>I think it is obvious that all philosophical statements which transgress the bounds of reason are anthropomorphic and have no validity beyond that which falls to psychically conditioned statements. A philosophy like Hegel’s is a self-revelation of the psychic background and, philosophically, a presumption. Psychologically, it amounts to an invasion by the unconscious. The peculiar high-flown language Hegel uses bears out this view: it is reminiscent of the megalomanic language of schizophrenics, who use terrific spellbinding words to reduce the transcendent to subjective form, to give banalities the charm of novelty, or pass off commonplaces as searching wisdom. So bombastic a terminology is a symptom of weakness, ineptitude, and lack of substance. But that does not prevent the latest German philosophy from using the same crackpot power-words and pretending that it is not unintentional psychology.
Wow, Hegel EXPOSED by based Dr. Jung.
Muh analytical
love jung, love hegel, also think they have written some shit as well
anyway love em all :3
>megalomanic language of schizophrenics, who use terrific spellbinding words to reduce the transcendent to subjective form, to give banalities the charm of novelty, or pass off commonplaces as searching wisdom. So bombastic a terminology is a symptom of weakness, ineptitude, and lack of substance
Huh, that's pretty much why literature annoys me. Not 'real' enough. But Jung had his time, psychologists today know that just by labeling something very nicely you can actually increase it's appeal. So Jung is actually wrong, for the exact same reason as he was right.
>>8623197
Yeah, I hope one day literature will finally move on to discussing the subject of style vs substance, and the ability of language to create truth rather than reproduce it - subjects that are so mysteriously absent from 20th century literature
>>8623210
I think modern amateur lit is doing a fine job. The problem is that you don't have profs being the gatekeepers anymore, it's more like they are sideshow acts instead. Dylan got that nobel because a group of lit profs were recommending him for twelve years.
I'm thinking that the next age is going to be one of personal confidence and self-analysis. I'm seeing it already with podcasts and the health industry. Of course, they may just become crackpots and go to /pol/ but I didn't say it was good or bad quality thinking, just confidence.
>>8623210
>I hope one day literature will finally move on to discussing the subject of style vs substance
>mysteriously absent from 20th century literature
What the fuck are you talking about? Literary modernism is grounded by stylistic consciousness.
>Reason
>Not anthropomorphic
C'mon papa J you're more based than this.
But on the actual argument he's completely correct, men of science or philosophy are dangerously unaware/denying of their emotional motivations and it shows in their mannerisms. See Žižek, ı love the guy, but he looks diseased (not as much as Welbeck howevs) and half the time seems like he's teetering between loving humanity and starting a Pogrom. At least scientists are [benefitted by being] aware of the how small the scope of their linguistic autism is, philosophers and critics go around talking (and therefore thinking) like knowing who this or that author was is somehow expected if you want to understand what they're saying, so they end up with frozen minds because they won't adapt their language to anything, and therefore become stuck, inert, and their workshop becomes sterile.
>>8624372
hahaha youcan see de benis xD
>>8623546
Have you heard of sarcasm
>>8623159
>philosophical statements which transgress the bounds of reason
Already failed.
>bombastic
Ya don't say?
>But that does not prevent the latest German philosophy
>German
What is it with Germans and Formalism anyway? It's in EVERYTHING they do. I really don't want to believe the eternal German=Autism meme but...
>>8625110
what's Formalism exactly?
>>8623159
>A philosophy like Hegel’s is a self-revelation of the psychic background and, philosophically, a presumption.
Jung's psychoanalytic stuff about the psychic/unconscious/etc always rubbed me the wrong way, but I agree with his evaluation of Hegel's philosophy as presumptuous. The idea of history being 'progress', for example, was built upon a boatload of presuppositions.
>>8623159
Can someone explain what Jung means? I seriously can not comprehend most of Jung's writing
>>8625981
big words / fancy self-referential phraseology =/= substance and for the most part = lack of substance
Colonel Sanders?
>>8626020
That makes it clearer. Thanks
>>8626020
retard
>>8625110
>I really don't want to believe the eternal German=Autism meme but...
King Attilla, you do not know the loyal German soul!