UNUS MUNDUS

The UNUS MUNDUS forum of Psychovision (Remo F. Roth) invites discussion of theoretical and practical issues of a possible union of Carl Jung's depth psychology with quantum physical principles.
(All posts are the property of their respective authors)
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:47 am



 [ 6 posts ] 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic
 The feeling function : rational or irrational ? 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:23 am
Posts: 646
Location: Lyon, France
Post The feeling function : rational or irrational ?
RATIONAL ?

source : http://www.psychovision.ch/synw/jungneo ... otlep1.htm

Carl Jung was fascinated by the archetype of the quaternity. We can see this for example in his typology of the consciousness. He distinguishes four different functions: thinking and its opposite, feeling, as the so-called rational functions, and sensation with its opposite, intuition, as the so-called irrational functions.

OR NOT ?

But I just read a text from Marie-Louise von Franz (Réhabilitation de la fonction sentimentale dans notre civilisation par C.G. Jung) which seems to show that the feeling function is irrational :

source : http://4psicologia-cgjung-mlvfr.blogspot.com/

Jung wrote in a letter that "we have become unilaterally intellectualist and rationalist" and that "we have totally forgotten that there are other factors that do not allow themselves to be influenced by the straightness of reason and understanding. Hence we see everywhere a blaze of mystical emotionality that had been declared extinct since the Middle Ages "

OR BOTH ?

I don't know , I'm a litlle lost.

_________________
There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not? ( Robert Kennedy quoting George Bernard Shaw )


Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:30 am
Profile
Founder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:25 pm
Posts: 2657
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Post Re: The feeling function : rational or irrational ?
fox

fox wrote:
RATIONAL ?

OR NOT ?

Jung wrote in a letter that "we have become unilaterally intellectualist and rationalist" and that "we have totally forgotten that there are other factors that do not allow themselves to be influenced by the straightness of reason and understanding. Hence we see everywhere a blaze of mystical emotionality that had been declared extinct since the Middle Ages "

OR BOTH ?

I don't know , I'm a litlle lost.


Yes, for years I was also a little lost! In Jung's definition, the feeling function is in fact rational. See CW 6, § 787:
Quote:
Thinking and feeling are rational functions in so far as they are decisively influenced by reflection.


The problem is that we always mix up feelings and emotions. When we study the young Jung, especially the one before, during and shortly after his big life crisis from 1913 to 1918, we realize that in his Burhölzli years (1900-1909) he was unconsciously identical with his horrible emotions. They undermined his thinking function and the result was what his Burghölzli colleagues described as follows:

Quote:
[from my ms about the young Jung; not yet published]… we have also to deal with a remarkable character aspect of the young psychiatrist. There are many testimonies, which show the Burghölzli doctor as a very arrogant human. Abraham Brill, Jung’s colleague in these days criticized him as “aggressive.” Further, he “brooked no disagreement with Freud’s views,” and was “impulsive and bright,” but not able “to see the other side.” “Anyone who dared doubt … aroused his anger.” Ernest Jones wrote that “he could change his mood like a chameleon,” and further: “One moment the big vibrant charming chairman of the group and the next a vociferous intervener, who, when confronted with opposition, put his case with a vigor which some thought – well – pretty rough,” and: “He did not mince his words.” Yet in the year 1913 – the year of the beginning of his “night sea journey” – Lou Andreas-Salomé described Carl Jung as possessed by “pure aggression, ambition and intellectual brutality.”


Then, as a means in his "confrontation with the unconscious" (Chapter VI of Memories, Dreams, Reflections), Jung developed Active Imagination. In it he dealt with his incredible emotions. He personified them and called them the Anima. In this form the Anima was not integrated. The result of the differentiation of the Anima – the integration – was the separation of the feeling function from the emotions (of "her"). IMO, this was a very important and even revolutionary progress (that not too many men of today are able to follow yet). It means that feeling became something very calm – the worth giving function. In this definition the feeling function is in fact rational, insofar as it helps us to give worth and this way to sort out things and persons in a rational way.

The feeling function says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong (not in the intellectual way but in the way I feel it!). If integrated, the feeling function is not mixed up with emotions anymore. The concrete aspect of such an integrated feeling function is as follows: if one uses it, there are no corporeal reactions connected with it anymore. It is just a "cool" yes or no, and it gives much security in one’s decisions. One does not have to find intellectual arguments for or against something or for the behaviour in relationships anymore, but just feels what is right and what is wrong. To me, learning to use the feeling function in this way let me feel much more secure than before.

Remo

PS: People who always have to vindicate themselves have exactly this problem of a non-integrated Anima -- men and women! They cannot use the conscious feeling function and thus argue with a causal/logical justification.

_________________
'Here stands the mean uncomely stone,
Tis very cheap in price!
The more it is despised by fools,
The more loved by the wise.'
(C.G. Jung, MDR, p. 253)
WebSite: http://www.paulijungunusmundus.eu


Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:19 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:23 am
Posts: 646
Location: Lyon, France
Post rational and irrational
Hi Remo,

So an "unconscious feeling" is a nonsense ?

I define the rational like a faculty from the ego which says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong and the irrational like a faculty from the unconscious which says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong but if I understand you, that's not correct.

_________________
There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not? ( Robert Kennedy quoting George Bernard Shaw )


Sat Oct 23, 2010 10:38 am
Profile
Founder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:25 pm
Posts: 2657
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Post Re: rational and irrational
fox wrote:
Hi Remo,

So an "unconscious feeling" is a nonsense ?

I define the rational like a faculty from the ego which says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong and the irrational like a faculty from the unconscious which says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong but if I understand you, that's not correct.


If we use the terms of Jung, we must say that an "unconscious feeling" is in fact a nonsense. He speaks of feeling as a function of consciousness. As long as feeling is in the unconscious, it is always mixed up with emotions.

This is why Jung replaced the term "gefühlsbetonter Komplex" (feeling-based complex) -- a complex being a content of the personal unconscious and verifiable in his association test -- by the term "emotional complex." This way the insecurity between emotion and feeling was removed.

Remo

_________________
'Here stands the mean uncomely stone,
Tis very cheap in price!
The more it is despised by fools,
The more loved by the wise.'
(C.G. Jung, MDR, p. 253)
WebSite: http://www.paulijungunusmundus.eu


Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:38 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 9:32 am
Posts: 832
Images: 1
Location: Virginia, USA
Post Re: rational and irrational - feeling or emotion
Remo Roth wrote:
fox wrote:
Hi Remo,

So an "unconscious feeling" is a nonsense ?

I define the rational like a faculty from the ego which says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong and the irrational like a faculty from the unconscious which says yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong but if I understand you, that's not correct.


If we use the terms of Jung, we must say that an "unconscious feeling" is in fact a nonsense. He speaks of feeling as a function of consciousness. As long as feeling is in the unconscious, it is always mixed up with emotions.

This is why Jung replaced the term "gefühlsbetonter Komplex" (feeling-based complex) -- a complex being a content of the personal unconscious and verifiable in his association test -- by the term "emotional complex." This way the insecurity between emotion and feeling was removed.

Remo

Well, this is interesting. I had set my alarm for 9 AM this morning, but I woke up about 7:45 and not long afterward decided to get up. While I was still lazily lolling around under the covers, Lee said to me, "Can you feel our feelings?" "Yes, I can feel them." "It is important that you can feel my feelings. It helps me too." "You mean like how we nourish rather than feed off of one another?" "Yes, feeling deeply is very nourishing and helpful to both of us."

I went ahead and got up then. Did a couple of things and then came to the computer to check E-mail and find out what is going on at the forum. Before I got here, I was briefly thinking about how I get upset with my husband about his serious medical and mental problems that can be very overwhelming to me. I think the guy who calls this over-reactiveness "amygdala hijacking" is Goleman... OK, just took a minute to look it up...
Quote:
Amazon.com Review: There was a time when IQ was considered the leading determinant of success. In this fascinating book, based on brain and behavioral research, Daniel Goleman argues that our IQ-idolizing view of intelligence is far too narrow. Instead, Goleman makes the case for "emotional intelligence" being the strongest indicator of human success. He defines emotional intelligence in terms of self-awareness, altruism, personal motivation, empathy, and the ability to love and be loved by friends, partners, and family members. People who possess high emotional intelligence are the people who truly succeed in work as well as play, building flourishing careers and lasting, meaningful relationships. Because emotional intelligence isn't fixed at birth, Goleman outlines how adults as well as parents of young children can sow the seeds...

SOURCE: http://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Intelli ... 0553375067

... and this definition from Wiki:

Amygdala hijack is a term coined by Daniel Goleman in his 1996 book Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ.[1] Goleman uses the term to describe emotional responses from people which are out of measure with the actual threat because it has triggered a much more significant emotional threat.[2]

The brain processes stimuli by having the thalamus direct sensory information to the neocortex (the "thinking brain"). The cortex then routes the signal to the amygdala (the "emotional brain") for the proper emotional reaction. The amygdala then triggers a flood of peptides and hormones to create emotion and action. Perceived potential threats, however, can disrupt this smooth flow; the thalamus bypasses the cortex and routes the signal directly to the amygdala, which is the trigger point for the primitive fight-or-flight response; when the amygdala feels threatened, it can react irrationally and destructively.[3] Goleman states that "Emotions make us pay attention right now - this is urgent - and give us an immediate action plan without having to think twice. The emotional component evolved very early: Do I eat it, or does it eat me?". The emotional response "can take over the rest of the brain in a millisecond if threatened".[4][5] An amygdala hijack exhibits three signs: strong emotional reaction, sudden onset, and post-episode realization that the reaction was inappropriate.[4]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala_hijack


OK, when my hijacking really gets going and I am unable to stop it by THINKING about how foolish and unhelpful it is... sending my pulse and blood pressure soaring... and not doing a thing to alter my husband's behavior in a positive way... Lee may try to get my attention and say something like this: "Come on now, what is our goal?" "Yeh, yeh, I know, gentle spirits being love." "So, why can't you do it?" "I don't know how to do it." "Yes, you do. Quiet inside, close your eyes, now tell me how we do it." "We do it by FEELING what gentle spirits being love is like. Then we start BEING that." "So, why don't you just pause and feel it now. You know this already. I am just reminding you."

Seeing what you and Fox are saying this morning, made me think (which is a fine function in its own way) about how the word emotion implies inner motion rather than inner stillness. So, emotion is a kind of stirring up of reactions that can quickly go out of control. But the center within of stillness is what I dreamed many years ago to be called composure.
Quote:
Emotion is the complex psychophysiological experience of an individual's state of mind as interacting with biochemical (internal) and environmental (external) influences. In humans, emotion fundamentally involves "physiological arousal, expressive behaviors, and conscious experience".[1] Emotion is associated with mood, temperament, personality and disposition, and motivation. The English word 'emotion' is derived from the French word émouvoir. This is based on the Latin emovere, where e- (variant of ex-) means 'out' and movere means 'move'. [2] The related term "motivation" is also derived from the word movere.

SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion

Origin of EMOTION
Middle French, from emouvoir to stir up, from Old French esmovoir, from Latin emovēre to remove, displace, from e- + movēre to move
First Known Use: 1579

SOURCE: http://mw1.m-w.com/dictionary/emotion

Composure – noun
serene, self-controlled state of mind; calmness; tranquillity:
Despite the hysteria and panic around him, he retained his composure.


Origin:
1590–1600; compose + -ure

—Related forms
non·com·po·sure, noun

—Synonyms
equability, serenity, quiet, coolness, equanimity, self-possession.

—Antonyms
agitation.

Word Origin & History

composure

c.1600, with many senses now given to composition or compound , from compose + -ure. Sense of "tranquility, calmness" is first recorded 1660s, from composed "calm" (1620s). For sense, cf. colloquial to fall apart "to lose one's composure."


SOURCE: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/composure

World English Dictionary
compose (kəmˈpəʊz)

— vb
1. to put together or make up by combining; put in proper order
2. to be the component elements of
3. to produce or create (a musical or literary work)
4. ( intr ) to write music
5. to calm (someone, esp oneself); make quiet
6. to adjust or settle (a quarrel, etc)
7. to order the elements of (a painting, sculpture, etc); design
8. printing to set up (type)

[C15: from Old French composer, from Latin compōnere to put in place; see component ]

Word Origin & History

compose

late 15c., from O.Fr. composer "put together, arrange" (12c.), from com- "with" + poser "to place," from L.L. pausare "to cease, lay down," ultimately from L. ponere "to put, place" (see position). Meaning infl. in O.Fr. by componere (see composite). Musical sense is from 1590s.


SOURCE: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/compose


NOTE: Adding this at 11:09 - From above we can see that emotion can mean... displace... and compose as in composure can mean... to put in place.

Suzanne

P.S. As far as we know, Jung himself never attained this inner centerness, calmness, and composure... unless it was very close to his last breath. In the DVD film available now, hmm, it's in the other room some place, I think it's called "Heart of the Matter", not only is his earlier aggression and domination of others dealt with, but it shows that in his later years, he would become shockingly petty and dictatorial in his behavior as well even toward friends and family. It is not a pretty picture. He was a great guy who opened the way for many of us to do a lot of THINKING about what wholeness might be, but FEELING and BEING wholeness is quite another thing that can alude us as it did him apparently.

Well, it is 10:32 now, and as I was getting some coffee and something to eat, it occurred to me to look up the word FEELING. Sure is interesting about the origin of this word! Sounds very BODY CENTERED.

Quote:
Feeling – noun
1. the function or the power of perceiving by touch.
2. physical sensation not connected with sight, hearing, taste, or smell.
3. a particular sensation of this kind: a feeling of warmth; a feeling of pain.
4. the general state of consciousness considered independently of particular sensations, thoughts, etc.
5. a consciousness or vague awareness: a feeling of inferiority.
6. an emotion or emotional perception or attitude: a feeling of joy; a feeling of sorrow.
7. capacity for emotion, esp. compassion: to have great feeling for the sufferings of others.
8. a sentiment; attitude; opinion: The general feeling was in favor of the proposal.
9. feelings, sensibilities; susceptibilities: to hurt one's feelings.
10. fine emotional endowment.
11. (in music, art, etc.)
a. emotion or sympathetic perception revealed by an artist in his or her work: a poem without feeling.
b. the general impression conveyed by a work: a landscape painting with a spacious feeling.
c. sympathetic appreciation, as of music: to play with feeling.

Word Origin & History

feel

O.E. felan "to touch," from Gmc. *folijanan (cf. Du. voelen, Ger. fühlen "to feel," O.N. falma "to grope"), from PIE base *(s)pol-/*(s)pal- "to strike softly" (cf. Gk. psallein "to pluck (the harp)," L. palpare "to touch softly, stroke," palpitare "to move quickly"). The sense in O.E. was "to perceive through senses which are not referred to any special organ." Sense of "be conscious of a sensation or emotion" developed by late 13c.; that of "to have sympathy or compassion" is from c.1600. Noun sense of "sexual grope" is from 1932; from verbal phrase to feel (someone) up (1930).

feel·ing definition
Pronunciation: /ˈfē-liŋ/
Function: n
1 a : the one of the basic physical senses of which the skin contains the chief end organs and of which the sensations of touch and temperature are characteristic : TOUCH
b : a sensation experienced through this sense
2 : an emotional state or reaction feeling s >
3 : the overall quality of one's awareness especially as measured along a pleasantness-unpleasantness continuum

Encyclopedia
feeling

in psychology, the perception of events within the body, closely related to emotion. The term feeling is a verbal noun denoting the action of the verb to feel, which derives etymologically from the Middle English verb felen, "to perceive by touch, by palpation." It soon came to mean, more generally, to perceive through those senses that are not referred to any special organ. As the known special organs of sense were the ones mediating the perception of the external world, the verb to feel came also to mean the perception of events within the body. Psychologists disagree on the use of the term feeling. The preceding definition accords with that of the American psychologist R.S. Woodworth, who defines the problem of feeling and emotion as that of the individual's "internal state." Many psychologists, however, still follow the German philosopher Immanuel Kant in equating feeling to states of pleasantness and unpleasantness, known in psychology as affect.

Quotation by Shakespeare (or Francis Bacon or... whoever)

"I understand thy kisses, and thou mine,
And that's a feeling disputation."

William Shakespeare (1564–1616), British dramatist, poet.
Mortimer, in Henry IV, Part 1, act 3, sc. 1, l. 202-3.

An Englishman speaking to his Welsh wife; they do not speak each other's languages; "feeling disputation" means exchange of feelings.


SOURCE: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feeling


_________________
"Only if a man dares to entrust himself again to the depth of his origin can he reach the height for which he was destined." Karlfried Graf Durckheim


Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:13 pm
Profile Personal album

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:58 am
Posts: 506
Location: canada
Post very, very close to home
Hi, Suzanne and all...

After about 7 years of my own 'guided study' in a professional setting, I came to the conclusion that fight or flight was the root of a couple of anxiety related issues I deal with. Sorry, this may seem super personal, but I can't even believe that this comes up. I was adopted when I was 8 weeks old. The first 8 weeks were spent in foster care. The woman who took care of myself and some other babies didn't really take care of us. From what I understand, we were left in a room with a bottle, and that's the extent of it. She was caught doing this and was fired. Anyway, intense reactions are very common for me, and it feels like being struck by lightning. I used to have a very intense fear of the dark and would see these kind of morphing 'evil' faces when I closed my eyes. The cortisol is what I assume keeps me 'tired' most of the time. It's much like that 'cat on a hot tin roof' idea, there's no 'off' button to be found. It's only been in the last couple of years that I can 'befriend' the anxiety and ride it out (although I do 50 laps of the yard in the process.) I think there's a kind of 'awakening' that happens with that kind of sensory depravation, and I believe it affects a person's reflexes also. That part of the individual is always 'on' and it peaks upward from that baseline.

I had just found this really interesting site on Jung and adoption last week. I think I was meant to find it.

http://eve3.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/or ... ones-myth/


...hope it's alright to add this here. I am studying these things and not dwelling on them, so I really mean that for all intents and purposes the story could be anyone's and is purely objective.


kind regards,
pascal

_________________
Each of them is one with the other two.


Sun Oct 24, 2010 6:53 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 6 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.