<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Atheism, Jungianism, and the Jungian Problem of Religion (Part 1)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://uselessscience.com/blog/2009/10/atheism-jungianism-1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://uselessscience.com/blog/2009/10/atheism-jungianism-1/</link>
	<description>Useless Science Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:18:24 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://uselessscience.com/blog/2009/10/atheism-jungianism-1/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:18:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uselessscience.com/blog/?p=95#comment-2</guid>
		<description>The day after I posted the first and second parts of this essay, I stumbled upon a paper of John P. Dourley: &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.jungianstudies.org/publications/papers/dourleyjp2.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;THE FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENTS OF A JUNGIAN SPIRITUALITY&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.

This was originally presented at a conference on the Symbolic Way in Spirituality, Analytic Practice and Culture, AGAP Forum, July 16, 2006, Zurich, Switzerland.  

I highly recommend that anyone interested in the topic of Jungianism and religion/spirituality read this essay.  In fact, it is better if you read this essay &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;before&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; reading &lt;a href=&quot;http://uselessscience.com/blog/2009/10/atheism-jungianism-2/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Part 2&lt;/a&gt; of my piece on the Jungian Problem of Religion.  Dourley provides the scholarship behind my claim that there is a significant precedent for a Jungian atheism (which I, perhaps unwisely, took for granted was largely known by the well-read Jungian audience).  As another service &quot;to me&quot;, Dourley goes on to construct a psychologized spirituality that (although interesting and compelling on some levels) demonstrates (somewhat unwillingly) a number of the pitfalls I described in any such imagination of a Jungian religion or spirituality (in Part 2 of my essay).

In essence, my essay has begun to propose answers to some of the questions Dourley asked in 2006 . . . and has begun to provide analyses or deconstructions of some of the constructions he suggested for a kind of future Jungian &quot;religion&quot;.  Of course, these are immensely complex topics, and what I have proposed is the roughest of rough outlines on what we need to consider in order to proceed and to understand our Jungian religiosity.

Still, Dourley&#039;s paper is a welcome synchronicity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The day after I posted the first and second parts of this essay, I stumbled upon a paper of John P. Dourley: &#8220;<a href="http://www.jungianstudies.org/publications/papers/dourleyjp2.pdf" rel="nofollow">THE FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENTS OF A JUNGIAN SPIRITUALITY</a>&#8220;.</p>
<p>This was originally presented at a conference on the Symbolic Way in Spirituality, Analytic Practice and Culture, AGAP Forum, July 16, 2006, Zurich, Switzerland.  </p>
<p>I highly recommend that anyone interested in the topic of Jungianism and religion/spirituality read this essay.  In fact, it is better if you read this essay <b><i>before</i></b> reading <a href="http://uselessscience.com/blog/2009/10/atheism-jungianism-2/" rel="nofollow">Part 2</a> of my piece on the Jungian Problem of Religion.  Dourley provides the scholarship behind my claim that there is a significant precedent for a Jungian atheism (which I, perhaps unwisely, took for granted was largely known by the well-read Jungian audience).  As another service &#8220;to me&#8221;, Dourley goes on to construct a psychologized spirituality that (although interesting and compelling on some levels) demonstrates (somewhat unwillingly) a number of the pitfalls I described in any such imagination of a Jungian religion or spirituality (in Part 2 of my essay).</p>
<p>In essence, my essay has begun to propose answers to some of the questions Dourley asked in 2006 . . . and has begun to provide analyses or deconstructions of some of the constructions he suggested for a kind of future Jungian &#8220;religion&#8221;.  Of course, these are immensely complex topics, and what I have proposed is the roughest of rough outlines on what we need to consider in order to proceed and to understand our Jungian religiosity.</p>
<p>Still, Dourley&#8217;s paper is a welcome synchronicity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

