The difference between the works of Jung and Frankl and almost all of what has been written in psychology is that both have designed a psychology for healthy minds, while the bulk of the rest applies only to sick mental states, emphasizing, always and only, the morbidity from which man can suffer. A person who is even remotely experienced and sane and chooses a work by Freud or Adler to enter the science of the mind will come out amazed and disgusted, overcome by a mixture of strangeness and repulsion because, obviously, the man painted in such works has little or nothing in common with himself. And then he will see, on every page, endless classifications of disorders, complexes, and the like, often associated with natural behaviors, but justified by reasons that seem like direct insults to him who reads. In Jung, in Frankl, how different everything is! In these great psychiatrists, who were also great men, although one can find Freud and Adler, the high spirit can finally recognize itself.
The Taoist Perspective
There is a remarkable beauty when we meditate on reality from the perspective of Chinese philosophy, or more precisely, from a Taoist perspective. The principle of duality is justified because, ultimately, a balance, a harmony is necessary for the world to continue to exist. Taoism is a doctrine that forces us to overcome, in the micro and macro, the apparent chaos, providing only prolonged meditation as a means of overcoming. This will inevitably lead us to the redeeming conclusion, the effect of which is peace. It is impressive to note the applicability of what seems to be a very simple philosophy, since it is possible to verify the principles that support it wherever the lens is directed. It is, without a doubt, a doctrine worthy of admiration.
Everything Indicates That I Will Complete a Full Year…
Everything indicates that I will complete a whole year of exclusive dedication to fifteen miserable poems or, more precisely, to about one thousand seven hundred verses. Laugh, Hugo, laugh! And, at the end of the process, there will be no publication, because it is necessary for the verses to rest—although it seems that this is what they have been doing in the last months. Were these notes not a very efficient way to give vent to the ideas that come and pile up, I would be faced with an impregnable mountain of annotations. I have, at the bottom, some forty perfectly idealized short stories that require no more than a day’s work to be realized on paper. Besides, I do not know how many plots for novels, plays, or whatever. Even for poems, there are excesses that could not be used in this volume. And I am left wondering how, in the past, artists who did not have secretaries would organize themselves after ten, twenty years of creative work. Without a computer, it seems to me that I would be forced to give up…
Modern Psychology, Taking Away Man’s Autonomy…
It is curious how modern psychology, by taking away man’s autonomy, painting him as submissive to this monster created by Freud,—the “unconscious,”—has ended up devaluing his own mind, the opposite of what one might expect. Even Jung, who so distinctly perceived the individual character of human psychology, seems to slip into some false notions of modern psychology. He claims, with some prudent caveats, that nothing influences our conduct so little as ideas. And here we return, once again, to the insulting comparison of this “our”. What “our”? Unquestionably, different men make different uses of the minds they possess. One does not have to be a philosopher to have a “philosophy of life”; and what is this but the practical result of the individual’s ideas, concepts and judgments? How can the practical consequences of reasoning be denied to the man of value? How can we continue with this infamous contention that all morality is a strictly collective construction? If ideas really influence man so little, one can only conclude that this man, specifically, is inferior.