Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

No description available.

In this thesis I will be offering an analysis of C.G. Jung’s influence on the theoretical framework of the American comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell. My first main argument will be that Campbell underwent what I am calling a ‘Jungian turn’ around 1968: before this date he was vague and sometimes even dismissive about Jung, while after that date he became suddenly highly positive about Jung’s ideas (particularly about his concept of the archetype). My second main argument will be that this shift in attitude towards Jung occurred because Campbell’s interpretation of Jung changed. Before 1968 Campbell thought of Jung’s concept of the archetype as a ‘closed system’: a completely innate psychological structure that isn’t open to ‘imprinting’ by the environment in any way whatsoever. From 1968 onwards, however, he came to think of the archetype as the equivalent of a so-called ‘open innate-releasing mechanism’, which is the ethologist Konrad Lorenz’s term for a psychological structure that, although it has an innate component as well, is nevertheless open to ‘imprinting’ by the environment. As Campbell’s ideas prior to 1968 had been based on this concept, he realised that his own theoretical framework was compatible with Jung’s to a large extent. My final argument will be that the theoretical position which Campbell arrived at in the final phase of his career (which revolves around the concept of the open innate-releasing mechanism, but which has several other specific characteristics) is the same as the interpretation of Jung put forward by the scholar Anthony Stevens. As Stevens’ work is indisputably Jungian in nature, we might therefore draw the conclusion that it is possible to think of Campbell’s work as ‘Jungian’ in nature as well. However, as there are also some important differences between Campbell and Jung, I am arguing instead that we think of Campbell’s work in the final phase of his career as ‘post-Jungian’: this is the scholar Andrew Samuel’s term for a thinker who may not agree with Jung about every single issue, but whose work is still firmly rooted in his core ideas.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis or dissertation. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / Carl Gustav Jung has devoted considerable attention to the study of man's image or concept of God. This dissertation investigates Jung's theories and findings relevant to man's concept of God, sets forth a systematic presentation of these theories and findings, compares Jung's concept of God with a Christian concept of God as stated by Emil Brunner, and evaluates critically Jung's concept of God. An examination of Jung's works revealed that the concept of God in analytical psychology is based on Jung's theory of the collective unconscious and its archetypes. When Jung applies his theory of the collective unconscious to his observations of various religious phenomena, he concludes that there is a certain spiritual content of the human psyche which he calls the God archetype. In other words, he regards God as an archetype of the collective unconscious which expresses itself regularly in archetypal images or symbols. When the statements about the concept of God in Jung's psychology are drawn together and set forth in a systematic presentation, we observe four important factors: First, Jung is certain that what man experiences as revelation is the manifestation of the God archetype from deep within the collective unconscious. Second, Jung asserts that since God is an archetype we are forced to think of God as relative. Thus, God is as dependent upon man as man is upon God. Third, the essential aspect of the concept of God is "wholeness" or "completeness." Therefore, He is both good and evil, darkness as well as light. Fourth, Jung contends that the Godhead is composed of a quaternity rather than a trinity. [TRUNCATED] / 2031-01-01

<p>Abstract</p><p>Titel: Myter som sanning i ”Battlestar Galactica”</p><p>Författare: Ulf Liedström och Maria Dovgan</p><p>Handledare: Malin Nilsson</p><p>Examinator: Veronica Stoehrel</p><p>Typ av arbete: C-uppsats i Medie- och Kommunikationsvetenskap, 15 hp HT-07</p><p>Plats: Högskolan i Halmstad</p><p>Syfte: Syftet med studien är att ta reda på vilka myter som finns i TV-serien ”Battlestar Galactica” och hur de används för att säga något om vår kontemporära syn på vetenskap, politik och religion.</p><p>Metod: Vi har använt oss av en kvalitativ semiotisk metod med djuppsykologiska teorier av C. G. Jung</p><p>Resultat: Vi har kommit fram till att myter i högsta grad används i serien och att de används för att få tittaren till att reflektera över det nutida samhällets brister och därmed är serien också väldigt samhällskritisk till sin karaktär.</p><p>Nyckelord: Battlestar Galactica, Science Fiction, Semiotik, Roland Barthes, Carl Gustav Jung</p>

Abstract Titel: Myter som sanning i ”Battlestar Galactica” Författare: Ulf Liedström och Maria Dovgan Handledare: Malin Nilsson Examinator: Veronica Stoehrel Typ av arbete: C-uppsats i Medie- och Kommunikationsvetenskap, 15 hp HT-07 Plats: Högskolan i Halmstad Syfte: Syftet med studien är att ta reda på vilka myter som finns i TV-serien ”Battlestar Galactica” och hur de används för att säga något om vår kontemporära syn på vetenskap, politik och religion. Metod: Vi har använt oss av en kvalitativ semiotisk metod med djuppsykologiska teorier av C. G. Jung Resultat: Vi har kommit fram till att myter i högsta grad används i serien och att de används för att få tittaren till att reflektera över det nutida samhällets brister och därmed är serien också väldigt samhällskritisk till sin karaktär. Nyckelord: Battlestar Galactica, Science Fiction, Semiotik, Roland Barthes, Carl Gustav Jung

Diss. : Philosophie : Zürich : 1981.

No description available.

No description available.

Thèse (Ph. D.)--Université Laval, 2007. / Bibliogr.: f. [211]-217. Publié aussi en version électronique dans la Collection Mémoires et thèses électroniques.