Shopping Cart

No products in the cart.


Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 45 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Defining Myth #72113

    Drewie, I love this definition. Is this your own formulation? Of course, that begs the question of just who or what “the Gods” are that are sending the message . . .

    That is the question indeed but I stopped asking that question a long time ago. 🙂

    And I honestly cant remember if I read this somewhere or if it is mine but I remember it came to me when I was reading a lot of ancient Greek mythology from Greek authors and not very popular ones hence the plural in “Gods”.

    I always thought myths are not just metaphors or stories we tell ourselves for comfort, there seems to be a layer deeper than the psychological that sometimes we can tap into it. It must have been one of those moments.


    in reply to: Defining Myth #72178

    Drewie, I love this definition. Is this your own formulation? Of course, that begs the question of just who or what “the Gods” are that are sending the message . . .

    That is the question indeed but I stopped asking that question a long time ago. 🙂

    And I honestly cant remember if I read this somewhere or if it is mine but I remember it came to me when I was reading a lot of ancient Greek mythology from Greek authors and not very popular ones hence the plural in “Gods”.

    I always thought myths are not just metaphors or stories we tell ourselves for comfort, there seems to be a layer deeper than the psychological that sometimes we can tap into it. It must have been one of those moments.


    Gabrielle its a risk because when you open up, when you trust people, people tend to abuse that and push you around. It is just a fact especially in the workplace that you have to show your teeth or you wont get any respect.

    And you can see it in the Ted Lasso story too, a bitterness, a meanness at the centre of it for masculinity. (Men need women, women dont need men, etc etc)

    Which brings me to Roy.

    You seem to imply that its ok to be aggressive if you are gonna stand for ideals that seem to fit our morality? Because that is what Roy does, starts a fight to defend Nathan because he doesn’t like seeing him being bullied. If I was Nathan I would be insulted by this to be quite honest with people for not believing I could handle the situation.

    I guess being aggressive has its uses after all.

    I dont think its kindness, compassion that will change what you call toxic masculinity if it needs changing at all, I think it will take much more than. The problem with Lasso and Parsival is that they will never be Kings because they never have to make the hard decisions.

    Anyways, have a lovely day all.

    Yeah I think you get it. You do raise some interesting questions in your reply though.

    It is true that indirectly I did say that Ted is naive, ofcourse Ted being the ideal not a real person I can afford to say that. I am under the impression that this guy will be a tragic figure till the end of the show, wait for it.

    And I do cringe a bit when I hear the words non-judgmental and right-est in the same sentence. After all when we indulge in what is right and wrong we do become judgmental. And what is right and what is wrong to begin with and who will be the judge of that (sorry for the pun), well when we don’t think in terms of right or wrong, then certainly that feels non-judgmental. What I am trying to say is they seem antithetical to me.

    But before I continue to what extend you are referring when you talk about “Toxic masculinity” in your initial reply in this conversation and I also wonder what do you think is the reason for this toxic masculinity?

    The problem as I see it, is how each one of us perceives niceness. I have several examples in my life where people I thought to be mean and “toxic” actually were helping me, making me stronger, in the long run. Yet at the time I perceived them as mean, perhaps an understatement.

    That being said I do agree with you and the qualities you try to promote being open, trusting and forgiving and never take anything personally, its a risk but worth it.



    Hey Everyone, if you haven’t seen the show, spoilers ahead.

    I watched Lasso in almost one go and not sure how I missed it. Lasso and Resident Alien are two of the best stories I have watched in the last years, interesting that they are both comedies.

    Gabrielle, thanks for the essay I needed that, people tell me I am too stiff these days, especially in the workplace.

    Ofcourse the ultimate trial in all our lives and I dont think this has to do with gender is like Campbell said and like most stories focus “is the system is gonna deprive you of your humanity or are you gonna use the system for human purposes.” Then again we have to be honest about this. I am a firm believer that in this life everything is about balance, this view of masculinity that seems to be a new age trend, like embracing your feminine side which also means compassion and kindness, does not come without a cost, nice guys do finish last and men who embrace this side do seem to fail and break in a harsh and competitive environment which we call society. That is just a fact and it also one of the points the story is trying to make, kinda, you can feel the author struggling with this idea a bit. For that honesty, I give him a thumb up, and even though the author seems to imply that men (husband, father) are the root cause of the wasteland and leaves it open without reconciling it, at least he is honest that kindness and relationships wont get you the win. And therein lies the rub. Being the winner and alone or be the loser and with good relationships. Like Jung said the opposite of power is not powerlessness, its relationships.

    Romanticism is obviously escapism but its very much needed sometimes. I guess the question is can you be like Lasso and not break down. Well Lasso did seem to have a couple of break downs but the show being predominately a comedy it has to have a happy ending. Personally I think we are a mixture of qualities.

    Anyways, just saying.


    in reply to: Standing on the lord of the abyss? No. #73141

    Thanks Stephen for taking the time to explain this even though you had all those medical adventures you mentioned. I hope for a hasty recovery man.

    I am not sure if we can make a post reply editing because it seems to me that your reply fits perfectly in the “Understanding Campbell” conversation. I was gonna ask something along these lines especially after this conversation. Something like what did Campbell meant by saying “Transparent to the transcendent” or what did he meant by saying “one foot is in the field of time, and the other has stepped into eternity“? I think it fits with your reply.

    My take is that Campbell want us to have one foot on the ground, you know, not fly too high like Icarus, that, would definitely cause some blisters and so he gives us tales that on how to live a human life. In Myths to Live by (Zen chapter), the story of Indra in POM, in Pathways to Bliss. Indeed the hero journey requires a return to be complete, it seems like he is always telling us how to live a human life, keep one foot on the ground. I have this fantasy to go to Alaska and live in a hut isolated from the world and discover whatever truth I am gonna discover there but then I am thinking what would be the point of that? So I stay involved in the world.

    Anyways, just saying..


    in reply to: On Synchronicity and Meaning #73112

    Shaheda, I am from Greece but I wouldn’t be surprised if I had Scandinavian roots. I always felt at home with Norse mythology.

    Now as far as these researchers go. I don’t accept them as scientific they are more like fringe science to me.


    In my first post I said “Myth and History should never be confused”. Well never say never.

    I see now much better after further explaining it to me. Your example of Lord of the Rings really helped clear some of the confusion I had in mind. It does bring an extra layer of understanding to the game. Never thought of the shire as the homeland of our national ideological identity. I am very used reading these symbols mythologically so for me the shire always meant what also other myths depict at the beginning of the story – an unconscious state of mind where the ego is beginning to emerge. Yeah, actually LotR is a good example of how history is connected with the mythological considering the experiences Tolkien had with war and how these became the inspiration for his epic story. Interesting. Am I understanding it right?

    Whatever the case, I’ll definitely read more about this subject which seems very rich in information. Thanks.



    in reply to: On Synchronicity and Meaning #73118

    No Marianne you are feeling it right. I should have used quotations. Bottom line, I just don’t think Jung meant anything metaphysical with Synchronicity but I could be wrong or misinterpreted your statements. It is all good, I never felt disrespected and apologies for the confusion. Please continue.




    Hey Norland and the rest,

    I am just gonna go with the flow.

    I see this problem of “personal mythology” in contemporary cinema a lot. That is of an ideology trying to pass as mythology or something archetypal. Trying to sneak feminist messages or racial sensitivities. It just doesn’t work. Which is why I believe the latest Star Wars was a flop. I honestly couldn’t finish the last episodes. It is one thing to fight for equality and against racism and it is another to try to force it into a mythology.

    So in the same way I think myth and history should never be confused. How this is done is another question. The Maya example you give is a nice example of a time this used to work. This idea of myth and history coexisting is a primitive idea when the conscious and the unconscious was one and the same. Kind of hard for me to see Christ as both historical and mythological. A pretty raw and straight forward example but maybe it is more complicated. Nonetheless, it is good to have this awareness of the distinction and of the unity of myth and history.

    You say:

    As with the psychotherapy of the individual so it is with entire nations; the problem is not so much the “creation of a new myth” but the elimination of repressive elements that block the spontaneous outpouring of mytho-historic truth.

    This got my attention if you wanna talk more how to eliminate those repressive elements.

    Kudos for the essay. Subtle.

    in reply to: On Synchronicity and Meaning #73121

    OK Shaheda I corrected that. As far as the paranormal and metaphysical goes, I already wrote my opinion. 🙂

    in reply to: On Synchronicity and Meaning #73123

    I answer to James too in this reply.

    But Marriane I didn’t contradict Jung’s quotes. I offer an alternative to your interpretation of his theory.

    All the quotes you and James provided, I see nothing that points to a metaphysical nature of Synchronicity with the exception “The synchronicity phenomena point, it seems to me, in this direction, for they show that the nonpsychic can behave like the psychic, and vice versa, without there being any causal connection between them.” and even then is hard to understand Jung intentions.

    From describing “mundane” Synchronicity in dreams which makes sense to omens, tai chi and clocks that stop to work when people die. It is not the same thing and it is a pretty big leap of faith. How many people die in the world every day? Around 150k, we would have some serious electrical problems, I think, if that was the case.

    It is very necessary to have a metaphysical sense of things, how could we not? But how much is too much that is another matter.

    Anyway, I am not up to the task of trying to find evidence and quotes and explaining Jung and Campbell’s intentions and I am not sure if I could even If I wanted to so I’ll just say this little and stop.

    Take care, have fun. Adios.

    in reply to: On Synchronicity and Meaning #73128

    Hey Shaheda,

    I didn’t meant it was something you said. It was a general comment. It is fine to believe in whatever you wanna believe but my opinion on the subject was this. That I don’t see any link between the metaphysical and what Jung and Campbell said about synchronicity and fate. And like I said I had those experiences too.  I guess I still have them, only these days they come through active imagination by reading mythology and stories.


    in reply to: On Synchronicity and Meaning #73130

    Hey all,

    I was a bit hesitant to answer to this conversation because as much as I like to tone down the scientific approach I also like to tone down the metaphysical (a bit less that one 😉 ). But oh well here goes nothing.

    Sure life it self is a weird phenomenon and nobody can say with certainty what this whole thing is. That being said we have to work with what we have. That is with the rules and laws that at least work in our surrounding environment.

    Meaning and the concept of synchronicity for me has nothing to do with the metaphysical or paranormal. It is simply a creation of our own character and I am pretty sure that Jung and Campbell meant it that way. We are the puppet and the puppeteer.

    I ask what is the importance of making the distinction between Psyche and Matter? Maybe everything is psyche or maybe everything is matter maybe they are one and the same. Also as far as fate goes I am again pretty sure Campbell never meant anything metaphysical, I think, he is just pointing out to the limited control that we have over our unconscious and how it directs our conscious lives and especially if we are not aware of this how it appears as fate.

    Nice experiences to have nonetheless. I had them too when I was a kid. Butterflies would come and fly around me, dogs would follow me for no apparent reason, it appeared to rain when I was sad, etc (I don’t mean to say that these experiences are childish but that it is an experience that happens more when you are a kid). The meaning of these events was always personal, it didn’t matter which event happened to be meaningful only that it was meaningful but after a while they stopped. Two things could have happened here. Either myself was cut off from that transpersonal source or I didn’t need them anymore because I could understand my choices more clearly. I think it’s the latter and that why I said meaning is irrelevant in the other conversation we had, at least it is to me at this point.

    Anyways I guess what I am trying to say goes well with this little piece from the Matrix. I leave you with a quote and a link.

    The meaning that follow one another do not lie in things, but lie in you, who are subject to many changes, insofar as you take part in life. Things also change but you do not notice this if you do not change. But if you change the countenance of the world alters. The manifold sense of things is your manifold sense. ~Carl Jung, The Red Book.



    P.S. I did enjoy Marianne’s Dream interpretation with the monarch. Why not take a similar approach on Synchronicity though?

    I also found this video on synchronicity, very informative.


    Hello Dennis and everyone,

    Exactly, I do love to let my thoughts simmer for a bit. My initial thoughts can be overwhelming and chaotic and I can easily get stuck in semantics.

    So let me jump directly into the issues you raised  in your replies to me. I also didn’t mean to say that the meaning/experience category was antagonistic. Meaning ofcourse is embedded in our experience but as soon as we go after meaning consciously/rationally we also create another category of experience that of meaninglessness or at least that is how the mind understands it. I do see much more clear now after I read your replies again. The transition wasn’t going from meaning to experience so much but from tackling meaning rationally which made me transition from a rationally oriented world-view (causal) to one that was mythical (acausal) holding causality and acausality at the same time (took me a while to understand what that meant, heh), I do enjoy my paradox more these days. Now that I remember my experience better, it is true, that I had a tremendous wrestle with meaninglessness for years, an experience of alienation from my mythical self, or what Campbell would call our inner most being, no doubt. To say the battle was epical and that I got over-cooked is the understatement of the century but I went through to the other side so all is good.

    I do have to say this though because that is how I feel. I still stand by my initial statement that meaning and meaninglessness has become irrelevant at this specific period of my life. Ofcourse my activities and experiences are meaningful to me, I just don’t think about it anymore, I do the stuff that seem most fulfilling to me. I did a bit of research on this experience and I found this quote from Jung which describes a lot how I feel these days.

    If you marry the ordered to the chaos, you produce the divine child, the supreme meaning beyond meaning and meaninglessness. Carl Jung, Liber Novus

    You gotta love Jung how he links meaning with order and chaos with meaninglessness. Yeap.. that is how it feels.

    I hope sharing this, is relevant somehow with the conversation and your essay. I think it is, right? Since one of the themes on your essay is one that has to do literalism and the metaphorical. I guess going from experiencing life rationally in literal terms to something more metaphorical embracing the mythical has something to do with my thoughts and experiences, I hope. I do like to make it personal though so anyways. 🙂

    Thank you very much for your time and thoughts. I do enjoy your writing style a lot and your approach to the business of living. Awesome.


Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 45 total)