>>12219198I've been reading Jung for about a year and to be honest the ideas he put forward are astounding.
If I can put a modern spin on them, (to the same tune as Jordan Peterson) he elaborated on the theories of psychoanalysis (Freud's in particular) of the late 19th century by focusing on the unconscious. The main idea is that the human psyche is divided into conscious and unconscious processing (there are plenty of reasons to take this view seriously, which the modern cognitive sciences and neuroscience haven't really done), and that at the root of unconscious processing lie the archetypes.
The best way to see an archetype is as a sub-personality, with it's own set of actions, motivations and affects. The origin of these archetypes are in our evolution history. It's obvious that we share certain innate (evolved) cognitive faculties and behaviors with other animals which are based in neural structures. (In social organisms there is devolution of social structure along with biological evolution, but these are all interactions between the evolutionary mechanisms, the organisms nervous system and the social environment. This is a fucking complex set of systems)
These neural structures/archetypes constitute the collective unconscious.
Now the brain is capable of creative simulation of new scenarios, and this is where the collective unconscious truly shows itself. (and where whatever "built in" simulations are regenerated as well) Our fantasies, the figures and stories in our dreams, fiction and art. These are exemplified by the myths and religious systems we create. Symbolic, abstract representations via events and characters, appearing in every culture at all levels of human life.
What might be the reason that these neural structures that bring forth specific archetypal stories have been carried forward in our species. Adaptation.
