Showing papers by "Fredrik Barth published in 1974"

On responsibility and humanity: Calling a colleague to account

Abstract: and archetypic thinking is treated in the text. 2. Do I think it possible that \"change in the social form of people's life as a result of 'social cooperation' will open to mankind such perspectives as will make Jung's religious therapy look like sorcery\"? That is to say, can socialism become an integrative symbolic framework, fully replacing an integrative, archetypic symbolic structure? Definitely not in itself. It cannot be imposed by logicorational means alone. It must come as a result of a new archetypically founded synthesis, as the organic ingredient of a new \"culture\"-in which case Jung's \"religious therapy\" is no longer needed, because it has come to pass. 3. Does myth contain the same kind of truth as a scientific thesis? Definitely not. A myth gives an all-encompassing view of the known universe, whereas a scientific truth gives only a quantified description of a detail of the environment. 4. Is there any \"basis\" for religious belief? Is there no fundamental difference between \"truth\" and \"delusion\"? That is to say, in what relation does \"religious truth\" stand to objective reality, and is the relation the same as for \"scientific truth\"? These questions cannot be answered without taking refuge in a belief in the absoluteness of scientific or of religious \"truth.\" My paper analysed archetypic symbolic frameworks from the point of view of their origin and biological usefulness (function). 5. Do I consider that my theoretical position is also neutral in reference to its correspondence to the \"objective content\" of the subject treated? Definitely not. However, I can only express hope that it is closer to \"objective truth\" than others. 6. What symbols do correspond with environmental phenomena? Only archetypic symbols, which constitute a fusion of engrams with perceptions (projection); see my paper. 7. Is religion still relevant? \"Relevance\" is not the question. The question is, How does the human nervous system work? Does it still show the phenomenon of religious experience or, in a wider sense, archetypic experience? Of course it does.