Jung and Freud

[Logic]

Yea, I'm reading a book called The Dreaming Universe, it shows in great deal jungian physics and freudian physics as well as some of their history. Its a great read for anyone interested in psychology, dreaming and obeing.

[Leah]

Kinda depends upon what you deem "wacko", I guess.
I like Jung, and his works. But he doesn't stick within the scientically approved ways of thought, he slipped into the esoteric and alchemy- which I personally value as having peirced a higher level of truth.

Freud, on the other hand, I appreciate less, though he was a bit more scientifically accepted, but more by the layman than professionals now.
His perception of truth never quite raised itself to the dynamics of creation, energy, yin/yang- he never saw past the physical expression of that in humans- sex.  Everything went back to your sexual urges and how you processed and lived them. Kinda limited view, I feel.

Jung wasn't just interested in death as we call it- he was conscious of death being the same as creation, birth, and the source of all that is known- the matrice of the unknown. And to discover or produce new thigns, or thoughts, or anything, you have to chase the unknown, mystery- that is why what you bring up is "new"!

But yeah, for most people, they were both a bit wacked out- or at least they show us parts of ourself we call wacky and don't feel comfortable with- the unconscious.

[shaman]

One of the main thing that has been a problem in Freud research is that he based all his findings on people who were actually mentally ill and sick. He did not study normal people at all but only those who suffered mentally. Sure at the time he did all his research, beginning of the last century, sex was more tabu than it is now and it might have been on the mind of many (and it is still so unfortunately). So I guess Freud was right only for a specific "slice" of the population. For the rest he got a good introductory look into unsconsicousness.

As to Young we can be glad he seriously considered topics such as the "collective consciousness", where there is still much work to be done. I think they are both the basis for many things we know to day and I would give them credit for that, even if their time has passed.

[Radha]

Back in the period prior to their writing, the occult groups (Black) of Liepzig and Hamburg especially, were trying to bring forth black concepts and give them legitimacy.  The half truth is a usual vehicle for such propaganda, so Freud wrote of Libido without fully defining it from an esoteric point of view, and naturally it was twisted downward into "sex" which for most people would only have human sexual connotations.
Jung wanted to write QBL and was off to a start, however the black schools won and still, for the most part, control what is taught in psychiatry etc.
One person I knew researched this history fairly well but didn't publish widely.  Shame as the public could benefit from knowing more about the roots of these people.  Also the origins of the WFMH.

[Mustardseed]

Just did a study on these 2 guys but I was not very positive. Seemed they were a bit wacko. Is that true. One obsessed with sex and the other with death. It sounded like Jung was channeling a Spirit who "gave" him an entire book, in automatic writing. Sort of Zeta conversations.
Does anyone have a more balanced view and or book titles as these books made them up to be compleate fruitcakes.
Regards MS