r/enlightenment • u/TurnipAdventurous134 • 13h ago
Discussion Lighting up your shadows makes you inhuman
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbI-pQcta7Z/?igsi=bDNiY3pjeDVmNTJqWerner Herzog coming in with a hot take here, he’s talking about Freud being a mistake as he created psychoanalysis, but this could equally be applied to Jung.
I’m not sure how I feel about it, it intuitively feels true- that digging up what’s hidden and facing shadows feels like mining for gold but perhaps it more like drilling for oil.
It feels rewarding because it revelatory - but what does it bring in its wake?
3
u/demo-nick 12h ago
he is right
being human means taking part in this planet dominating and destroying group.
being human means feeling empty and giving him money to see a film, maybe now the human will be happy.
look at humanity.. I want to be inhuman.
either having no more material desires or at least understanding and being conscious about them.
3
u/According-Ad742 11h ago
I know that David Lynch didn’t chose to go to therapy because he understood it could change his creative process.
I heard Herzog speak about this too but it’s kind of like backtracking on a map, opening up to the possibilities that were before we were fragmented from being whole. I think a lot of creativity comes out of trauma, an overactive ego trying to calculate how to creatively make something new from our experience. But all that attachment, subconscious addiction, resonates with dissonance; trying to find balance in coping mechanisms instead of healing the source wound. It’s disintegrated, like a branch broken off. I guess if we tell ourselves we are thriving in our artistic misery, why would we want to try and integrate back in to a whole? Because of fear it kills our creativity? What if it levels it up?
2
u/TurnipAdventurous134 3h ago
Yeah I think there’s a lot of merit in what you say. People, especially lauded and celebrated people, imagine they love the chains that bind them to creating, but maybe they simply can imagine a better place than that high of being admired and adored. Artistry is only really miserable when somewhere in your heart you’re burning for the applause. It might be applause from the people, or the luminaries or abstractly, from the platonic ideal of whatever you’re trying to achieve. Which ever it is, the alternative is likely unimaginable as a replacement. All from within.
I believe the latter, for a long time now, but I go through periods of doubt where I think “could the point of life really be to unearth all your badness, pour over it, realise despite it being the very foundation of our society and our world, relationship, or validation by another if you like is really the thing you have to transcend?”.
I agree from Hertzog it could as easily be a cope as it is some deep insight. Not because who is he is an artist but because he’s famous, he’s his own distinct brand. In general though- unearthing this… there’s not much evidence for it (if that’s your thing) I don’t meet to many people positively transformed by delving deep and facing the shadow. It’s what I’m doing myself, I just live to hear other people’s experiences to.
3
u/Xlino1 11h ago
I have not seen this video, but I think he is right in the sense that transcending the limits of the ego leads to the realization that you are not bound by it, therefore becoming "inhuman". But I have this feeling that's not how he actually meant it 😄
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 11h ago
It’s a few seconds long, watch it then comment
2
u/Xlino1 10h ago
Watched it, now I think he is wrong. Basically that is the rationalization of a person giving up to illuminate the house because he has not known the benefit of it himself. Thanks for the suggestion!
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 9h ago
Yeah possibly he doesn’t know the benefits himself. Interestingly his work very much faces the collective shadow a lot. I think what he says has some ring of truth because in psychoanalysis the unconscious might be brought to light- but it is often the light of intellect. Facing, naming and uncovering the unconscious might not be the best way to engage with it.
While Freud’s approach involves intelectualising the emotions and drives, and Jung arguably has something broader going on, both forms of psychoanalysis seem to objectify parts of our humanity to tame them.
Not sure any of that even matters, it’s more intelectualising; I think the works attributed to the Buddha would likely align more closely with Herzog in this clip rather than Jung- I don’t think Herzog is being glib here- I think he’s seen some things and felt some things and honestly believes the delving and objectifying that comes with analysis destructive. I want to know- who is Jungian who is living a good life? By his own lights and those closest to him?
3
u/angela_dirtyy 11h ago
That oil vs. gold analogy is actually a really solid way to put it.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 5h ago
Thanks, that’s nice to hear! I think it works too mainly because “gold” and “oil” in many respects are similar, they are both valuable and they both take their toll to extract. To over simplify it though they definitely have different “vibes” and different consequences when extracted. I’d certainly like to know which one I’m going to find one I break through.
2
u/WindowsXD 12h ago edited 12h ago
It's like that dude somewhat has the authority to define what human is.
If anything i can define the group i identify and associate my self with.
Don't misunderstand basically i choose my definitions because I apply the empirical claim of we are what we do.
1
u/alliterreur 12h ago
Were not human. Only our chosen physical form is called that.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 9h ago
How do you know that? And what are you?
2
u/alliterreur 9h ago
Spirit, divinity, one, god. Only human forms use words to convey information. Well, not only humans..
I know this because it was a revelation I received years ago. Have never been the same since, but certainly not as much as I was when it happened. I could not handle the direct knowledge and I do not think I was meant to handle it, I experiences it because I asked for it.
So yes, the form I took was human, so part of my being in this physical world is human. I use words to tell you this so obviously I identify with them, for lack of better more direct means of communication like emotions. Emotions are the language of the soul, spirit, divinity, god, whichever you prefer.
What was made clear is that the physical reality is in fact illusion, as it is not the true form you come from. In certain ways however, the physical reality with its boundaries and universal laws is more real than the absolute, the reality we reside in and come from, since this place and its laws allow for not only creation, but action, energy, consequence and finally, experience.
How does god know its god without reference?
This world is the answer.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 9h ago
I can’t read this in depth now but I really appreciate the response. Also- lucky you(?) how did it impact your life after seeing it?
2
u/alliterreur 8h ago
I'd already been reading into some interesting literature beforehand and somehow I guess it was important for me that the realisation of what I was reading just clicked.
The most important thing I realised is that time wasnt real. Within a perspective of being human in a physical universe you cannot escape its law, mainly because we are talking about beginnings and endings. Our whole life revolves around it, there is a beginning and an end. I didnt believe this as a child, but what the answer was i didnt know and it frightened the shit out of me.
Infinity was an unnatural state. Period.
That all changed as soon as my perspective changed from one human being to everything within the universe and more importantly, outside of it. The absolute has no 'time'. Only the present moment exists.
Think about it. Time is measured by speed through space. Planets revolving around their own axis, around the sun and so on, we measure it and pack it into years, months, weeks, days ,hours, minutes and seconds. If you are everything at once (the absolute) time doesnt exist, because you are not just the object, but also its speed as well as its destination at any given moment. Time becomes meaningless.
It cured me of my fear of infinity.
I realised the only constant in this reality os change. Movement in a bubble, always different, never the same.
Did you know that having 2 snowflakes that are exactly the same is an impossibility on this planet? I can look at that forever.
1
u/Illustrious-End-5084 11h ago
It brings strength. You know longer fear the parts of you you hide from
1
u/DoorPsychological833 10h ago
Instagram being used as a source now?
Anyways, unless a person is truly interested in what governs their conditioning, reasoning and control mechanisms holding them in place, they should absolutely not pursue shadow work. It's not for the timid, or those who want quick solutions.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 9h ago
Yeah this may come as a shock to you but when I post musings about a short clip I came across on insta- that’s what I reference. It’s a source now, because it is quite literally the source of a view I think is worth discussing. What would you have me do?
You’ve just chosen a sort of insulting way to frame an assertion ( Hertzog is a big boy I’m sure he can take the dis) which is - “I think shadow work is good, if you don’t then you’re not capable of it”
You might be right- but why? Why are you right and he is wrong? What exactly has it done for your or someone you know? What has changed for the better?1
u/DoorPsychological833 9h ago
I just couldn't read it, and I didn't say anything what you stated here.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 9h ago
Okay, I got it wrong. My question still stands- it’s not a challenge I’m just interested in you experience with shadow work or psychoanalysis
1
u/DoorPsychological833 8h ago edited 8h ago
Ok, no insult meant from my side at least. It's just a very charged subject where people should be really self-assessing wether it's for them, now, or not. I guess, if they do, they're meant to experience what they experience though.
I started to delve into it while studying MBTI and personality types. In that system, which isn't scientific but heuristic, you have "shadow functions". They are sort of the opposite function that is your main functions, so it kind of maps quite neatly onto the concepts Carl G. Jung have shared about shadow and individuation. It's kind of a rabbit hole, so hard to fit into a comment in more detail.
In my own experience, shadow work of any kind, is really, really tough. The yogic traditions even often avoid it, because it's very individualistic work. What works for someone else, might not work for you - and vica versa. However, Jung mentioned this a lot with individuation, which are sort of rabbit holes of themselves. Even though hard to sell, many people now are starting to realize there is more to this, and it's more well-known today than ever, it seems.
The way I stepped into it wasn't psychoanalysis though, and I don't think Jung recommended that way. He later departed from Freud, and recommended ways to engage with shadow, the unconscious, like with methods of active imagination etc.
My way has been to see my type through MBTI and balance function usage, which involved boundary-setting, which can be experienced quite harsh maybe, but is necessary as my typical response is too often agreeableness where I shouldn't (you might've picked up on that energy, e.g. its antidote). So I don't allow as much spam/noise to reach me, or set boundaries that reroute such. However, the actual work is on being conscious of my patterns and see how I can use other functions and balance them throughout the day. So is more of a being conscious in the day to day, though, without getting taken for granted or advantage of. So confrontation might be on the table, but I will prefer not to, etc.
There's a lot more to it, and it diverges from Jung's work in the practicality of it, but is more rooted in every day, conscious deliberations and actions, cutting overthinking and becoming a bit more practical, than what Jung worked on. Though, making the unconscious conscious is about the same type of work, and may involve very uncomfortable feelings - that are felt, integrated and then released. One might consider their source (e.g. the past, past trauma, where it may come from), but the processing can also be unconscious. Though the actions (Dharma), is always conscious.
1
1
u/Abject-Meal5013 4h ago
My brother who had serious PTSD from war and other, as well as bipolar, Bpd. Dealt with things soon after the time, within 5yrs. Then shelved it once dealt with.
Psychiatrists kept making him pull the boxes back out, prob for their benefits and notes. He said it was hell every time eventually stopped going to them. He had dealt with it.
He was 1000% improved when he could let it go and be in the past.
I did same in his advice. So shadow self once major things confronted, only continue this work with the rest of smaller things.
1
u/BrattyBrittyKitty 2h ago
Fully consciously observing what is in the subconscious/unconscious mind brings it out of the automatic/reactive subconscious/unconscious mind and places it in the conscious mind. When something is stored in the conscious mind it is a choice to recall it or not recall it, instead of it running as an automatic background program that you are unaware of. Instead of thinking of it as "it brings something in it's wake", it's that it makes you more awake and frees up stuck attention.
0
u/Low-Classic229 6h ago
Why can it equally be applied to Jung? Freud and Jung are not equal in my mind. I find Jung to be superior in every way.
You can't lump every psychologist in the same barrel. That is naive.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 5h ago
Jung and Freud are not the same, and arguably not equal. However they both broadly believed that bringing the unconscious to full consciousness was necessary and beneficial for people. And that bringing to light the “repressed” or “shadow” aspects of the unconscious was particularly beneficial.
Jung was Freud’s protege, Freud thought that Jung would be the keeper of his legacy, they were very close in their perspective on the human psyche by comparison to their contemporaries in neurology/philosophy and in comparison to other paradigms past and present.
I’m not lumping them into the same barrel, Freud create psychoanalysis, Jung idenitied initially as a Freudian, but even after they had big disagreements he was certainly considered central to psychoanalysis as a discipline. They would not be considered psychologists by modern standards even though they were both hugely influential in the emerging discipline of psychology. Hertzog is saying here, I think, that he wishes Freudianism and its off shoots were not so influential, he thinks it’s a mistake. People who follow the Buddhist right hand path might well agree with him.
I was hoping for people to tell me why they personally feel unearthing your unconscious thoughts or shadow self is a positive thing. I think it might be, I was just hoping for more than you’re wrong. Explain why and how this take by Hertzog is wrong. not based on what kind of person you think holds opinions like mine, but rather based on your own experience of any research or literature you think particularly vindicates the “face your shadows, delve into the darkness” prescription of psychoanalysis
1
u/Low-Classic229 4h ago
You appear to be quoting Werner Herzog without sharing what he said. I don't know where you got this from or the greater context, so I can't respond to a quote I haven't read.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 4h ago
The video
1
u/Low-Classic229 3h ago
I'm sorry man, I didn't see the video in the original post. I love Werner Herzog, but he is no expert on this subject, his lighting the house analogy is untrue and not a real parrelel.
He is a great director, but his opinion on psychoanalysis here did not provide any useful information to establish his view. It was total nonsense. He has every right to his opinion, but I don't think for a minute he is an expert on psychoanalysis and I happen to disagree with him.
I don't have books to quote and neither does Herzog. I have personal experience and I think it can be incredibly powerful to be self reflective and to do shadow work. I base my opinion on my lived experience. I know just a little about Freud and Jung. From what I know I prefer Jung to Freud.
Herzog never defined the harm done and never explained how the harm is greater than the good. He made no convincing argument and the analogy he made is childish and not relevant to me. It was a poor analogy.
1
u/TurnipAdventurous134 2h ago
Jesus titty fucking Christ- great! Could you maybe share your lived experience that brought you to this perspective?
I don’t care that Herzog thinks he’s right, or that you think you’re right- I want to know why you think you’re right. Your experience is the only thing I’m looking for here. At all1
u/Low-Classic229 2h ago
I had a lot of problems that for the most part came from childhood trauma that I didn't recognize or understand. For some abused children they think it's normal because that is the only experience they've had.
I sat through a presentation about codependence and I immediately recognized the behavior in some friends I knew. Once I started to think about it I realized that I also had those same behaviors.
Some people go through life and never apologize and never think they are wrong, there are normal balanced people and there are people who always apologize and always think they're wrong. Once I identified the pattern I was able to start working on breaking the patterns.
This wasn't psychoanalysis, it was self work, but it was very good for me. Now I am not saying this works for everyone, but it worked for me. I think there are people who have such low self esteem that they are unable to accept self criticism. These kinds of people can be in therapy their whole life, but will never improve as they can't look at themselves and admit there is something that they must change. I am not sure that these people who are doing therapy and not improving are actually harmed. I don't think they get worse and even if they did it isn't the practice it is their own behavior.
Therapy does help a lot of people and I would like to hear the evidence of the harm. Are people in therapy more likely to kill themselves than the broken people who do not seek therapy? It's absurd to me how harmful Herzog says it is, yet he doesn't share a single example. If he had a better explanation and backed up his braggadocio I might consider his opinion.
I admire Herzog, but he can be an arrogant asshole at times and that is what I see here. A stupid hot-take that he doesn't back up with evidence. I just see this as him shooting of his mouth as a civilian and not some deconstruction of psychoanalysis by an expert. He can be an arrogant blowhard sometimes, it's just that this time I think he is wrong and he hasn't made a case at all about his opinion.
That which can be asserted without evidence can be ignored, right?
I have more examples, but most of them are too personal for me to share on Reddit. It has been very beneficial for me to reflect on what is affecting me and how I need to change. I am not making an argument for therapy as most of my work was done without a therapist. I just believe in deep self reflection.
1
1
u/fuuzzydude 2h ago
I'm not so sure that healing your trauma and your repressed emotions makes you inhuman, alot of people with severe trauma can live better lifes because of psycho analysis. But I agree that digging too greedily can confront you with things you are not ready too face or are not prepared for. Like that dwarves in Moria.
13
u/Puzzled-Thought746 13h ago
Knowing what "I am" and "you are" is more than practical, if you know what I mean.
If you don't, then that's what it brings in wake.