I happen to have checked out a book from the library by Laurens van der Post called Jung and the story of our Time.

They met when Jung was in his seventies, and became close friends. Post was ten or twenty years younger than Jung. Anyway, if you aren't familiar with him, he's in the movie Matter of the Heart, based on Jung.

Here is a great paragraph that I just read and feel like I should share it. I read half of it and paused, and I thought to myself, 'truth is good and frees us from the bondage of ignorance (which is a nice phrase I read somewhere before), but what about the truth that you don't know about. You know the phrase, 'you don't know what you don't know'. Truth is something that unfolds through time and effort. The truth that you don't know, or have not experienced, is as useless as a lie.

So I was impressed when I read on, that Post's words closely resembled what I was just thinking, and it amused me significantly:

Jung, of course, was convinced that the Oedipus symbolism and its role in the imagination could not be taken literally as Freud did. He was certain it was not there to protect man actually against some sexual incest. For him it was there as a protection, a portentous warning to prevent "psychological incest" between parents and children. It expressed how vital it was for man's increase that children and parents should respect scrupulously their differences of personality and need, be free from spiritual bondage, and live their own lives. (where I paused to think) Though neither Freud nor Jung stressed it to my knowledge, I feel certain that perhaps the most important aspect of the Oedipus legend overlooked even now was the fact that the incest took place without mother and son knowing their true relationship. In other words, as always fate struck through lack of self-awareness, for that is what the "not knowing" in mother and son in the myth symbolises. And this element reinforced Jung's symbolic interpretation, that the myth was directed at a psychological emancipation of the son from the mother and a rebirth of himself into his own idividual role in life. More, he saw the myth in its ultimate resolution as a union of the individual with his highest meaning and so of an essentially religious sign-post.

If I read this correctly, it goes to show that even in such a condition of infantile dependence, the psyche is determined toward a liberation (through the symbolism of incestuous offspring) of its own energies. The offspring would be the dreamer himself/herself being reborn. This is perhaps the only route towards self-realization of one's unconscious. There is something that escapes my tally, Post describes the legend at once as a warning against psychological dependency as well as a fruitful means toward psychological rebirth.

Age & Gender & Location {Required}: 33, Montana

Have You Posted Before? Date of Last Post {Use Search and Your Post Name to Help Find Last Post} Male

How Did You Find the Dream Forum? Yes

Sam,
Thanks for bringing this book to our attention. The role of Oedipus complex in Jung's and Freud's relationship is well known but the fundamentals are often less understood. I was aware of Laurens van der Post but have not read extensively any of his books. Leave to the true 'Jungians' to inform the rest of us of any 'new' knowledge that adds to enlightenment. Even when that new knowledge is something old.

It is interesting you bring up Oedipus, and sex. There is an article at CNN.com, 'Love, sex and the male brain' that provides insights to the physical makeup of the human brain having to do with sexual attitudes in men and women. The jest of the article is
'Perhaps the biggest difference between the male and female brain is that men have a sexual pursuit area that is 2.5 times larger than the one in the female brain.'

In other words, men more likely have 'sex on the brain' much more than women. And it is by nature this is so. It could be so because of the need to procreate. But the physical aspect of the brain is significant because it helps explain why men are so much more obsessed with sex then women. It could even lend help to explain the Oedipus complex.

But something else was stated in the article that may have even more significance to those of us who are dedicated 'jungians' {I spell it with a lower case j so to denote the dedication to the theories and not so much the man}. From the article:

Meanwhile, the "I feel what you feel" part of the brain -- mirror-neuron system -- is larger and more active in the female brain. So women can naturally get in sync with others' emotions by reading facial expressions, interpreting tone of voice and other nonverbal emotional cues.

In other words, women do possess a larger area within their brains that is geared to interpreting emotional clues. But men also possess this aspect, part of the anima, to a lesser extent. If this 'anima' aspect is consciously engaged I believe it can be enhanced. Intuitiveness is a natural feminine trait, women are naturally more intuitive than men. My experience, generated from from life experiences, is a man can enhance this feminine aspect of intuitiveness.
I am very intuitive for a man and use that quality not only when interpreting dreams but also in dealing with people in everyday life. It is especially valuable in my work when I have to assess potential customers for honesty. I 'know' almost immediately 'about' a person, reading what is beneath the ego personality. I am 'in sync with others' emotions by reading facial expressions, interpreting tone of voice and other nonverbal emotional cues.'

And there is something is to be said once again about such new research. Time and again I find the new evidence from 21st century research that verifies Jung's theories. Much as with Einstein and proving his theories of relativity, new research has not only proven him {Einstein} right but has also verified much of what he believed but had not published as evidence because it was so controversial. The same can be said of Jung. More and more Jung's theories are becoming standards in psychology replacing much of the old 'Freudian' approach. What was very controversial is now recognized as accepted science.

I don't mean to deviate from the original point of discussion. But your insightful post stimulated my brain so early this morning I felt the need to vent. I guess it goes to prove that when we use the brain it can be much more resourceful than expected.

Thanks again Sam for the post and info. And the early morning stimulation.

Jerry

Age & Gender & Location {Required}: 60 Murfreesboro, Tn

Have You Posted Before? Date of Last Post {Use Search and Your Post Name to Help Find Last Post} Male

How Did You Find the Dream Forum? Yes

Sam,
I was going through some of my old books and audio tapes {I have large selection of audio books, buying most that were available having anything to do with Jung or Campbell during a several year period in the late 90s} and discovered I do have this very book by Laurens van der Post {JUNG & THE STORY OF OUR TIME. I don't remember reading the book but have had it stored away for many years, along with the many others I accumulated during my 'enlighten period' all through the 90s. I was possesssed with reading all I could that was associated with Campbell and Jung.
I'll have to refresh my self and read the book.
Thanks again.

Jerry

Age & Gender & Location {Required}: 60 Murfreesboro, Tn

Have You Posted Before? Date of Last Post {Use Search and Your Post Name to Help Find Last Post} Male

How Did You Find the Dream Forum? Yes

One thing that seems to be of increasing importance to me and I'm certain is an implicit axiom of operation for you, is a statement van der Post echoed of jung's. He said that, before trying to auger the meaning of a dream through a sophisticated tool of interpretation, however universal it may be, that the first step was to let the dream be what it is, an experience. I borrowed William Jame's book Varieties of Religious Experience, from the Unitarian library today, and read an affirmation of the concept that has raised itself often lately in my mind. The cover reads,

Pragmatism's leading exponent defends his belief that the evidence for God lies primarily in inner personal experiences rather than in abstract philosophical systems.

- That to me is the core of the entire experience of the path toward individuation.

Age & Gender & Location {Required}: 33, Montana

Have You Posted Before? Date of Last Post {Use Search and Your Post Name to Help Find Last Post} Male

How Did You Find the Dream Forum? Yes

Sam,
"the evidence for God lies primarily in inner personal experiences rather than in abstract philosophical systems"

That reminds me of Campbell's response when asked about faith. "I don't need faith, I have experience".

It is great to know you are attending the Unitarian church. I first attended UU when I began my search for a congregation after my encounter with Joseph Campbell. Everyone, no matter their belief system is welcome at UU {Unitarian Universalist churches}. No one is turned away.
If that isn't in the tradition of Jesus, what else is there?

Jerry

Age & Gender & Location {Required}: 60 Murfreesboro, Tn

Have You Posted Before? Date of Last Post {Use Search and Your Post Name to Help Find Last Post} Male

How Did You Find the Dream Forum? Yes