Carl Gustav Jung & The Red Book (part 1)


Publicado em 07/08/2013
“Carl Gustav Jung and the Red Book,” an all day symposium, featured presentations by prominent Jungian scholars.

Speaker Biography: Jung scholar Sonu Shamdasani is a London-based author, editor, and professor at the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at University College London WIHM/UCL. Shamdasani works discuss the history of psychiatry and psychology from the mid-nineteenth century to current times. Shamdasani holds a BA from Bristol University, followed by MSc, History of Science and Medicine, University College London/Imperial College and gained his Ph.D. in History of Medicine from WIHM/UCL.

Speaker Biography: James Hillman is a psychologist, scholar, international lecturer, pioneer psychologist, and the author of more than twenty books. Hillman has held teaching positions at Yale University, the University of Chicago, Syracuse University, the University of Chicago, and the University of Dallas, where he cofounded the Dallas Institute of Humanities and Culture.

Speaker Biography: Ann Ulanov is a professor of psychiatry and religion at the Union Theological Seminary in New York City. She is the author of several books, including Religion and the Spiritual in Carl Jung and The Healing Imagination: The Meeting of Psyche and Soul.

For captions, transcript, and more information visit…

Carl Jung: The Wisdom of The Dream – Vol 1 – A Life of Dreams


This film is one of a three-part series of films produced by PBS, on the life and works of the great thinker and psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung. Born on July 26, 1875, in Switzerland, Jung became interested in psychiatry during his medical studies. He saw that the minds of mentally deranged persons had similar contents, much of which he recognized from his own interior life, described in his autobiography Memories, Dreams, Reflections. His lifelong quest to understand the workings of the psyche led him to develop the analytical method of psychiatry. He proceeded by looking at the role in his patients’ lives of what he termed the personal and collective unconscious, as expressed through dreams, myths, and outer events.

Carl Jung – Approaching the Unconscious


Two names are synonomous with the field of psychology/psychoanalysis, Freud and Jung. This is reputedly Jung’s last project/publication before his death in 1961 and is an excellent primer and synopsis of his work in the field. Jung edited this book and wrote the first chapter on the importance of symbols before unleashing writings from his students/protegees.
As a whole this book covers an incredible array of subjects, relating in layperson’s terms the importance of symbols in the unconscious, the role of the unconscious through dreams in communicating these symbols to the anals and and analyst.

Carl Gustav Jung e a Jornada para o Auto-Descobrimento


Carl Gustav Jung – Documentário Legendado Pt. 2/2

Carl Gustav Jung e a Jornada para o Auto-Descobrimento. Legendas em português.

“Se a legenda não está aparecendo, ative-a ali na barra do vídeo, aperte no botão da extrema-direita (ao lado do que ativa a visualização em tela inteira) e clique no botão “ATIVAR LEGENDAS””

Face to Face: Entrevista com Carl Gustav Jung, BBC 1959


Entrevista realizada com o psicólogo suíço Carl Gustav Jung em sua residência, na cidade de Zurique, Suíça.

Destaco do diálogo aos 30:30:

Jung: (…) Uma coisa é certa; uma grande mudança de nossa atitude psicológica é iminente. Isso é certeza.

Freeman: E porquê?

Jung:  Porque precisamos de mais, precisamos de mais psicologia. Nós precisamos de um entendimento maior da natureza humana, porque o único perigo real existente é o próprio homem. Ele é o grande perigo, e lamentavelmente não temos consciência disso. Não sabemos nada sobre o homem,  sabemos muito pouco. Sua psique deveria ser estudada, pois somos a origem de todo o mal vindouro.

BBC, 1959, Sinópse: John Freeman interviews Carl Gustav Jung, the most famous living psychologist, at his home in Zürich. We learn about Jung`s early life, including the moment in his eleventh year when he realized he was an individual consciousness. Jung speaks about his friendship with Sigmund Freud, and explains why the friendship could not last. Jung is asked about his belief in God, and Jung can only respond that there is no belief: he knows. And, he says, he knows – knows, not believes – that death is not an end. Finally, Jung forecasts what he thinks will happen to mankind and describes what man needs to survive. BBC `Face to Face` interviews Carl Gustav Jung October 22, 1959 Face To Face was a 35 episode BBC television series broadcast between 1959 and 1962, created and produced by Hugh Burnett. The insightful and often probing style of the interviewer, former politician John Freeman, distinguished it from other programmes of its genre at the time. Freeman`s face was almost never shown. Apart from the back of his head, the cameras were concentrated on the subject, sometimes concentrating on a nervously smoked cigarette or a close-up of a face. The theme music was an excerpt from the overture to Berlioz` opera Les Francs-juges. The titles for each episode featured caricatures of that week`s subject drawn by Feliks Topolski. Some episodes departed from an interview conducted at the BBC`s Lime Grove Studios: the edition with Carl Gustav Jung was conducted at his home in Switzerland. The interview was a success, with his much quoted remark about the existence of God – `I don`t believe, I know` – arousing a storm of comment at the time

David Steindl-Rast: Want to be happy? Be grateful


The one thing all humans have in common is that each of us wants to be happy, says Brother David Steindl-Rast, a monk and interfaith scholar. And happiness, he suggests, is born from gratitude. An inspiring lesson in slowing down, looking where you’re going, and above all, being grateful.

Are We in an Age of Collective Learning?

This is a guest post by Rotana Ty from Paris, France, who curates on the subject of “exploring learning” on Permamarks.Ancient Art Community

Are We in an Age of Collective Learning?

Recently, after reading a great post from Gianpiero Petriglieri offering a different view on MOOCs, here is what I tweeted:

Education is not just about skills, concepts, knowledge as commodity.  Also about ties/citizenship.

So, if education is also about relationships and citizenship, how do we harness new learning curves?

How do we go with learning flows?

Learning flows are already everywhere. People didn’t wait for online courses for learning from each other and on their own.


We are moving away from the model in which learning is organized around stable, usually hierarchical institutions (schools, colleges, universities) that, for better and worse, have served as the main gateways to education and social mobility. Replacing that model is a new system in which learning is best conceived of as a flow, where learning resources are not scarce but widely available, opportunities for learning are abundant, and learners increasingly have the ability to autonomously dip into and out of continuous learning flows.


Instead of worrying about how to distribute scarce educational resources, the challenge we need to start grappling with in the era of socialstructed learning is how to attract people to dip into the rapidly growing flow of learning resources and how to do this equitably, in order to create more opportunities for a better life for more people.  –Marina Gorbis

If you want to go deeper you might be interested in diving into the research of the Institute For The Future“From Educational Institutions to Learning Flow.

Trisha Brink Design Vintage Stamps[photo courtesy of Trisha Brink Design]

Collective Sense-Making

I think that Marcia Conner describes very well how collective sense-making and learning are shifting.

How do you define social learning?


I define social learning as participating with others to make sense of new ideas. Augmented by a new slew of social tools, people can gather information and gain new context from people across the globe and around the clock as easily as they could from those they work beside.


Social learning is not just the technology of social media, although it makes use of it. It is not merely the ability to express yourself in a group of opt-in friends. Social learning combines social media tools with a shift in the corporate culture, a shift that encourages ongoing knowledge transfer and connects people in ways that make learning a joy.

– Excerpt from “Where Social Learning Thrives”  (Marcia Conner withSteve LeBlanc.)

In defining social learning, and what it isn’t, Marcia Conner also shares her learning experience and insights:

Learning can easily occur anytime, anywhere, and in a variety of formats. It always has, but augmented by social tools, now it’s easy for others to see and learn from too.


Together we are better. Together we participate with others and learn nonstop.


Every day I connect and learn from people across the world through social technologies. Some of these people I’ve met in person, increasingly they are people I didn’t know before social media. From them I glean new insights about topics I set out to learn as well as get introduced to new topics and related information I didn’t realize would help round out what’s important to my life and in my work.

Dennis Callahan also described in a terrific post how social learning is like gravity:

Learning with and from others fosters an environment that creates the birth of new ideas, connections, products, etc. Think about a positive brainstorming session that you had with someone or a group of people. This creates an energy that propels you into creating something new.

The recent #ideachat on the value of curation with thinkers across many disciplines is a nice example on how collective brainpower is used for advancing and cross-pollinating ideas from diverse and many areas.

The big shift is a learning shift

Since 2009, John Hagel has been talking about the big shift as a“movement from the world of push to a world of pull”. We are moving from knowledge stocks to knowledge flows. Learning is changing becauseways of learning are evolvingin our connected world as J.P. Rangaswamiwrote in this piece :

The ability to observe. The ability to imitate. The ability to try it out for yourself. The ability to get quick feedback. Four critical requirements for learning.


We’re in the midst of a digital revolution. Everything that happens can be observed by more people than has ever been possible before. The internet is a copy machine, the ability to share and to imitate has never been cheaper. Tools continue to be invented to make it possible for all of us to be able to try more things for ourselves than we could ever do before.


This digital revolution is a learning revolution. As long as we don’t waste it. Waste happens when we constrain the ability to observe, to imitate, to try out, to get feedback. Particularly when we have the opportunity to make it all affordable, ubiquitous.


Education drives the solution to so many of our perceived problems. Education is so incredibly accelerated, assisted, augmented by digital infrastructure. If we let it.


We who are here on earth today can make a difference to that earth by ensuring that we don’t waste this incredible opportunity, of using digital infrastructure to enfranchise everyone, to provide the opportunity for all to learn.

How do you keep learning in networks?

Connected Learning

[Infographic courtesy of]

For contributing to collective intelligence, you need to learn on your own first. How do you grow and learn? How do you cultivate your curiosity and self-directed learning? As Jon Husband wrote:

There just isn’t any choice other than continuous learning because ongoing change—permanent whitewater—is our only remaining constant.

So how do you learn faster, better from each other, and on your own? Are you curating smart networksGideon Rosenblatt said:

The way we curate our connections shapes our networks in ways that affect their health and effectiveness.

I think Mark Oehlert nailed it when he said:

Go with the flow…feel the Force…be the ball….focus on building your network. You don’t have a 1:1 relationship with social media – what you should be building is a many to many relationship. Social media is a network, and you need to respond to the output of that network with your own network. I’ve got a strong network that kinda looks like a patchwork quilt.


It’s my responsibility to architect the right network. The cool thing? Me and my network are also part of other people’s networks – at absolutely zero incremental cost to any of us. Start thinking like a Subject-Matter Network.

Across many industries there are many people who think and learn in networks. They are networked learners. For instance, many healthcare professionals are networked learners. It becomes a reality.

I speak to doctors, and they tell me to just what extent they are learning from international peers through social media. –Daniel Ghinn

Are you both mindful and networked?

But among the toughest difficulties for learning from each other in our hyper-connected society, it is the ability to be mindful and connected to ourselves. “Disconnect to connect,” said Tiffany Shlain. If you have time, I also recommend you watch her fun, short and insightful videos.


So being mindful, connected to ourselves, thinking critically, and learning in networks, imply to use our 5 senses in smart and modern ways. Why does it matter? It matters for each of us to be networked and for tribal knowledge because in a fragmented world we need to go deep asNilofer Merchant said.

It’s a fragmented world. And it’s only becoming more so. It used to be that when people wrote, they wrote more deeply. In the early days of the web (pre-twitter), I remember hand picking the few voices I would listen to and then putting them into my RSS feeder and checking for their essays. Essays, not tweets, were the way we shared what we were thinking. But as “content” has become more important to maintain a standing online, more and more people are entering into the fray. More and more people who may not even have a point of view to advocate but just want to participate in the conversation. – Nilofer Merchant


Towards network thinking and networked libraries

As William Gibson said “The future is already here – it’s just not evenly distributed.” So are we heading to a world of connected learningnetwork thinking, and networked libraries? These words from Greg Satell paint very well the age in which we are living:

I am also meeting and collaborating with people online that I would have never had a chance to know before. I can even gain access to knowledge in other languages through online translation. In other words, I am to stumble over people and knowledge to a degree that wouldn’t have been possible even a relatively short time ago.


And that’s why we can expect life to continue to get better. While earlier technologies allowed us to master energy and matter, newer advances are giving us something far more valuable: They are unleashing the power of human potential.

Explore Rotana Ty on Permamarks:

Aldous Huxley: the prophet of our brave new digital dystopia

Aldous Huxley

Aldous Huxley pictured in the 1930s. ‘We failed to notice that our runaway infatuation with the sleek toys produced by the likes of Apple and Samsung might well turn out to be as powerful a narcotic as soma.’ Photograph: Hulton Archive/Getty Images

CS Lewis may be getting a plaque. But Huxley, for his foretelling of a society that loves servitude, is the true visionary

 , The Guardian, Friday 22 November 2013

On 22 November 1963 the world was too preoccupied with the Kennedy assassination to pay much attention to the passing of two writers from the other side of the Atlantic: CS Lewis and Aldous Huxley. Fifty years on, Lewis is being honoured with a plaque in Poets’ Corner at Westminster Abbey, to be unveiled in a ceremony on Friday. The fanfare for Huxley has been more muted.

There are various reasons for this: The Chronicles of Narnia propelled their author into the Tolkien league; Shadowlands, the film about his life starring Anthony Hopkins, moved millions; and his writings on religious topics made him a global figure in more spiritual circles. There is a CS Lewis Society of California, for example; plus a CS Lewis Review and aCentre for the Study of CS Lewis & Friends at a university in Indiana.

Aldous Huxley never attracted that kind of attention. And yet there are good reasons for regarding him as the more visionary of the two. For one of the ironies of history is that visions of our networked future can be bracketed by the imaginative nightmares of Huxley and his fellow Etonian George Orwell. Orwell feared that we would be destroyed by the things we fear – the state surveillance apparatus so vividly evoked in Nineteen Eighty-Four. Huxley’s nightmare, set out in Brave New World, his great dystopian novel, was that we would be undone by the things that delight us.

Huxley was a child of England’s intellectual aristocracy. His grandfather was Thomas Henry Huxley, the Victorian biologist who was the most effective evangelist for Darwin’s theory of evolution. (He was colloquially known as “Darwin’s Bulldog”.) His mother was Matthew Arnold‘s niece. His brother, Julian and half-brother Andrew both became distinguished biologists. In the circumstances it’s not surprising that Aldous turned out to be a writer who ranged far beyond the usual preoccupations of literary folk – into history, philosophy, science, politics, mysticism and psychic exploration. His biographer wrote: “He offered as his personal motto the legend hung around the neck of a ragged scarecrow of a man in apainting by GoyaAún aprendo. I am still learning.” He was, in that sense, a modern Voltaire.

Brave New World was published in 1932. The title comes from Miranda’s speech in Shakespeare’s The Tempest: “Oh, wonder! / How many goodly creatures are there here! / How beauteous mankind is! Oh brave new world, / That has such people in’t.”

It is set in the London of the distant future – AD 2540 – and describes a fictional society inspired by two things: Huxley’s imaginative extrapolation of scientific and social trends; and his first visit to the US, in which he was struck by how a population could apparently be rendered docile by advertising and retail therapy. As an intellectual who was fascinated by science, he guessed (correctly, as it turned out) that scientific advances would eventually give humans powers that had hitherto been regarded as the exclusive preserve of the gods. And his encounters with industrialists like Alfred Mond led him to think that societies would eventually be run on lines inspired by the managerial rationalism of mass production (“Fordism”) – which is why the year 2540 AD in the novel is “the Year of Our Ford 632”.

In the novel Huxley describes the mass production of children by what we would now call in vitro fertilisation; interference in the development process of infants to produce a number of “castes” with carefully modulated levels of capacities to enable them to fit without complaining into the various societal and industrial roles assigned to them; and Pavlovian conditioning of children from birth.

In this world nobody falls ill, everyone has the same lifespan, there is no warfare, and institutions and marriage and sexual fidelity are dispensed with. Huxley’s dystopia is a totalitarian society, ruled by a supposedly benevolent dictatorship whose subjects have been programmed to enjoy their subjugation through conditioning and the use of a narcotic drug – soma – that is less damaging and more pleasurable than any narcotic known to us. The rulers of Brave New World have solved the problem of making people love their servitude.

Which brings us back to the two Etonian bookends of our future. On the Orwellian front, we are doing rather well – as the revelations of Edward Snowden have recently underlined. We have constructed an architecture of state surveillance that would make Orwell gasp. And indeed for a long time, for those of us who worry about such things, it was the internet’s capability to facilitate such comprehensive surveillance that attracted most attention.

In the process, however, we forgot about Huxley’s intuition. We failed to notice that our runaway infatuation with the sleek toys produced by the likes of Apple and Samsung – allied to our apparently insatiable appetite for Facebook, Google and other companies that provide us with “free” services in exchange for the intimate details of our daily lives – might well turn out to be as powerful a narcotic as soma was for the inhabitants of Brave New World. So even as we remember CS Lewis, let us spare a thought for the writer who perceived the future in which we would come to love our digital servitude.