man and his symbols by Carl Jung (book review)

Man and His Symbols by Carl Jung is a great book. The aim of the book is to be an introduction to Jungian thought, and also a brief exploration of human psychology. In both of those aims, I believe he succeeds; however, there are nonetheless some reasons to not read the book. Here is why.
📚man and his symbols review:
00:00 the purpose of the book
01:52 what are symbols?
03:31 what is Jung's view of the unconscious?
05:21 what is individuation?
07:24 pros and cons of man and his symbols
10:04 who should read this book?
📕 my book: www.amazon.com/dp/B08ZBM2SY6/
💻my website: ideasinhat.com/
✏️written review: ideasinhat.com/2022/05/17/boo...
#Jung #bookreview #psychology

[@IdeasInHat]

what do you think about Jung?

[@mashaferme]

While reading this book in 2018 I first started dreaming a lot more, a lot of dreams were about symbols, I started questioning a lot and somewhere in the middle of the book I started to experience panic attacks (I had anxiety before), my life turned upside down, I started working on myself, got out of a toxic relationship 2 months after that and at the end everything changed for the better. No major anxiety after that. I am happy. But in the midst of all of that I was afraid to finish the book for another year or so. But I still think of this as one of the most significant books I have ever read, it transformed me and made me go through darkness to find light again. To let go of everything that didn't serve me. Planning to read it again now.

[@IdeasInHat]

Very nice! I love when books are guides for difficult times in life. They show us a direction that we can take when it's not obvious where we should go! Thank you for sharing, I am happy for you! Yes, read the entire book. It is the best overview of Jungian psychology!

[@mashaferme]

@@IdeasInHat True! I have read it, but I finished the second part after a year:)

[@laney1975able]

I have just finished the Red Book. Emotionally evocative on many levels, sorrow, joy and bliss. As someone who is naturally introspective, I could not have read any of Jungs work five or ten years ago. I am ready now

[@hermanhale9258]

I used to check this book out of the library all the time. I found it very interesting. However, the mandala symbol meant nothing to me and I found it strange that he insisted the symbol was so important. His patients dreamed of the symbol all the time, but I never dreamed of it. Later, I dumped Jung. He couldn't prove anything. But I had told someone that Man and His Symbols was my favorite book, and that person found a library discard of the hardback version and gave it to me as a surprise. I felt a little bad about that, but I have the book and I look through it, sometimes. I did have one dream, once, about a kind of mandala. It was a spiral of the brightest light I had ever seen. It descended down from the sky and told me that my time had not yet come. I took it to Jesus. I expect to see him again when I die and he will tell me that my time has come. :)

[@IdeasInHat]

I only read Jung because he's interesting. The stuff he writes about is definitely beyond empiricism.

[@hermanhale9258]

@@IdeasInHat I read him for the symbolism.

[@lidiarona4335]

I appreciate the summary and I want to add that Jung is not for everyone. Also, psychology field is so vast with so many frameworks and anyone that gets into this field will have... well, preferences. Studying Jung takes a lifetime to understand the nuances and subtleties. To add on top of this, no theory in psychology is scientifically demonstrated as all studies (no matter the framework that you ascribe to) show correlations and not cause and effect.

[@IdeasInHat]

Yeah, it will take me 5+ years to finnish all of Jung! And psychology is very big, there are soooo many theoretical frameworks!

[@LittleMew133]

Do you think "Approaching the Unconscious" is a good introduction to Jung?

[@IdeasInHat]

This is meant to be an introduction to his ideas. If you can, start with man and his symbols.

[@aaliyahserafina9366]

Thank you my friend. This book is arriving for me tomorrow. I’m hyped.

[@IdeasInHat]

It reads well. You will enjoy it as long as you want to get into Jungian psychology!

[@emeg6150]

I disagree with the fact that when meeting someone you know in a Dream means you have to interact diferent or beware around them. What the book implied it that generally that person represents a part of your psyche wich you should pay more attention to.

[@tamrakat]

I’d love to hear your thoughts on Gayle Delaney’s book, Living Your Dreams.

[@IdeasInHat]

I can look it up. But my tbr list is already pretttttyy large lol.

[@JaimeLynBarbarian]

This book stays in my bag 🕊️

[@rengsn4655]

Did you make it to Alchemy by von Franz? If so, what did you think of it in relation to this book?

[@IdeasInHat]

Yes. And this book was better. Von Franz I feel didnt talk as clearly or as thoroughly and to the point as all the authors in this book.

[@rengsn4655]

@@IdeasInHat ah good to know. Thanks

[@jefe5507]

Good review

[@IdeasInHat]

Thankks!

[@talhabedir3812]

I've been just listening to the audiobook. There are a lot of points I really want to invest in, but overly speculative analyses are making me a bit uneasy. Dreams and symbols can never be so concrete and he admits the uneasy texture of dreams but I guess I expected more since I have been advised that Jung is pretty solid for self-help and self-motivation, being different from all the mediocre garbage we have been reading and watching

[@IdeasInHat]

Naaaah. Jung is just over hyped for self-help. Irvin yaloom is waaaay better. Or rollo may.

[@talhabedir3812]

@@IdeasInHat Really? I can use some quality self-help man... Do you advise some of their books? Or do you have videos on self-help?

[@IdeasInHat]

@@talhabedir3812 Check out existential psychotherapy by Yaloom. I love that book.

[@talhabedir3812]

@@IdeasInHat thanks a lot!

[@nsrnhssn1899]

Jun is the base of psychi analysis

[@MarioOrtiz-fe3dv]

Its very cute that the little kid dares to rate an eminence like Carl Jung

[@Lindsay4182]

Why so condescending?

[@emmafergusonhribar]

Funny how with psychology all they do is measure and quantify. Yet so much of psychology is immeasurable

[@IdeasInHat]

Jung has an essay on this topic. He says there are things that are meaningful which science itself cannot yet study or does not yet have data on. And we should be able to talk of those things. It seems silly to exclude them.

[@Coderama]

I have heard there is too much pseudoscience in this book , i wanted to know your opinion

[@IdeasInHat]

Its really just philosophy being disguised as science. It's more accurate to say that this is a philosophy of psychology book, or a philosophy of mind book.

[@hermanhale9258]

Science can be proved. Carl Jung couldn't prove anything he was saying. Jung was speculating. Bertrand Russell said this over 100 years ago: when philosophy can be proved, it becomes science. Philosophy = speculations on Nature.

[@michaeldupont7530]

I don't understand why people are so interested in the works of psychologist like Jung or Freud. If I want to study medecine, I will not search for books that's 50 or a century old, that would be absurd, even if the doctor who had written it was an expert in his days. I am not judging because I don't know so much about psychology but if someone is willing to explain, that would be great.

[@IdeasInHat]

Both invented their own approaches to psychology, with different interpretations of data and experiences. It would be like studying Darwin to learn about evolutionary theory, or Adam Smith to learn about economics. Or, Gregor Mendel to learn about genetics. These writers laid the foundations of theoretical frameworks to interpret data. Hence why people read them. That being said, Jung and Freud also wrote in a manner that makes them a bit timeless, in the same way that Aristotle or Confucius are timeless.

[@michaeldupont7530]

@@IdeasInHat Thank you for the answer :)

[@petermaharajh2088]

@@IdeasInHat well said

[@kairogomes8584]

@@IdeasInHat but are their theories relevant today?

[@IdeasInHat]

@@kairogomes8584 Good question. I think that will depend on what you want from a theory. Can it make predictions? Sure. Does it mend well with naturalism? Not all that much. Just going to depend on what you want!