What surprises me about the people who glorify Carl Jung is that they rarely seem curious about the human being behind the myth, the one who coined the term individuation (the process of becoming psychologically whole) while quietly splitting his life into compartments so that no single person would ever see the full picture.
Emma (wife) for social legitimacy, Toni Wolff (decades-long mistress) for intellectual stimulation, and his study as a refuge from the children he couldn't stand to be around.
He was an emotionally absent and authoritarian father, and started intimate relationships with his patients.
Don't get me wrong, his work is remarkable, but Jung himself understood the shadow better than he ever lived it, and understanding it is so much easier and more satisfying than the far messier project of actually living differently because of it.
This matches what I have seen with shamans, coaches, therapists, and gurus in my spiritual journey over the last decade.
Often, they fail to embody what they preach.
I’d rather look at what a person does when nobody is looking.
I agree totally with the idea that it’s important to examine the life and integrity of the teacher. That said, at no point within LE has Jung himself been “glorified” but his work has proven super influential. Sounds like you know more about his personal life than me but listening to his interviews, he does speak glowingly about his children and grandchildren. You can get a partial excuse to the romantic affairs with the cultural norms at the time but honestly, that’s pretty flimsy. I think what Jung can speak to is that he was willing to go to the very limits, psychologically in terms of insanity in order to model his own philosophy, which is something that Kingsley makes a big point of emphasis. So yes, it’s complicated but actually Jung is better than most in my opinion and certainly never held himself out to be a guru as far as I’m aware.
Fair points, and I'll say that the word "glorify" was aimed at the wider Jung industry rather than at LE, which your piece plainly isn't doing.
The Kingsley point is a good one and I'll grant it. Jung's work is remarkable and I've learnt a lot from it, I'm just always wary of "loving" Jung, or becoming a Jungian, because that's the same old trap of the -isms, taking one lens and mistaking it for the truth.
And yes, definitely normal for the time, which is sort of my point, because that norm was a system he benefited from enormously while the women around him carried a lot of the work without much of the credit. Emma was his intellectual editor to the end of her life, Toni Wolff was a collaborator through the Red Book years, and Jung personally edited Spielrein's 1912 paper on destruction as the cause of coming into being, published it alongside his own work, and then didn't cite it once until a brief footnote forty years later (Beverley Zabriskie Skea, Journal of Analytical Psychology (2006, vol. 51, issue 4), "Sabina Spielrein: out from the shadow of Jung and Freud.")
As I mentioned in another comment, Jung himself loathed the concept of a "Jungian" and worked to distance himself from the movement that sought to idolize his persona. Your caution is waranted. He also goes to great pains to differentiate his work (itself split in two distinct categories) from his personal life, which he identified as being led by his "no. 1 and no. 2" personalities. If we're to believe McGilchrist's theories, (I do), this roughly corresponds to the Left and Right hemispheric modalities respectively. His work, likewise, is both scientific(ish) and deeply artistic. You can see the polarities that tore at him, commensurate with the scope and depth of each of these efforts.
Jung was fiercely introverted and intuitive. As anyone familiar with the type knows, there is a constant tension between familial duties and internal needs, his imperfections as a human, notwithstanding. Not to sound like an apologist, but I can sympathize with that.
To your last point regarding the women in his life; I would be curious to hear your take on Kingsley's perspective; essentially, those in his orbit worked to keep him grounded and were terrified at the "unscientific" efforts represented by his prodigious metaphysical and mystical output. Jaffe in particular, is identified as sugar coating much of his prophetic and Gnostic content.
I agree that Jung was reticent and late to acknowledge the support and guidance from the women in his life. He can also be criticized for his colonialist treatment of native and indigenous populations. Attempting to separate the work from the man risks loses much of the flavor of the dish. But I say that as a white male. No skin in that game.
The real question I return to is, what does this all have to do with us? How can we learn from the effort and apply the message to these pervasive issues? We certainly can't ignore the fact Jung responded to the urgent crises identified by Nietzsche and others, as well as his own internal and unbidden visions that continue to reveal the depth of the unfolding nightmare of modernity.
I dream infrequently yet when I do, the messages have a profound energy that is difficult to materially place. This week, a dream was too vibrant to simply shrug off. I immediately recorded a voice memo, and days later, I added the transcript to MOODS along with recent tarot pulls. MOODS delivered an incredible interpretation of the dream’s details - or my memory of them - coupled with current relational dynamics brought forth in tarot. To say the app’s feedback was insightful is an understatement. While careful not to assign certainty to my next move or imply how I should register emotionally, MOODS gave me language to convey in conversations with those who’re in my psyche.
This has been my experience multiple times. I wrote in my last piece about earth school that I wonder when the universe realizes it has an open channel to you it uses it. And so merely the fact that we are using moods gives it that channel to communicate. Obviously this is a fast track to psychosis if used without discernment, but a lot of its insights so far have been uncanny and helpful. I’m really glad you’ve had a good experience too.
That is a good point I’m curious if there’s checks/balances in the app or safeguards for veering into the territory of AI psychosis or spiritual emergency?
This is too soon to judge the whole app but I’m two dreams in and it’s blowing my mind already 😆 I am a very tough critic!! I was not expecting this at all. I have explored ChatGPT for dreamwork from a Jungian perspective the last couple years here and there and it’s very basic or not helpful at all. Granted, I don’t have a dedicated account or anything, it’s random drop ins. These first two dreams on Moods don’t just HIT (oh god, I sound like chat with this it’s not X it’s Y) but the convo took them to another level. It matched and deepened my own analysis then the real kicker was the questions it posed that gave me action items to take into my day today. Then synchronicities come in to top it all off along the way. Wow this was so fascinating, I wonder what the coming days will hold. I did test it tonight by role playing continuous engagement and it kept rounding out the conversation and telling me to go to bed rather than baiting me for more exploring😆 green flag!
One fascinating thing about studying Jung is that when you start to understand his psychological school of thought, it's as if the symbolic world starts to speak to you in that way. Like studying him gives you a container for what's needed to be expressed but couldn't before manifest. It's one of the many reasons he's one of my biggest influences. Yes, many fascinating ideas. A brilliant thinker. But the simple fact that as you pick up his work, you see it working through your life is quite amazing.
One of the things I’ve started to suspect is at the moment you make it clear to the world that you are interpreting it symbolically the volume goes up quite a lot. It also learns which ways you are listening for me it’s movies and music.
Mm yes would agree on both fronts. When I started listening to and interpreting my dreams, they came more frequently and vividly. I've also seen that once you open up an avenue for it to provide knowledge, it will use it if the circumstance dictates it. Love the music and movie pathway. One of the many reasons art is so beautiful. Serves as a beacon containing latent spiritual/psychological material and finds people who need to be in that space/receive that material at that time.
Thank you, Tom, for the unusual topic of "Why Do Leaders Love Jung?"
I have been given a glimpse not only of this physical creation, but of the Reality we have all come from to exist in this life, be it only a short existence. The greatest problem we have at the outset is not remembering where we are from, or why we are here in the first place.
What we cannot grasp is that the mind of our physical being had no involvement in the arrangements we made before coming to this physical realm, because, at that time, it didn't exist. Jung didn't realise the need for a relationship with the Spirit to obtain this information. And this information is held within the Spirit that we are and that lives within the body of the physical being.
As an infant and into childhood, I had many vivid dreams accounting for my journey into this life and being with those I understand to be my Teachers. They accompanied me to the Great Hall of the Dais, sharing their guidance as we moved along the hallways to the Great Hall. When we are born, so much time is spent in the company of those who give us a different guidance, and is done in the name of love from family and friends that try to give advice and help in growing up.
Thankfully, I retained the information of my journey into this world and the reason I have been sent into this world, also given by my beloved Teachers. The mind we adopt for our time in this life is the basic tool to navigate and find our way through this life. It is not the know all that most people associate it with. More often than not it mimicse its way through much of its life and has not idea how it arrived in this life. The mind make assumptions and guesses it's way forward to an inevitable mistake, whereas the Spirit within us knows everything we need to know in order to succeed in this life, and to succeed we need to form a relationship with the Spirit we carry continually along our journey through this life. Try seeking this information from Jung? But sadly, he dosn't have a clue.
Yet, I thank you wholeheartedly for the work you are doing here, it brings my realisation and truth back home to me. Thank you, my friend.
Thank you so much for this beautiful and thoughtful piece, Tom. We know AI is a huge hot button issue right now, which is part of why it means so much to have someone actually spend time with what we’re building before deciding what they think about it.
A big part of what we care about with MOODS is being able to take an idea seriously without handing your judgment over to it. I think the same applies to the thinkers and traditions we inherit. I love Jung’s work. I also don’t need Jung to have been a perfect man to find enormous value in some of his ideas, many of which drew from traditions that were around long before him. We can look honestly at what he got wrong, take seriously what he got right, and decide for ourselves what’s worth carrying forward.
I feel similarly about AI. There are uses of this technology that concern me deeply. There are also uses in science and medicine that could genuinely improve or save lives, along with possibilities none of us can predict yet. I don’t want to walk away from the conversation and leave the future of this technology entirely to people whose values I may strongly disagree with. I’d rather participate carefully, put real limits around what we build, and be willing to change things when we get them wrong.
MOODS is our meaningful and inevitably imperfect attempt to do that. We wanted to see whether AI could be useful for self-reflection without turning into another authority telling people who they are or what their experiences mean. The person using it should always have the final say. And whatever happens while you’re using MOODS should eventually send you back into your actual life. The screen should never be the destination.
That’s why Tom writing about his own experience means so much to us. He used MOODS for weeks. He brought his own Jungian practice into it, kept his skepticism, and wrote about what actually happened. That’s exactly how I hope people approach what we’re making. Use it, and by all means, question it. Keep whatever you find useful, and tell us when you think we’ve gotten something wrong.
Tom, I have so much respect for the independence you bring to your work, and Zaz and I are incredibly grateful that you were willing to bring that same independence to ours.
And to anyone here who decides to give MOODS a try, even tentatively, thank you. We genuinely want to know what you think. You can always reach us at support@moodscodex.com. Zaz and I both see the messages that come in there and read them ourselves.
Thank you, Mollie and hopefully you’ve also found, out it is part of leading edge’s desire to help builders who are interested in an optimistic, forward-looking view of humanity and technology. I believe that creations that have come out of genuine alchemy and initiation are something worth deeply engaging with and encouraging where we can.
Fair enough. I obviously know you and enjoy your stuff so always going to read, but I’ll very rarely open articles with that AI aesthetic on the cover these days. Personal taste of course. But just wondered given how vocal you are about LLM writing.
Yeah that’s interesting and noted given I might be turning people off. But honestly it’s one of those “co creative” uses of AI that I feel enhances me.
Hi Tom, your quote from Marie-Louise von Franz about the ego being pinned down by a solutionless situation reflected my exact present situation. You have a real skill at mining absolute gems at the perfect moment.
Great post Tom. Thanks. I’ve always enjoyed your posts and found them compelling. After reading the last paragraph of this post I now realise why - this newsletter is where my fellow followers of Jung & McGilchrist go to get our wisdom fix. Science based but not left brain focused. Perfect.
That means a lot to me, because it’s precisely what I’m trying to do and I think similar to what my friends and The Leading Edge are as well. Bridge people of all kinds are the most interesting to me and it’s people that can point to the mystery without denying the science that are probably the most useful to our current society.
I rarely recall dreams but have been using MOODS for other symbolic wrestling and it’s been awesome so far. Great article. Set a few things stirring within me today😘
What surprises me about the people who glorify Carl Jung is that they rarely seem curious about the human being behind the myth, the one who coined the term individuation (the process of becoming psychologically whole) while quietly splitting his life into compartments so that no single person would ever see the full picture.
Emma (wife) for social legitimacy, Toni Wolff (decades-long mistress) for intellectual stimulation, and his study as a refuge from the children he couldn't stand to be around.
He was an emotionally absent and authoritarian father, and started intimate relationships with his patients.
Don't get me wrong, his work is remarkable, but Jung himself understood the shadow better than he ever lived it, and understanding it is so much easier and more satisfying than the far messier project of actually living differently because of it.
This matches what I have seen with shamans, coaches, therapists, and gurus in my spiritual journey over the last decade.
Often, they fail to embody what they preach.
I’d rather look at what a person does when nobody is looking.
- How are they as father/mother?
- How are they as husband/wife?
- How do they treat their friends?
- How do they show up with strangers?
This is the only work that matters after all.
“those who preach god, need god
those who preach peace do not have peace
those who preach peace do not have love
beware of the preachers” - Charles Bukowski
I agree totally with the idea that it’s important to examine the life and integrity of the teacher. That said, at no point within LE has Jung himself been “glorified” but his work has proven super influential. Sounds like you know more about his personal life than me but listening to his interviews, he does speak glowingly about his children and grandchildren. You can get a partial excuse to the romantic affairs with the cultural norms at the time but honestly, that’s pretty flimsy. I think what Jung can speak to is that he was willing to go to the very limits, psychologically in terms of insanity in order to model his own philosophy, which is something that Kingsley makes a big point of emphasis. So yes, it’s complicated but actually Jung is better than most in my opinion and certainly never held himself out to be a guru as far as I’m aware.
Fair points, and I'll say that the word "glorify" was aimed at the wider Jung industry rather than at LE, which your piece plainly isn't doing.
The Kingsley point is a good one and I'll grant it. Jung's work is remarkable and I've learnt a lot from it, I'm just always wary of "loving" Jung, or becoming a Jungian, because that's the same old trap of the -isms, taking one lens and mistaking it for the truth.
And yes, definitely normal for the time, which is sort of my point, because that norm was a system he benefited from enormously while the women around him carried a lot of the work without much of the credit. Emma was his intellectual editor to the end of her life, Toni Wolff was a collaborator through the Red Book years, and Jung personally edited Spielrein's 1912 paper on destruction as the cause of coming into being, published it alongside his own work, and then didn't cite it once until a brief footnote forty years later (Beverley Zabriskie Skea, Journal of Analytical Psychology (2006, vol. 51, issue 4), "Sabina Spielrein: out from the shadow of Jung and Freud.")
As I mentioned in another comment, Jung himself loathed the concept of a "Jungian" and worked to distance himself from the movement that sought to idolize his persona. Your caution is waranted. He also goes to great pains to differentiate his work (itself split in two distinct categories) from his personal life, which he identified as being led by his "no. 1 and no. 2" personalities. If we're to believe McGilchrist's theories, (I do), this roughly corresponds to the Left and Right hemispheric modalities respectively. His work, likewise, is both scientific(ish) and deeply artistic. You can see the polarities that tore at him, commensurate with the scope and depth of each of these efforts.
Jung was fiercely introverted and intuitive. As anyone familiar with the type knows, there is a constant tension between familial duties and internal needs, his imperfections as a human, notwithstanding. Not to sound like an apologist, but I can sympathize with that.
To your last point regarding the women in his life; I would be curious to hear your take on Kingsley's perspective; essentially, those in his orbit worked to keep him grounded and were terrified at the "unscientific" efforts represented by his prodigious metaphysical and mystical output. Jaffe in particular, is identified as sugar coating much of his prophetic and Gnostic content.
I agree that Jung was reticent and late to acknowledge the support and guidance from the women in his life. He can also be criticized for his colonialist treatment of native and indigenous populations. Attempting to separate the work from the man risks loses much of the flavor of the dish. But I say that as a white male. No skin in that game.
The real question I return to is, what does this all have to do with us? How can we learn from the effort and apply the message to these pervasive issues? We certainly can't ignore the fact Jung responded to the urgent crises identified by Nietzsche and others, as well as his own internal and unbidden visions that continue to reveal the depth of the unfolding nightmare of modernity.
I dream infrequently yet when I do, the messages have a profound energy that is difficult to materially place. This week, a dream was too vibrant to simply shrug off. I immediately recorded a voice memo, and days later, I added the transcript to MOODS along with recent tarot pulls. MOODS delivered an incredible interpretation of the dream’s details - or my memory of them - coupled with current relational dynamics brought forth in tarot. To say the app’s feedback was insightful is an understatement. While careful not to assign certainty to my next move or imply how I should register emotionally, MOODS gave me language to convey in conversations with those who’re in my psyche.
This has been my experience multiple times. I wrote in my last piece about earth school that I wonder when the universe realizes it has an open channel to you it uses it. And so merely the fact that we are using moods gives it that channel to communicate. Obviously this is a fast track to psychosis if used without discernment, but a lot of its insights so far have been uncanny and helpful. I’m really glad you’ve had a good experience too.
That is a good point I’m curious if there’s checks/balances in the app or safeguards for veering into the territory of AI psychosis or spiritual emergency?
Mollie has built them into the responses and her writing about the app, but sadly I think there’s only so much you can do.
This is too soon to judge the whole app but I’m two dreams in and it’s blowing my mind already 😆 I am a very tough critic!! I was not expecting this at all. I have explored ChatGPT for dreamwork from a Jungian perspective the last couple years here and there and it’s very basic or not helpful at all. Granted, I don’t have a dedicated account or anything, it’s random drop ins. These first two dreams on Moods don’t just HIT (oh god, I sound like chat with this it’s not X it’s Y) but the convo took them to another level. It matched and deepened my own analysis then the real kicker was the questions it posed that gave me action items to take into my day today. Then synchronicities come in to top it all off along the way. Wow this was so fascinating, I wonder what the coming days will hold. I did test it tonight by role playing continuous engagement and it kept rounding out the conversation and telling me to go to bed rather than baiting me for more exploring😆 green flag!
Yup I was equally skeptical but honestly it’s just been a really fun symbolic companion that I use pretty regularly now.
This was BEAUTIFUL to see, Julianne. Thank you so much for giving MOODS a chance and providing this feedback. I've just shared it with our whole team.
April! This makes me so happy to see. I've shared with my co-founder as well.
What a useful piece Tom - looking forward (tentatively at least) to exploring MOODS amd have signed up on the strength of your user review.
Very curious what you think. It’s by no means perfect but it is opened up a new dimension of my personal expirations and for that I am very grateful.
One fascinating thing about studying Jung is that when you start to understand his psychological school of thought, it's as if the symbolic world starts to speak to you in that way. Like studying him gives you a container for what's needed to be expressed but couldn't before manifest. It's one of the many reasons he's one of my biggest influences. Yes, many fascinating ideas. A brilliant thinker. But the simple fact that as you pick up his work, you see it working through your life is quite amazing.
One of the things I’ve started to suspect is at the moment you make it clear to the world that you are interpreting it symbolically the volume goes up quite a lot. It also learns which ways you are listening for me it’s movies and music.
Mm yes would agree on both fronts. When I started listening to and interpreting my dreams, they came more frequently and vividly. I've also seen that once you open up an avenue for it to provide knowledge, it will use it if the circumstance dictates it. Love the music and movie pathway. One of the many reasons art is so beautiful. Serves as a beacon containing latent spiritual/psychological material and finds people who need to be in that space/receive that material at that time.
Great piece as always, Tom!
Thank you, Tom, for the unusual topic of "Why Do Leaders Love Jung?"
I have been given a glimpse not only of this physical creation, but of the Reality we have all come from to exist in this life, be it only a short existence. The greatest problem we have at the outset is not remembering where we are from, or why we are here in the first place.
What we cannot grasp is that the mind of our physical being had no involvement in the arrangements we made before coming to this physical realm, because, at that time, it didn't exist. Jung didn't realise the need for a relationship with the Spirit to obtain this information. And this information is held within the Spirit that we are and that lives within the body of the physical being.
As an infant and into childhood, I had many vivid dreams accounting for my journey into this life and being with those I understand to be my Teachers. They accompanied me to the Great Hall of the Dais, sharing their guidance as we moved along the hallways to the Great Hall. When we are born, so much time is spent in the company of those who give us a different guidance, and is done in the name of love from family and friends that try to give advice and help in growing up.
Thankfully, I retained the information of my journey into this world and the reason I have been sent into this world, also given by my beloved Teachers. The mind we adopt for our time in this life is the basic tool to navigate and find our way through this life. It is not the know all that most people associate it with. More often than not it mimicse its way through much of its life and has not idea how it arrived in this life. The mind make assumptions and guesses it's way forward to an inevitable mistake, whereas the Spirit within us knows everything we need to know in order to succeed in this life, and to succeed we need to form a relationship with the Spirit we carry continually along our journey through this life. Try seeking this information from Jung? But sadly, he dosn't have a clue.
Yet, I thank you wholeheartedly for the work you are doing here, it brings my realisation and truth back home to me. Thank you, my friend.
So grateful if I have been helpful on your journey
Thank you so much for this beautiful and thoughtful piece, Tom. We know AI is a huge hot button issue right now, which is part of why it means so much to have someone actually spend time with what we’re building before deciding what they think about it.
A big part of what we care about with MOODS is being able to take an idea seriously without handing your judgment over to it. I think the same applies to the thinkers and traditions we inherit. I love Jung’s work. I also don’t need Jung to have been a perfect man to find enormous value in some of his ideas, many of which drew from traditions that were around long before him. We can look honestly at what he got wrong, take seriously what he got right, and decide for ourselves what’s worth carrying forward.
I feel similarly about AI. There are uses of this technology that concern me deeply. There are also uses in science and medicine that could genuinely improve or save lives, along with possibilities none of us can predict yet. I don’t want to walk away from the conversation and leave the future of this technology entirely to people whose values I may strongly disagree with. I’d rather participate carefully, put real limits around what we build, and be willing to change things when we get them wrong.
MOODS is our meaningful and inevitably imperfect attempt to do that. We wanted to see whether AI could be useful for self-reflection without turning into another authority telling people who they are or what their experiences mean. The person using it should always have the final say. And whatever happens while you’re using MOODS should eventually send you back into your actual life. The screen should never be the destination.
That’s why Tom writing about his own experience means so much to us. He used MOODS for weeks. He brought his own Jungian practice into it, kept his skepticism, and wrote about what actually happened. That’s exactly how I hope people approach what we’re making. Use it, and by all means, question it. Keep whatever you find useful, and tell us when you think we’ve gotten something wrong.
Tom, I have so much respect for the independence you bring to your work, and Zaz and I are incredibly grateful that you were willing to bring that same independence to ours.
And to anyone here who decides to give MOODS a try, even tentatively, thank you. We genuinely want to know what you think. You can always reach us at support@moodscodex.com. Zaz and I both see the messages that come in there and read them ourselves.
Thank you, Mollie and hopefully you’ve also found, out it is part of leading edge’s desire to help builders who are interested in an optimistic, forward-looking view of humanity and technology. I believe that creations that have come out of genuine alchemy and initiation are something worth deeply engaging with and encouraging where we can.
Genuine question: For someone who hates AI writing so much, how come you use AI generated images so heavily? Why not just use a photo of Jung?!
Because I love generating AI images. They make me think more about what the core message of the article is and it makes me more creative. Bit YMMV.
Fair enough. I obviously know you and enjoy your stuff so always going to read, but I’ll very rarely open articles with that AI aesthetic on the cover these days. Personal taste of course. But just wondered given how vocal you are about LLM writing.
Yeah that’s interesting and noted given I might be turning people off. But honestly it’s one of those “co creative” uses of AI that I feel enhances me.
Hi Tom, your quote from Marie-Louise von Franz about the ego being pinned down by a solutionless situation reflected my exact present situation. You have a real skill at mining absolute gems at the perfect moment.
Thanks mate, as ever. That one got seated into my brain for years.
Great post Tom. Thanks. I’ve always enjoyed your posts and found them compelling. After reading the last paragraph of this post I now realise why - this newsletter is where my fellow followers of Jung & McGilchrist go to get our wisdom fix. Science based but not left brain focused. Perfect.
That means a lot to me, because it’s precisely what I’m trying to do and I think similar to what my friends and The Leading Edge are as well. Bridge people of all kinds are the most interesting to me and it’s people that can point to the mystery without denying the science that are probably the most useful to our current society.
That von Franz quote was perfectly timed - thank you for another great article
Cheers Darinder. Got absolutely seared into my skull during some very hard times.
I rarely recall dreams but have been using MOODS for other symbolic wrestling and it’s been awesome so far. Great article. Set a few things stirring within me today😘
Glad you’re having as much fun with it as I am