How do numbers as archetypes work???
Polymatt
You seemed to know a bit about this, so this is directed at you, but open to
all. I understood it that archetypes were like an in-built expectation of
things, hence mother, father, friend archetypes. How does this apply to
numbers???
Matt
Sharyn C
Polymatt wrote in message <19990403111217...@ng26.aol.com>...
Matt:
Others have very eloquently defined archetype in various threads here, but I
will make a quick stab at it in order to move to the gist of your question.
I'm not an expert at all in this, but will try to express how I understand
this. Archetypes are innate structural predispositions within the psyche
which order or arrange representations (images, feelings, motivations) into
certain patterns. They are also described by Jung as 'elementary behavior
patterns' of the psyche, again motivating behavior. At one end of the
spectrum they are instinct and at the other spirit. The archetypes are
unknown psychic factors, and we have to look at the net of associations
surrounding an archetype to attempt to understand what it is, as we only
experience it through the images and feelings built up by our life
experience and our cultures input. M.L. von Franz states in "C.G. Jung: His
Myth in Our Time", the following:
"Toward the end of his life Jung saw in natural numbers the most primitive
element of the 'spirit' and thought that they might be the 'key impulse'
underlying archetypal images."
In Vol. 8 at the end of his essay on synchronicity, Jung talks about the
numbers 1-9 as having been seen as sacred and numinous in many cultures.
Cultural anthropologists have noted that indigenous peoples often counted up
to 3 or 4 and after that said there were simply many objects, such as the
Dani people of New Guinea counting only to 3, who were isolated from the
world until this century. If you think about the number 3 you will see that
it appears all over the world where cultures attempt to bring order. There
are 3 parts to the U.S. government, the holy trinity, Freud and Jung's model
of the psyche, and 3 degrees to become a doctor (B.A., M.A., Ph.D.), 3 parts
to our school systems (elementary, Middle School, High School), Dorothy of
Oz clicked her heels 3 times to go back home, and etc. It depends on the
culture as to whether 3 or 4 are the predominant ordering numbers, as in the
Native American culture the #4 is predominant. Jung talks about the numbers
3 and 4 as being common to peoples around the world, occurring most
frequently, as the most "primitive element of order in the human mind".
To try to answer your question, you would have to look at the net of
associations around a particular number, such as 3, to try to understand the
number as an archetype creating a particular form of order and motivating a
particular kind of behavior, and as being associated to a particular
archetypal image as it moves up from abstract to pictorial representations
such as Mother, Father, Divine Child, Wise Old Woman/Man, and etc. For
instance the number 4 is seen in the Mandala and as image of the special
archetype of the Self, and as an image of wholeness.
Jung goes on to say, in CW 8, Para 870: "These structures not only express
order, they also create it. That is why they generally appear in times of
psychic disorientation in order to compensate a chaotic state or as
formulations of numinous experiences. It must be emphasized yet again that
they are not inventions of the conscious mind but are spontaneous products
of the unconscious, as has been sufficiently shown by experience."
This is an important point, as everyone has times in their life when things
seem to be beyond their control, and dreams bearing images of threeness or
fourness, or even abstract images such as mandalas, if grasped by
consciousness by pondering the dream, can bring order back with perhaps a
sudden knowing of how to handle a particular situation. Jung does not mean
this in a pathological way, though these images can surface in dreams in
pathology, but they occur very frequently with people just in the course of
life's ups and downs, reestablishing order.
Thus the I CHING, a number system, seems to work when we're emotionally
charged over an issue, and the archetypal ground can break through into
consciousness riding the affect, perhaps showing a way we hadn't been able
to come up with consciously as a solution, bringing order back.
Synchronicity works in this same way, and as I've stated before is "not"
dependent on pathological problems, but simply rides the wave of our normal
human emotional ups and downs. Some periods or issues are more charged, and
synchronicities occur more frequently, and very often with numbers. If you
use the I CHING or astrology or any system around numbers, you are accessing
the archetype at this most abstract root, allowing it an avenue to emerge
into consciousness.
Para 871: "It is generally believed that numbers were 'invented' or thought
out by man . . . But it is equally possible that numbers were 'found' or
discovered. In that case they are not only concepts but something more -
autonomous entities which somehow contain more than just quantities. Unlike
concepts, they are based not on any psychic conditions but on the quality of
being themselves, on a 'so-ness' that cannot be expressed by an intellectual
concept. Under these conditions they might easily be endowed with qualities
that have still to be discovered. I must confess that I incline to the view
that numbers were as much found as invented, and that in consequence they
possess a relative autonomy analogous to that of the archetypes. They would
then have, in common with the latter, the quality of being pre-existent to
consciousness, and hence, on occasion, of conditioning it rather than being
conditioned by it. The archetypes too, as 'a priori' forms of
representation, are as much found as invented: they are 'discovered'
inasmuch as one did not know of their unconscious autonomous existence, and
'invented' inasmuch as their presence was inferred from analogous
representational structures."
Regards,
Sharyn
Sharyn C
"I've had numerous profound synchronistic experiences. I analyze the
worlds financial markets, so it goes without saying that frequently
numbers have a significant meaning to me. The synchronicities I've had
involve numbers from the markets. I'm interested in Jung's writings
regarding numbers specifically and would appreciate any references to
these. I'm exploring the idea that the numerical quality of any market
manifests a collective unconscious. Numbers are not only archetypes.
Jung said -somewhere- that all archetypes can be reduced to numbers.
Where can I find his writings on this subject? Thanks"
Pete
Dear Pete, or anyone who might be interested:
I've just had an incredible synchronicity around your question and my two
answers. As a matter of fact, where did you go Pete? Maybe I should
backtrack. Yesterday afternoon I rented the movie "Pi" (which is actually
titled with the mathematical symbol of pi) for two days, but I hadn't gotten
a chance to watch it until a few minutes ago. It was the winner of best
film (I think) at the Sundance Film Festival last year. I rented the film
before I read Pete's question, and before I answered him. I was aware that
the title of the film was a mathematical symbol, but I didn't really think
much about it and I've heard nothing about what the film's theme is.
At any rate, today I spent some time responding to Polymatt about number as
archetype, feeling hesitant knowing that I'm not a thinking type, nor a
great mind for understanding number nor physics, though I do feel more
confident in my understanding of archetypal theory. I have to add this
also, that recently the project I've been working on is reviewing a film
from a Jungian perspective, thus marrying two areas that I've a passion for,
thinking that I'd like to do more of this, and even thinking that this film
(Pi) might be fertile ground without really knowing why.
In fact this could apply to the thread about poetry and psychology, as one
of the reasons I've been so entranced by Jung's psychology is that it is so
rich and enthralling because you see it reflected in all of the world's
great art, literature, myth, poetry and film. With a background in Jungian
psychology and the awareness it gives you of an underlying repeating
structure in nature, any piece of art pulls you in with it's symbolism and
reflection of the patterns that make up the human condition. The whole
world of psychology, outside of Jung's, is dry and abstract in comparison.
It's so fabulous to find this psychological theory in the most living and
vivid places, in the individual's dreams, or the individual's poetry or
works of art. I mean which would you prefer, memorizing systems and
complicated lists of symptoms, or understanding patterns that appear in
images and studying by reading literature, fairytales, poetry and watching
films, while listening to an individual's unconscious spin meaningful tales
for them? My god, I'm a lucky human being, as my work is truly enjoyable.
So yes, I vote for Jung's psychology and method as first and foremost an
art, as well as a craft, and with a system and tools also.
Back to the synchronicity. I started the film, watched 5 min. and came to
write this. The film opens with a man (probably the main character) who is
walking down the street and this is what he is thinking:
"12:45. Restate my assumptions: 1. Math is the language of nature; 2.
Everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers; 3.
If you graph the numbers of any system, patterns emerge. Therefore there
are patterns everywhere in nature. Evidence: Cycling of disease epidemics;
the wax and wane of Caribou populations; sun spot cycles; the rise and fall
of the Nile. So what about the stock market, the universe of numbers that
represent the global economy, millions of human hands at work, billions of
minds, a vast network screaming with life, a natural organism? Hypothesis:
Within the stock market there is a pattern as well."
Back to the movie,
Sharyn
Polymatt
Thanks. That was really good. I sort of remember reading about some of those
things now, esp. mandalas and threeness in dreams. I know that in Viking and
Nordic mythology, nine was the central number. This all begins to fall into
place. It's also made me think about my attitudes towards Astrology and alike.
Perhaps I was too hasty to judge.............. Thank you again, you've been
really helpful.
Yours,
Matt
gerry smillie
Thank you for your response. I'm assuming that after seeing the
beginning of "pi" your thoughts are on a similar track to my own. A
general application of chaos theory; that there are similar patterns of
order, (shapes, symbols, archetypes) recurring throughout nature's
turbulent systems led me to Jung. What is Acausal orderdness if not
Chaos?
I think the movie would provide you with good material for your
Jung/film project. The guy in the move was heading in the right
direction except that he was too obsessive, over complicated things, and
used too many drugs. I use pi all the time.
Pete
Sharyn C
gerry smillie wrote in message <37079C...@synopsys.com>...
I take it that you've seen the movie. It was rather difficult to watch but
fascinating at the same time. I've no head for higher mathematics, but
could relate to his search for the one number, the pattern, in a symbolic
way. I think you should read van Eenwyk's book, "Archetypes and Strange
Attractors", which compares Jung's archetypal theory to chaos theory. There
are others in this group who understand this much better than I, and
there've been threads over the last year or so about this. I knew a
mathematician once who was working on a problem involving "0" for years, or
something, and he said that there were several others around the world
working on this same problem. Each time he tried to explain it to me, he
left me in the dust. He was a little mad, but nothing like the character in
the film.
Sharyn
gerry smillie
with it yet. How familiar are you with the subject? You need not have a
background in higher math to appreciate chaos. James Gleick's, "Chaos,
Making a new science" is all one needs; and it is absolutely superb. As
for the mad mathematician; it's really quite subjective, isn't it?
There are many, I'm sure, who would regard the topics in this group as
quite bizarre. A good story I'm reminded of is one about some
"disturbed" fellow who had held some people hostage, (or something, I
don't recall exactly), and absolutely demanded to talk to Albert
Einstein. Einstein, being of a peaceful nature, and unafraid; agreed to
meet with him. They talked, and Einstein heard the man speak his peace;
and the situation ws resolved. Afterward, Einstein reflected, "I don't
know who is more the crazy one. He or I?"
Pete
Archon
>Others have very eloquently defined archetype in various threads here, but I
>will make a quick stab at it in order to move to the gist of your question.
>I'm not an expert at all in this, but will try to express how I understand
>this. Archetypes are innate structural predispositions within the psyche
>which order or arrange representations (images, feelings, motivations) into
>certain patterns. They are also described by Jung as 'elementary behavior
>patterns' of the psyche, again motivating behavior. At one end of the
>spectrum they are instinct and at the other spirit. The archetypes are
>unknown psychic factors, and we have to look at the net of associations
>surrounding an archetype to attempt to understand what it is, as we only
>experience it through the images and feelings built up by our life
>experience and our cultures input. M.L. von Franz states in "C.G. Jung: His
>Myth in Our Time", the following:
>
>"Toward the end of his life Jung saw in natural numbers the most primitive
>element of the 'spirit' and thought that they might be the 'key impulse'
>underlying archetypal images."
Hmm... but I did also once see a Jung quote that clearly showed him
acknowledging that the number archetypes seem to derive from nature.
Observing that various archetypes do seem to structure natural forms,
I suspect that means they manifest secondarily in the psyche. Well,
at least to the extent that their effects are observable there.
>In Vol. 8 at the end of his essay on synchronicity, Jung talks about the
>numbers 1-9 as having been seen as sacred and numinous in many cultures.
>Cultural anthropologists have noted that indigenous peoples often counted up
>to 3 or 4 and after that said there were simply many objects, such as the
>Dani people of New Guinea counting only to 3, who were isolated from the
>world until this century. If you think about the number 3 you will see that
>it appears all over the world where cultures attempt to bring order. There
>are 3 parts to the U.S. government, the holy trinity, Freud and Jung's model
>of the psyche, and 3 degrees to become a doctor (B.A., M.A., Ph.D.), 3 parts
>to our school systems (elementary, Middle School, High School), Dorothy of
>Oz clicked her heels 3 times to go back home, and etc. It depends on the
>culture as to whether 3 or 4 are the predominant ordering numbers, as in the
>Native American culture the #4 is predominant. Jung talks about the numbers
>3 and 4 as being common to peoples around the world, occurring most
>frequently, as the most "primitive element of order in the human mind".
Well to build houses you use 4 primarily, 6 secondarily when adding
floor and ceiling. Tepees and igloos are nice food for thought!
>To try to answer your question, you would have to look at the net of
>associations around a particular number, such as 3, to try to understand the
>number as an archetype creating a particular form of order and motivating a
>particular kind of behavior, and as being associated to a particular
>archetypal image as it moves up from abstract to pictorial representations
>such as Mother, Father, Divine Child, Wise Old Woman/Man, and etc. For
>instance the number 4 is seen in the Mandala and as image of the special
>archetype of the Self, and as an image of wholeness.
Think of how profound the trinity is in shaping the world-view of the
child. Me/Mummy/Daddy.
>Jung goes on to say, in CW 8, Para 870: "These structures not only express
>order, they also create it. That is why they generally appear in times of
>psychic disorientation in order to compensate a chaotic state or as
>formulations of numinous experiences. It must be emphasized yet again that
>they are not inventions of the conscious mind but are spontaneous products
>of the unconscious, as has been sufficiently shown by experience."
>
>This is an important point, as everyone has times in their life when things
>seem to be beyond their control, and dreams bearing images of threeness or
>fourness, or even abstract images such as mandalas, if grasped by
>consciousness by pondering the dream, can bring order back with perhaps a
>sudden knowing of how to handle a particular situation. Jung does not mean
>this in a pathological way, though these images can surface in dreams in
>pathology, but they occur very frequently with people just in the course of
>life's ups and downs, reestablishing order.
What about the three wise monkeys? Did you know there are really 4,
but one got censored by puritans back in the days of empire?
Well, Jung's too tentative for me. Prudence? Perhaps, but seems more
like academic timidity. The fact that there is one Sun and two poles
would be detectable by aliens even if our labels/pictures of these are
peculiar to us. Number archetypes are part of nature and cosmos.
>Regards,
>
>Sharyn
Thanks, Sharyn, for your capable selection of choice Jung titbits, but
I do think a multi-disciplinary perspective on both synchronicity and
the archetypes is the way ahead for all.
Dennis
Archon
Why not use your powers of observation and start noticing the way that
numbers seem to structure both our psyche and society? Start by
looking in the mirror: why one head and two eyes?
Why two hands? Why four fingers? Why one thumb?
How many gods/goddesses dwelt on Olympos? Same as the signs of the
zodiac? Same as the number of jurors in a jury?
Why nine judges in the Supreme Court? How many Muses were there?
Why are there four directions? Why four elements (or, if you suffered
a science education, four states of matter)? Why are there four
dimensions in the physical universe? Why are there three in space and
one in time? Is the 5th dimension merely an hyopothesis?
Why two sexes? Why is three a crowd?
Sorry, got carried away.. (any fool can ask questions...)
regards
Dennis Frank
(learning to be a bigger fool who gives answers..)
Sharyn C
Archon wrote in message <3709c076...@news.ihug.co.nz>...
(snipped)
>Thanks, Sharyn, for your capable selection of choice Jung titbits, but
>I do think a multi-disciplinary perspective on both synchronicity and
>the archetypes is the way ahead for all.
>
>Dennis
Dear Dennis:
Yes I agree, but didn't Jung apply a multi-disciplinary perspective to his
psychology by studying anthropology, religion, philosophy, physics,
mythology, medicine, alchemy and etc? I guess I feel you are saying by
quoting Jung I'm somehow not doing this, but I feel that this is a
perspective Jung encouraged as extremely important in order to understand
the products of the psyche. Also, I think this is being done by many
Jungian scholars, such as van Eenwyk who wrote "Archetypes and Strange
Attractors", comparing chaos theory and Jungian psychology.
> Hmm... but I did also once see a Jung quote that clearly showed him
> acknowledging that the number archetypes seem to derive from nature.
> Observing that various archetypes do seem to structure natural forms,
> I suspect that means they manifest secondarily in the psyche. Well,
> at least to the extent that their effects are observable there.
I'll just add, that the psyche "is" a part of nature with the archetype as
instinctual root, and it would stand to reason that if most of nature
reflects a numerical ordering, then the psyche should also reflect this. By
saying they manifest secondarily, it sounds like you're saying that numbers
were invented by consciousness observing nature, rather than being
spontaneous products of the unconscious. Perhaps I misunderstood you. At
any rate, Jung says that idea looks plausible, but gives a good argument for
numbers being a spontaneous product of the unconscious that have qualities
other than just being about quantity.
Regards,
Sharyn