Guest guest Posted December 17, 2000 Report Share Posted December 17, 2000 , " the social contract " was made implicit when you became a citizen, or adult. It is not a personal explicit piece of paper. It is a conception of philosophers and politically knowledgeable writers who have written about such things through the ages. Not to start this all over again, but you are psychically only a member of a " collective " as long as you believe, and agree with its principles .Once you do it out of lawful duty, you have separated yourself psychically from the " collective " but are obeying its laws, as you must. One cannot be coerced into Jung's idea of the " collective " unless one buy into their thinking and point of view. You have registered your protest, but as a good member of society you do not set yourself up in legal opposition.Everyone has the right of dissent from the collective, and you are no longer bound by its values, except as a dissenter. There are millions of souls past, present and future who care for others within the civil system. It is not an 'either or " proposition. How about " and also " .? I think Jung is quite clear about the term " collective " .It does take an implied assent to the values of the so called " collective " , otherwise his thinking about them , and his writing would not make sense, psychologically. Be wary of casting his concepts in stone. Have you seen and held an anima lately? or how about a shadow? you can show me in Peace, . Stay in awe of the Word as uttered by his holiness Jung, while I go about trying to understand how to adopt his genius to myself without doing damage to both of our values. I can only approach his meaning of words, I can not see his unpublished, unsaid ideas or draw inferences and tell you exactly " what Jung meant. " with any assurance that I am right Toni blue670424@... wrote: > > > << In the study of how man came together for protection and warmth, as it > evolved over the ages, it came to mean to those who thought about those things > that we human beings make a contract with each other. This is called the > " social contract " and in it we give up some freedom for those bits of > civilization we care about. >> > > A contract, yes, by all means! Let's make a contract between you and me, > between me and my neighbors in the town where we live. Let's take care of > one another because we know it is for the good of all of us if we do so. But > if some don't wish to join us, we have no right to coerce them to do so. > They are the losers, too bad for them. > > " Only where love and need are one and the work is play for mortal stakes is > the deed ever really done for heaven and the future's sakes. " Frost. > > And that's why I am in favor of self help initiatives, local action, small > groups. That's what Jung was talking bout also. We don't centralized > anything to meet the kinds of needs you are talking about. I am not in favor > of doing away with all government, but we could do with a great deal less > than we have and no one would be any worse off. It would foster individual > responsibility and help take us away from identification with the collective. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.