Preface: Unconscious Spiritual Processes
In brief, my primary argument is based on the well known fact that some traits of religiosity are genetic. As one social psychologist observed, Jung's concept of the Collective Unconscious and intrinsic symbolic archetypes has some truth in it. He noted that studies reveal that infants have an innate fear of snakes. In the same token there must necessarily be symbol-ideas of "spirit" and spirituality that are connected in the unconscious with - as all worldwide cultures show - ideas and comprehension of creation, life, morals, and idealism. There are numerous largely unconscious processes rooted in the idea-symbols of spirit and spirituality such as compassion, righteousness, as well as the ideals of justice, not to mention morals as well. The reality and truth of spirituality in this view relates to the reality more of the unconscious processes than the idea or symbol of spirit itself - which undoubtedly people will argue about until the Final Judgment.
Bettina Morello, a scholar on academic.edu in her comment on my Essay about "Different Approach: Unconscious Processes and Spirituality, expressed one aspect of what I am trying to say better than I could myself: "I find this all very fascinating that you were able to redirect the biological, medical and scientific to cast light upon the Spirit and Truth. If we look beneath the surface of deities and things, there is a living vibrant reality of unconscious energy and latent faculties. The Divine Attributes or Elohim provide shape, form and materialization of energy that is expressed consciously and unconsciously. Just as the Aether arranges the particles to form all substances and structures, so does Elohim arrange our thoughts and ideas. Everything we can learn from other branches of knowledge can only help us see into how important the invisible properties of light and consciousness are to our well being and continuity."
Unconscious Spiritual Processes
Carl Jung, believed, along with Viktor Frankl and William James, that spiritual processes were largely unconscious-instinctual oriented processes. In fact, Carl Jung believed that “spirit” [spiritual processes] is an autonomous unconscious process.
An Unconscious School of thought has recently emerged in psychology. In the article “The Unconscious Mind” by John A. Bargh and Ezequiel Morsella, the authors state that, "By this definition of the unconscious, which is the original and historic one, contemporary social cognition research on priming and automaticity effects have shown the existence of sophisticated, flexible, and adaptive unconscious behavior guidance systems. These would seem to be of high functional value, especially as default behavioral tendencies when the conscious mind, as is its wont, travels away from the present environment into the past or the future." Later, the authors conclude, “In nature, the “unconscious mind” is the rule, not the exception.”
George Lakoff and Mark Johnson succinctly summarize research by cognitive science with the statement: “most of our thought is unconscious”- justified mainly by the necessity that to consciously process even the simplest thoughts, large amounts of unconscious processing that necessarily accompanies that. The neurologist, Eliezer Sternberg, puts it this way: As a behavior is learned, it become automatic in order to make it efficient and free up the cognitive processes. In his book, NeuroLogic, Sternberg observes, “The unconscious system in the brain pieces together fragments of our perceptions, anticipating patterns and filling in gaps when necessary… to devise a single, meaningful interpretation. It tells a story. The conscious system experiences that story but can also reflect on it and question it.”
In general Carl Jung viewed "the psyche" not as "an indivisible unity” but as a fusion or integrated synthesis to one degree or another of “relatively independent”… “psychic fragments” which Jung termed [unconscious] “autonomous complexes,” (CW8 582) Jung’s observation is consistent with discoveries by neuroscience and psychology. William R. Klemm Ph.D. states that “Functions are modular. Different networks have different and shifting primary functions, and some may be selectively recruited when their function is needed.” Jung stated that “From the psychological point of view the phenomenon of spirit, like every autonomous complex, appears as an intention of the unconscious superior to, or at least on a par with, the intentions of the ego. If we are to do justice to the essence of the thing we call spirit, we should really speak of a “higher” consciousness rather than of the unconscious, because the concept of spirit is such that we are bound to connect it with the idea of superiority over the ego-consciousness.” (in CW8: 643)
Fraser Watts, the religious scholar, noted that in one study of people who reported positively on the question of spiritual experiences, 24% of the people who reported positively were atheists. That would be a solid indication that Carl Jung, Viktor Frankl, and William James were correct in assessing spiritual experiences as primarily unconscious in nature. As William James said about spiritual beliefs, “Instincts lead, reason but does follow.” My own rather exceptionally detailed and “spiritual” (though it took decades) “What a nightmare” spiritual-psychic experience occurred at a time when consciously I not only did not believe in transcendental spirit or psychic, but my conscious beliefs were seriously antagonistic to spirituality of any sort at all. I would say I am living proof that Jung assessment was correct.
Of course, having a spiritual experience does not necessarily automatically produce a cognitive belief in Transcendental spirit or ‘God.’ Watts cites a famous atheist who although he had an NDE experience definitely did not end up believing in afterlife. That isn’t surprising to me. It took me years and years of at times an intense internal struggle. I am probably the only person who had a twenty-year long identity-spiritual crisis. At one point, I even threw my “What a nightmare” document away. From my experience, I would say, there are a fair number of unconscious spiritual processes which a person can tap into which, while most times not a magic wand or miraculous, can be quite helpful and creative at times.
Carl Jung: "Spirit gives meaning to his [man's] life"
"Spirit gives meaning to his [man's] life" - Carl
Jung, a psychoanalyst and contemporary of Sigmund Freud, couldn't have been clearer or more succinct when he made that simple but
profound statement. (CW8:643) Jung observed, in the Collected Works (CW8: 648 -1968 revised) that “Life and
spirit are two powers or necessities between which man is placed. Spirit gives
meaning to his life, and the possibility of its greatest development. But life
is essential to spirit, since its truth is nothing if it cannot live.” Here,
Carl Jung clearly and unequivocally states that "spirit creates meaning." "Spirit" and spiritual beliefs are prevalent in every religion but especially in the Gospel of John, spirit and truth and the inter-connection is frequently highlighted. Jesus Christ stated unequivocally that "Spirit is Truth" (John 5:6) - which is remarkably parallel to Jung's observations about spirit, truth, and life.
Yet, Jung also appears to indirectly imply, by association, that even though spirit creates meaning, truth is intimately and inextricably connected to "life!" Perhaps, Jung may be implying that the "experience of life" gives shape to meaning ultimately giving form to the Truth. Perhaps, though Jung could possibly have been subtly suggesting that the highly charge emotional symbolism in the unconscious spiritual processes needed a supplementary aspect -maybe cognitive processing - to enable spiritual meaning to evolve into Truth. In a remarkably parallel viewpoint William Gould observes that Viktor Frankl, who also believed human beings have "spirit," argued that "Meaning analysis is based on three essential premises: the freedom of will; the will to meaning, and the meaning of life." (p.42 Frankl: Life...)
Carl Jung clearly recognized the inherent difficulty in integrating emotions and intellect: "Intellect and feeling, however, are difficult to put into one harness they conflict with one another by definition." ( CW9.2 ¶ 58) I would also briefly mention - for perspective and reflection (thought provoking?) - that Jesus Christ said to worship in "spirit and truth!" (John 4:23-24) While Jung appears to put different spin on his understanding of spirit and truth - perhaps because he was taking a 'psychological' approach, Jung's observations about spirit and truth remarkably mirror Christ's statements. In any case., it would seem that there is definitely an intimate and inextricable connection between spirit and truth.
Carl Jung, whose central concept of “psyche” could, at times, be interchangeable with the idea of “spirit,” believed - along with Viktor Frankl and William James - that spiritual processes were largely unconscious-instinctual oriented processes, which, in Jung's view, did possess the characteristic of possessing a large degree of autonomy. Jung stated that “From the psychological point of view the phenomenon of spirit, like every autonomous complex, appears as an intention of the unconscious superior to, or at least on a par with, the intentions of the ego. If we are to do justice to the essence of the thing we call spirit, we should really speak of a “higher” consciousness rather than of the unconscious, because the concept of spirit is such that we are bound to connect it with the idea of superiority over the ego-consciousness.” (in CW8: 643) In general Carl Jung viewed "the psyche" not as "an indivisible unity but a divisible and more or less divided whole. Although the separate parts are connected with one another, they are relatively independent...... I have called these psychic fragments “autonomous complexes,” (CW8 582)
In respect to Jung's injection of the concept of "life" into the spirit-truth connection, it could be, perhaps, because the unconscious process of its own can't truly achieve the "higher consciousness" on its own which could explain why Jung added the statement that " life is essential to spirit, since its truth is nothing if it cannot live.” What is it about life that could develop meaning into truth? - or an autonomous unconscious spiritual process into a "higher consciousness?" At one point, Jung did describe God in terms of "reality" - which in light of the ordinary scientific and psychological view of God in terms of a "transcendental Spirit" would seem a bit odd if not contrary to the ordinary understanding and view of God.
When it comes to emotions Carl Jung emphasized that symbolism and emotions are intimately connected and that the unconscious is the seat of emotions and symbolism, which, of course, would be the genesis of meaning. However, the bottom line is that Jung unequivocally stated that 'Spirit gives meaning to life!'
New Spin on an Old Idea: Spiritual Processes Create Meaning
In the context of Durkheim's argument that spiritual religious beliefs created social structure - and society - in that ideals are also social constructs, the argument that spiritual-religious processes create meaning and a sense of reality dovetails into Durkheim's theory. William James, Viktor Frankl, Carl Jung, as well as Durkheim and Clifford Geertz argue spiritual processes and spiritual experiences create meaning and a sense of reality, and, by implication would seem to play a role in creating social structure since those spiritual processes would necessarily be deeply involved in religious-spiritual-social ideals such as compassion, justice, righteousness, and so on. - and, as Durkheim argued, "society" itself! Furthermore, Viktor Frankl unequivocally states that it is the spiritual processes which give birth to and create "ideas and ideals!"
Viktor Frankl's Spiritual Dimension!
Viktor Frankl, like Carl Jung and William James, also firmly believed that the spiritual processes in the human mind generate and create meaning for the individual or person. In the anthology, Meaning in Positive and Existential Psychology (2014), edited by Batthyany and Russo-Netzer, Paul Wong, the prominent positive-existential psychologist, observes: “Frankl considers meaning seeking as stemming from one’s spiritual nature. According to Frankl, meaning, compassion and other positive psychological resources belong to the spiritual dimension.” Frankl believed that human beings have a "spirit" though it should be noted generally he used the word "nous." In the Aristotelian scheme or in ancient Greek mythology, nous is the understanding or awareness as an expression of intellect and intelligence. Zeus was believed to have reflected "nous" at times, perhaps suggested in the context of wisdom versus more basic instinctual impulses. Frankl believed in "spirit" but differentiated between two kinds of spirit - one directly connected with religion, and the other spirit or spirituality which he referred to as nous. Perhaps, that might be due to the same distinction a Baptist woman made when she said "Religion is of man! Spirit is of God!"
Paul Wong elaborates on Viktor Frankl's views regarding the nature and characteristics of spiritual or noetic (from nous)processes in the mind "in the following quotation: "The noetic (spiritual, specifically human) dimension contains such qualities as our will to meaning [Frankl's central concept of the human being's primary drive] our goal orientation, ideas and ideals, creativity, imagination, faith, love that goes beyond the physical, a conscience beyond the superego, self-transcendence, commitments, responsibility, a sense of humor, and the freedom of choice making. The human dimension is the medicine chest of the logotherapist. Patients are made aware that they have these rich resources of health within." (Fabry 1994 pp.18-19) (p.156) Also, PaulWong notes that, like many other modern day existentialist and positive psychologists, “Park (2007) regards religion and spirituality as meaning systems.” (p. 156) One could infer then that like Frankl, Park would agree that spiritual processes would be involved in meaning creation.
Furthermore, as William Gould notes, the famous philosopher Kant firmly believed that conscience is "the representative within us of the divine judgment-seat: it weighs our dispositions and actions in the scales of a law which is holy and pure..." (Kant Ethics, p.133) (WG p.55) William Gould observed that "Frankl insists that the noetic [spiritual] dimension gives the self the power to choose what one will be and what one will be and what one will become. A noetically empowered conscience is the key." (WG p.41) Frankl put a slightly different spin on "conscience" than Kant, and emphasized that "Only conscience is capable of adjusting the 'eternal' generally agreed upon moral law to the specific situation a concrete person is engaged with." (p.41 WG) However the bottom line is that the spiritual process and the 'eternal divine drive' is responsible for creating the ideals and morals of society.
William James Concept of a Sense of Reality
“They [abstractions (symbols) and spiritual emotions-experiences] determine our vital attitude as decisively as the vital attitude of lovers is determined by the habitual sense, …… They are convincing to those who have them as any direct sensible experiences can be, and they are, as a rule, much more convincing than results established by mere logic are……if you do have them, and have them at all strongly, the probability is that you cannot help regarding them as genuine perceptions of truth, as revelations of a kind of reality [my underlining] which no adverse argument, however unanswerable by you in words, can expel from your belief" is what William James emphasizes in his classic work, originally published in 1902, The Varieties of Religious Experiences. (P.47) William James goes on to say that religious experiences and spiritual experiences create and generate a “sense of reality” (p.48)
In his book, William James reviews the religious experiences which people had shared with him. Then James analyzes the beliefs produced by those experiences. William James' insight that religious and spiritual experiences generate and create meaning(s) and a "sense of reality" would appear, on the face of it, nothing short of brilliant. It appears rather evident, if simply only from a precursory overview of the beliefs about Creation, Truth, Justice, Righteousness, and so on, that religious beliefs, in general, create meaning(s) and produce a “sense of reality.” Every major religion emphasizes the concept of Truth in their sacred scriptures and beliefs. And what would truth be if not, in one sense, a "reality?" What would make William James concept especially relevant would be that the concept of a "sense of reality" would seem to clearly define, in a sense, an important "function" of spiritual experiences, spirituality and even religion itself - to make sense of and place order on the rather complicated and intellectually immense universe. At the dawn of civilization and before, spirituality has created meaning, beliefs, and a sense of reality - a sense of reality in which human "spirit" as well as transcendental spirit(s) proved to be pivotal.
Clifford Geertz: "A Realistic - System of Symbols"
Clifford Geertz’s reputation as a brilliant anthropologist is well deserved. It is a rare ability to express complex conceptual frameworks in an easily understood comprehensive form. A pivotal argument in the works of Geertz is that meaning and symbolism are essential and critical in culture and in religious beliefs: “The view of man as a symbolizing, conceptualizing, meaning-seeking animal, which has become increasingly popular both in the social sciences and in philosophy over the past several years, opens up a whole new approach not only to the analysis of religion as such, but to the understanding of the relations between religion and values. The drive to make sense out of experience, to give it form and order, is evidently as real and pressing as the more familiar biological needs. And, this being so, it seems unnecessary to continue to interpret symbolic activities --- religion, art, ideology – as nothing but thinly disguised expressions of something other than what they seem to be: attempts to provide orientation to an organism which cannot live in a world it is unable to understand.” (p.140 – my italics) In the mid 1960's Clifford Geertz published his almost universally accepted five-part definition of religion. His definition focused on religion as a "system of symbols" which is "realistic." William James concept of a "sense of reality" which was published nearly 65 years earlier remarkably mirrors Geertz's definition of religion. It seems Geertz had no awareness of William James classic work, The Varieties of Religious Experiences. Geertz, in his writing did emphasize the significance of meaning much more than William James did. However, both authors did emphasize the importance of religious beliefs as a "sense of reality," or a meaning structure ('realistic "System of symbols"), or Truth, and both make a direct connection between spirituality and religious beliefs and peoples' world-views.
Ideals and Meaning Creation in the Declaration of Independence
Of course, one expression of spirit that all Americans would be very familiar with, would be the idea of the "Spirit of America." Personally, I believe the most exquisite and beautiful expression of spirituality would be in the Declaration of Independence: "WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." In that the Declaration of Independence embraced ideals, which, in part, are expressions of hopes, dreams, aspirations and a vision or understanding of what "should be", the Declaration of Independence, then, is most definitely not the product of logical deduction. Nor would ideals, expressed as 'people being created equal', a "Creator" or 'Creation', and especially the idea of human beings having "unalienable Rights" be rational arguments. John Locke, the product of the Age of Reason, argued that human beings have "natural rights." Rather than being rational arguments, ideals, in this sense, would actually be the "assumptions" upon which rational arguments are based. The psychologists Mike Prentice and Ian McGregor, in Meaning in Positive and Existential Psychology, observe that "William James suggested that "inner meaning can be complete and valid...only when the inner joy, courage and endurance are joined with an ideal." (William James 201/1899, p.177) (p.209). Further, Viktor Frankl unequivocally stated that the spiritual processes are responsible for "ideas and ideals."
Ideals of equality, of justice, of natural rights would seem, somewhat self-evidently, to be necessarily connected intimately and inextricably with right and wrong - and good or evil. The philosopher Hume, the scientist Albert Einstein, as well as the modern neuroscientist Antonio Damasio, all stated that right and wrong and good or evil are definitely not the products of rational analysis or logical deduction, as well as being beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. At an Address to the Princeton Theological Seminary on May 19, 1939, Einstein stated unequivocally, as noted in the book, Ideas and Opinions (1954, 1982): that it is “equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is, and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations.” And ideals most definitely would be a form of "aspirations." Not being "rational", then it would seem the only other category for them to fall in would be in a "spiritual" category of one sort or another. Since Damasio points out that emotions play a very significant role in "judgment" so, it would follow that the emotional content of ideals would imply a role for unconscious processes.
Many scientists have pointed out that religious beliefs are pivotal in forming morals, values, norms, as well as ideas and beliefs about righteousness, as well. Even in the more "primitive" societies, such as the Australian Aborigines, religious beliefs are known to shape and determine morals, such as the prohibition on incest that was prevalent in Aboriginal society. So, it would stand to reason that unconscious spiritual processes would be deeply involved in questions and issues of right and wrong, and righteousness. That brings us full circle back to the concept advocated by Frankl, Jung, William James, Durkheim, as well as Geertz (by proxy) that (unconscious) spiritual processes are involved in meaning-creation and creating a 'sense of reality". So, Durkheim's argument that religious beliefs created society would definitely appear to have some serious merit.
Since most psychologists observe that a pivotal characteristic of religious beliefs is morality and morals, it would seem to stand to reason, that ideals, being directly connected with right and wrong as well as morals would would likely involve unconscious processes associated with spirituality. Furthermore, Einstein observed that good or evil and right and wrong are definitely beyond the scope of science, which would clearly indicate that ideals are not primarily produced by rational analysis. The origins of idealism being apparently beyond purely rational processes, that would seem to put ideals into the category of spirituality as spiritual expressions. It would seem to stand to reason then that "ideals" could be a strong argument for the existence of - what to science , has been a somewhat elusive aspect of human consciousness - spiritual aspect to human consciousness.
Spiritual Processes - Social-Religious Ideals and Justice in Old Testament Prophecy
Prophecy, without question, would necessarily involve spirituality, religious beliefs, and (unconscious) spiritual processes. Old Testament prophets frequently advocated "ideals" such as "justice," "compassion," "Truth," and "righteousness!" Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, Zechariah, and Hosea were Old Testament prophets who advocate justice as an ideal in their prophecies. Deuteronomy, one of the earliest books in the Old Testament states: "Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the LORD your God is giving you. (Deuteronomy 16:20) Isaiah proclaimed “Listen to me, my people; hear me, my nation: Instruction will go out from me; my justice will become a light to the nations. 5 My righteousness draws near speedily, my salvation is on the way, and my arm will bring justice to the nations. The islands will look to me and wait in hope for my arm." (Isaiah 51:4) Jeremiah prophesied: "Thus says the Lord: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. (Jeremiah 22:3) Zechariah stated: “This is what the LORD Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. (Zechariah 6:9) The prophet Micah said: "He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." (Micah 6:8) Hosea told the Jewish people: "But you must return to your God; maintain love and justice, and wait for your God always." (Hosea 12:6) The prophet Amos said: "But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!" (Amos 5:24) Ideals are a consistent "teaching" of the prophets. Even among "primitive" societies religious beliefs determine right from wrong and create the taboos of their societies - for instance the incest taboos of the Australian Aborigines,
The numerous Old Testament Prophets who advocated ideals such as justice would present, at minimum, some strong anecdotal information and facts that definitely could lend support to the argument that spiritual processes are heavily engaged in processes involved with right and wrong as well as ideals. Furthermore, one could also assume spiritual motivations were involved in some of the prophets actions in that many prophets were, for all practical purposes, persecuted. Jeremiah was put on public display and punished, put on a criminal-religious trial for prophesying against Judah's leaders, as well as thrown in a dungeon to die. In the end, clearly, meaning is vital to ideals, which would then appear to lend support to the idea that the [largely unconscious] spiritual processes are heavily involved in meaning-creation, as in the social-spiritual ideal of Justice. Further, it should be noted that ideals are also social constructs so, and, it would seem, as Durkheim suggested, that the spiritual processes - and religion by implication - would seem not only to play a role in creating a "sense of reality" but also in creating 'social structure' as well as social-religious norms.
Compassion in Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, and Hinduism
Compassion, which embodies the social-religious ideal of harmony, connectivity to others, and working together as a community is perhaps the most salient and visible concept in all the major religions. Spiritual leaders have eloquently praised and exulted the benefits of compassion.“Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot survive.” – that statement by the Dalai Lama sums things up nicely. How can society function at all without a minimal ‘sharedness?” - as Roy Baumeister points out. Or, as Albert Einstein states“Our task must be to free ourselves... by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature and it's beauty.” As Confucius observed, “Wisdom, compassion, and courage are the three universally recognized moral qualities of men.” Martin Luther King, Jr., who personally dedicated his life to others, stated, “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’
Of all the ideals, compassion - or love for your neighbor - are held by many religious and spiritual leaders to be the highest ideal for a person. Lao Tzu was one of earliest spiritual leaders to preach compassion: Simply see that you are at the center of the universe, and accept all things and beings as parts of your infinite body. When you perceive that an act done to another is done to yourself, you have understood the great truth. Of course, most Christians are familiar with Christ’s commandment to "love your neighbor" in Matthew 22:36-40 - 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” It might surprise many people that the word “compassion-compassionate” is the most frequent occurring word in the Quran. For instance, “Indeed, Allah enjoins justice, and the doing of good to others; and giving like kindred; and forbids indecency, and manifest evil, and wrongful transgression. He admonished you that you may take heed.” (Al Quran 16:91)
In Hinduism it should be said that the early Upanishads (sacred texts), focused largely on an introspective orientation had very few passages about compassion. However, in the later Upanishads, a vow of nonharm become a vital aspect of Hinduism. In modern Hinduism compassion is recognized as an integral aspect of dharma (perhaps expressed as the cosmic law). According to Buddhism, which grew from the roots of Hinduism, a fundamental aspect of compassion is as an aspiration or desire, a state of consciousness, a drive for all to be free from suffering. A central pillar of Buddha’s teaching was that in order to realize enlightenment, a person must develop two complementary qualities: wisdom (usually translated from the Sanskrit word prajna) and compassion. Carl Jung observed about the Buddha: "The image of the Buddha sits in the round lotus in the centre of the octagonal Amitābha land. He is distinguished by the great compassion with which he “receives all beings,” including the meditator. (CW11: 932)
Of all the ideals, compassion - or love for your neighbor - is a dominating principle in major religions and held by religious and spiritual leaders worldwide to be the highest ideal for people. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism all vigorously stress the importance of compassion. Needless to say, this would seem to forcefully argue that spirituality and spiritual processes are deeply involved, and dedicated, as it were, to the establishment and maintenance of spiritual-social ideals - reinforcing the argument that spiritual processes are involved in meaning creation and creating a sense of reality integrated into a social-religious structure. Also, I would remind the reader, as we have seen before, Viktor Frankl unequivocally stated that the creative processes involved in spirituality are responsible for creating "ideas and ideals." The religious history of humanity would seem to prove Frankl's point.
Collective Consciousness, the Function of Religion and Emile Durkheim
Emile Durkheim was a founding father of sociology. In The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, first published in 1912, Emile Durkheim stated that "A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, i.e., things set apart and forbidden—beliefs and practices which unite in one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them. (The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life) It should be noted that Durkheim' concept of the "sacred", which he viewed as the defining concept of religion, is very similar to how many view spirituality - as the ideas that appear to have no ordinary worldly explanation and which inspire awe and produce feelings of reverence.
Durkheim's theory stated that religion was the most fundamental social institution of humankind, and further, that religion gave birth to social-religious beliefs that later became integrated into the social structure. Durkheim felt that social interaction was the pivotal factor of forming society and that religious beliefs are a major influence on social interactions - and thus essential to the formation of 'society.' The fact that religions have consistently advocated ideals such as compassion, justice, righteousness, as well as truth, would seem to lend strong support to Durkheim's arguments. That is, the synergies between social factors and religious influences, which emerged simultaneously in primitive societies, produced a collective consciousness - a social-religious community as it were. Emile Durkheim's concept of the collective consciousness predated Jung's concept of a collective unconscious by several decades, and Durkheim forcefully argued that it was an essential characteristic of society, without which society could not properly function.
Durkheim argued that the norms, beliefs, and values of the group - and of society - effectively formed a collective consciousness - a system mutually agreed to values which would seem to have a minimal autonomous functioning - which then produced the "social integration" that is a prerequisite of any social integrity. Carl Jung observed that psychologists theories are, in the end, to a large degree, based on their experiences and views. His observation seems borne out by the fact that the same ‘Psychology of Religion’ textbooks-books which all refer to Freud's Oedipal Complex, leave out Emile Durkheim's theory about the origins and function of religion.
Freud stated that "the beginnings of religion, ethics, society, and art meet in the Oedipus complex (p.159 Anthro studies). On the face of it, the Oedipal complex is a story about a son who overthrows or kills his father (and then has an incestual relationship with his mother). Recently, the prominent psychologist, John Bargh (PhD), in his book, "Before You Know It," observes that "while his [Freud's] emphasis on unconscious drives was without a question a ground shaking insight, in effect Freud demonized the unconscious operations of the normal mind, claiming that each of us harbored a separate unconscious netherworld of dark, twisted urges ...[and] Freud presented the unconscious mind as a seething cauldron of maladaptive complexes bent on causing trouble and grief." (p.11-12) What Freud is doing in a 'Psychology of Religion' textbook, in this day and age would be an excellent question. It certainly gave me the impression that in the "Science of Psychology" when it comes to spirituality and religion, psychologists haven't properly separated the chaff from the wheat.
Specifically, the ‘Psychology of Religion’ textbooks-books, such as Wulff’s Psychology of Religion, Paloutzian and Park’s Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, Fontana’s Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality, Fraser Watts Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality: Concepts and Applications, all talk about Freud and his Oedipal Complex being an explanation for the formation of religion, and completely leave out Emile Durkheim (I say only partly tongue in cheek that perhaps that was because he was a lowly sociologist).
William James, Viktor Frankl, and Carl Jung were the psychologists who seemed to grasp spirituality and religious beliefs really well and who did the best analyses. That is, they seemed to "get it!" It would seem very salient that William James, Carl Jung and Viktor Frankl, all had their own personal spiritual experiences. There are strong emotional as well as philosophical beliefs and undercurrents involved in spirituality and religion. From my research it appears to me that some seem to "get it" and some don't, and that is all there is to it. What is also puzzling is that all of those same 'Psychology of Religion' textbooks-books left out Viktor Frankl completely as well as all his ideas about spirituality - for some unknown reason which honestly baffles me. I must say also, that most psychologists seem to have also generally glossed over William James concept of spiritual experiences creating a "sense of reality." Lastly I would mention briefly, that, to the best of my recollection, while many psychologists deal with Carl Jung's concept of the Collective Unconscious as well as archetypes, psychologists, do appear, for the most part, to have, for the most part, overlooked Jung's statement that 'Spirit gives life meaning.' I would highlight that William James, Carl Jung, and Viktor Frankl, because of their personal spiritual experiences, doubtless, 'knew' what they were looking for, which would been very helpful in developing ideas and theories about spirituality and religious beliefs.
In reviewing 'Psychology of Religion' textbooks-books, an inescapable conclusion would seem that that it appears that 'Psychology' did, in fact, fail to properly establish the "function" of religion. It would seem readily apparent that an absence of any proper description of a function for spirituality and religious beliefs would definitely produce some misunderstanding of spirituality and religious beliefs. The extensive 2018 Barna study of the younger generation attitudes toward religion and spirituality showed that somewhere between 50 and 60 % of them feel that religion and spirituality is not relevant. Personally, I do believe that spirituality is, indeed, relevant - which makes an understanding of the function of spirituality and religion pivotal, since if spirituality has no function or use, then it would appear truly "irrelevant."
I must admit that my thinking is similar to the famous psychologist Seligman who founded Positive Psychology. At the first international conference of positive psychologists, Seligman observed publicly that his inspiration was the insight that psychology is actually "half-baked" - especially in light of the frequent failure of psychology to highlight, communicate, or teach some of the more beneficial aspects of human thinking - which he correctly noted was really 'bad psychology.' My personal inspiration came from the realization that when it came to spirituality and especially "transcendental spiritual experiences," psychiatrists and psychologists, generally, in truth, didn't really have much of a clue as to what they were doing - mainly because the proper research and studies of people who have spiritual experiences has not been done. For example people who have transcendental spiritual experiences most likely have their own peculiar set of problems (i.e. social anxiety), which from experience I can say most don't know anything about. There are numerous, somewhat minor, surveys of people who have spiritual experiences. Fraser Watts, Paloutzian and Park observe that spiritual experiences and transcendental spiritual-psychic experiences appear fairly widespread - though it appears very clear that "mainstream psychology which has a definite "materialist bias", does actually repress quite a bit of information or facts about spirituality does not communicate this fact at all.
So the reader might understand where I am coming from, I would highlight that, in my view, the true relevance and significance of spirituality does not necessarily completely and totally originate in "transcendental spiritual experiences" or the concept of a "Transcendent God." My perception is that in spirituality, the transcendental characteristic of a 'transcendental spiritual experience might be compared to an iceberg - in which 2/3 of the iceberg is below the surface and not visible. The meaning, the relationships, the connectivity and the 'narrative' would be very significant - especially in light of Carl Jung's concept of the Collective Unconscious. A question did cross my mind, as to how a Christian might rank the importance of a Christian and Righteous-Compassionate Way of life versus the concept of a "Transcendental God." A personal perception of mine is that some Christian leaders do seem, at times, to over-emphasize the "transcendental" character of God. When Jeane Dixon, the famous 'psychic' who was a devout Catholic, asked her gardener to do something. He responded that he would "Ask God to tell him what he should do" - to which Jeane Dixon promptly replied that she would ask God, if she should pay him. I have run into the same thing from time to time. I can't help but comment that some Christians honestly seem to disregard the fact that God gave human beings a truly incredible and amazing brain (when properly used, that is).
The perspective that "transcendental" aspect is not the "ultimate characteristic of spirituality might seem ironic, in light of the fact that I, personally, have had a handful of transcendental spiritual experience. The most significant transcendental spiritual experience which influenced my beliefs and thinking a great deal, was not only notarized, but very detailed and a personally very powerful and meaningful spiritual experience, which resulted in my 'realization' of the 'existence' of a "Transcendent Spirit." (I should mention that, personally I am in complete agreement with the early Christian mystics, St. Gregory of Nyssa, Denys the Areopagite, as well as St. Augustine who firmly believe that God is beyond words and beyond comprehension. Anybody who tells you they 'know' God is either a fool or an idiot - or both. Lastly, I should also highlight the point that a Baptist woman made: "Religion is of man. Spirit is of God!." So, I put spirit and spirituality above religion, since I personally view spirituality as being more meaningful and important.
Spirituality and Spiritual Experiences in the Lives of Carl Jung, William James, and Viktor Frankl
Carl Jung's personal life was replete with spiritual and transcendental spiritual experiences. Carl Jung had a spiritual guide named Philemon. As a psychologist-psychoanalyst, Carl Jung was incredibly productive. Carl Jung came up with the concepts of the Collective Unconscious, Archetypes, as well as extroversion-introversion as well as countless brilliant insights. Though mainstream "materialist" psychology shuns Jung, there are numerous Jungian groups and Jungian societies.
It is not well-known, but it has come to light that some of the "religious experiences" in William James classic work, The Varieties of Religious Experiences, which listed peoples transcendental spiritual experiences also contained some of William James own experiences under the title of "anonymous." William James is known ton have had a few bouts with depression.At times it was a very real and, at times, even a desperate struggle for him. William James "escaped insanity," he says, only by clinging "to scripture-texts like 'The Eternal God is my refuge,' etc., 'Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden,'; etc., 'I am the resurrection and the life,' etc." (James 1902 pp. 134-135) (Wulff, p. 477) William James, who actually did not regard psychology as a proper science, turned out to be one of the more productive psychologists in history. In fact, William James is, of course, considered to be the Father of American Psychology.
It would seem likely that the personal spiritual experiences William James and Carl Jung experienced, greatly increased their ability to understand spirituality and religious beliefs. The same is probably true of Viktor Frankl who observed first-hand the salience and vital role of meaning - and spirituality - during his time as a prisoner in Nazi concentration camps. On top of that, Viktor Frankl also related a transcendental spiritual experience as a prisoner on a work detail at a Nazi concentration camp. Pushed past all limits of physical and mental endurance, he had an overwhelming feeling and experience of what might be called the 'ultimate love' of the universe. It would seem likely that transcendental spiritual experiences would facilitate their ability to grasp and understand the processes involved in spirituality and spiritual experiences. If one knows what one is looking for, that would doubtless be a huge help in developing ideas and arguments. It would seem readily apparent that in the case of William James, his personal spiritual experiences led him to grasp the fact that spiritual experiences are actually very real, so that he advanced, as psychologists' analyses of James highlight, the idea and importance of the "experience" versus the theoretical physical reality. Finally, in light of the conceptual integration in the work of Carl Jung, William James, and Viktor Frankl it might seem not only possible, but actually plausible that spiritual processes might also have a "synthesis" function.
Hardwired - Spirit or Spirits in Human Ancestry
Lastly, I would mention that Paul Wong also states that “To the extent that religion and spirituality are universal among all cultures, spirituality may be hardwired (p.156) Human beings have believed in spirit and spirits for tens of thousands of years. Karen Armstrong remarked in her book, A Case for God, that in the cave paintings of "shamans" in the caves of France and Spain dating back twenty to thirty thousand years ago, is the first evidence of human "ideology." Shamanism is believed my most scholars to date from the paleolithic age. It is now known that personality (primarily from studies of twins and adopted children)and some aspects of religiosity are inherited. So, it would seem, on the face of it, highly likely that there would be some minimal "spiritual processes" in the human mind that would be inherited in light of the fact that spirit, spirits, spirituality have been extremely salient beliefs in human culture and society for tens of thousands of years. Many scientists believe that grave goods demonstrate the first human beliefs in spirits and spirituality and the emergence of the first religious beliefs. The oldest known grave goods date back one hundred thousand years to a cave in Israel.
As Carl Jung points out the concept of spirit probably emerged simultaneously with an awareness of death: "The connection between spirit and life is one of those problems involving factors of such complexity that we have to be on our guard lest we ourselves get caught in the net of words in which we seek to ensnare these great enigmas. The problem must have begun in the grey dawn of time, when someone made the bewildering discovery that the living breath which left the body of the dying man in the last death-rattle meant more than just air in motion."(CW volume 6, 601) As I mentioned earlier, the earliest known grave goods - which would indicate a cognitive-emotional awareness of death and which many scientists believe indicate the beginnings of religion - date back one hundred thousand years, to a boar's mandible found in a burial site in the skul cave in Israel. (CW volume 6, 601)
Numerous world-wide languages show a definite and distinct connection between the word for "breath" and the word for "spirit," so it would seem Jung was definitely on to something. The roots for the Christian understanding of the concept of spirit originate in Judaism and Hebrew literature. The Hebrew word “ruach” translates alternately as “wind,” “breathe,” or “spirit.” A similar situation occurs in the Arabic language. Though some trace the roots of the word "spirit" back to the Proto-Indo-European *(s)peis, the word "spirit" came into Middle English via Old French. In English, the word spirit is derived from the Latin word spiritus which means “breath” as well as “spirit, soul, and courage.” Spiritus is distinct from the Latin word “anima” which means “soul” (which some trace back to an Indo-European root in the form of *h2enh1- which translates also “to breathe”). In Greek, likewise, “pneuma” meant "breath, motile air, or spirit," and psykhe translates as "soul" ( psykhe/psukhe is also from an Indo-European root meaning "to breathe" in the form of *bhes-, or in proto-Greek to *phs-)
Even in Sanskrit the word prana in Hinduism refers to “breath,” "life force," or "vital principle" and is viewed as all cosmic energy. The ancient Egyptians believed that a human soul was made up of five parts: The "Ka" part was the vital essence. Ka was "breathed" into a human being at the instant of birth. In ancient Egyptian mythology the ka was the force that actually endowed the human being with life. Likewise, in Scandinavian, Baltic, and Slavic languages, the words for "breath" are intimately connected to concepts of "the spirit.” With the prevalence of the language connections between "breath" and "spirit" it would seem very likely that there would be an unconscious symbolic connection between life (breath) and "spirit" in the human collective unconscious - which over the course of over a hundred thousand years would be genetically 'adapted' into human DNA. Jung's entire concept of the Collective Unconscious rests on the idea that certain symbols or models would be genetically acquired through time by the Human being.
Research into Unconscious Processes
Recently there has been a substantial amount of research into the existence and operation of "Unconscious Processes" in the human mind. The prominent 'unconscious psychologist' Bargh states that recent “research has demonstrated the existence of several independent unconscious behavioral guidance systems: perceptual, evaluative, and motivational. From this perspective, it is concluded that in both phylogeny and ontogeny, actions of an unconscious mind precede the arrival of a conscious mind—that action precedes reflection.” Then he goes on to say, “Over the past 30 years, there has been much research on the extent to which people are aware of the important influences on their judgments and decisions and of the reasons for their behavior. This research, in contrast with the cognitive psychology tradition, has led to the view that the unconscious mind is a pervasive, powerful influence over such higher mental processes (see review in Bargh, 2006).” That is to say, that research into unconscious processes would seem to indicate that "spiritual unconscious processes" would be just - unconscious and not readily accessible to the cognitive processes (especially in today's world in which "mainstream materialist" psychology which is, in truth, actually very repressive of spirituality). As a footnote, I would highlight Bargh's clearly stated it was necessary to go "outside" mainstream psychology to get the answers he needed.
Another prominent 'unconscious psychologist', Kihlstrom, who has studied implicit memory, implicit learning, implicit thought, and so on, observed: "There is also the matter of the comparative power of unconscious processing. Recently, in both the scientific literature and the popular press, authors have touted the power of unconscious learning and thought that unconscious learning and automatic processing allow us to solve more complex problems, more efficiently, than is possible consciously (Gladwell, 2005; Wilson, 2002)." As Bargh notes, some mainstream psychologists appear to seriously underestimate "the power of unconscious processing." I should mention that the research into unconscious processes reinforces Jung's concepts on the role of the unconscious as far as archetypes, symbolism and autonomy. The unconscious research hasn't really been applied to the concept of the Collective Unconscious - which would seem to offer some tantalizing ideas - perhaps such as a collective unconscious "field" much like a magnetic field of sorts.
The Unconscious Nature of Spiritual Processes
In fact, Fraser Watts notes that "the prominent atheist philosopher A. J. Ayer had a near-death experience." (p.19) While it took me years to sort my striking precognitive experience out, I finally concluded that it was an expression of the Holy Spirit, in part because other words or concepts don't really seem all that meaningful. In Ayers case, his experience left him more open-minded, however, he did not end up literally believing in a life after death. Also Watts observes that "24 percent of atheists and agnostics in Hay's survey say they have had a religious experience." (p.19) Fraser Watts did note that one survey did show that people who believe that "the spiritual side of life is important" tend to have more spiritual experiences. One need not have "God" automatically pop into your mind to have spiritual processes at work in your mind. It should mention that many people have told me that one doesn't necessarily need to absolutely believe in God to be spiritual, as it were. Spirituality, in this sense, is not about "God", but about "meaning and creativity as well as a "way of looking at things" - a "sense of reality." The bottom line is that people have had 'spiritual' experiences for tens of thousands of years, and I would argue that for mainstream psychology to ignore spiritual experiences because of some personal prejudices that spirituality is "superstitious nonsense" is neither reasonable nor objective in any way or scientific.
Addendum: Materialist Problem in a nutshell mini-critique which has over 80,000 views and zero criticisms
“Why stay in prison when the door is open!”
Rumi
John Bargh: filtering and the materialist problem in a nutshell
What Bargh's mini-essay on filtering and attention indicates is that the filtering process - as Mannheim/Maimones points out is so strong that it does skew the orientation of people.
John Bargh, a research and psychologist of the unconscious, observes, “When I was about twelve years old, we had a big family reunion and I decided to bring a tape recorder so we’d have a recording of our grandparents and uncles and aunts and cousins for posterity. I come from a large extended family so it was a really noisy room. During the gathering, our grandma sat on the couch and told some great stories in the middle of all other conversations. We listened and enjoyed all of them, and a few days after the reunion, we went back to listen to it again. What a disappointment! Just noise, noise, noise, a million people talking at once and no way to pick out her voice from the other people talking, even though we heard her so clearly at the time.
We quickly figured out that we hadn’t noticed the background noise because we had been so captivated by our grandmother’s stories. We’d filtered out what everyone else was saying. The actual, physical sounds in that room at the time, without the mind’s built-in filters, were there on the tape recording.” My personal experience in my forty years of dealing with mainstream psychologists and psychiatrists is that spiritual psychic is outside their awareness - just simply not on their radar - and it should be. (p. 111 Before you know it)
The stereotype that "quantification" unequivocally equates to "science" is widespread. Strict quantification excludes art, music, hope, dreaming, dancing, creativity, poetry, true love, idealism, freedom, as well as justice and even imagination [Einstein and other scientists viewed imagination as vital to science] Long ago William James observed paying attention and focusing necessarily required excluding and ignoring much else - confirmed by modern neuroscience.
Arthur Mullins in Truth and Ideology: Reflections on Mannheim's Paradox, states that “Nevertheless, with these few exceptions, Mannheim holds that historical and political thought is determined by the socio-historical location of the thinker and the political aspirations and material ambitions of the group or groups to which he belongs. Such thought is inherently value-laden, one-sided, distorted, and therefore false.
“Ideology [including philosophy & social science] is, as Mannheim uses the term, a mode of thought that obscures the real condition of society.... Groups are simply unable to see particular facts that would undermine their conception of the world! (Christina Maimone)
MAJOR Flaws, Errors and Omissions
1. Geertz's “universal definition” of religion (Chernus) has no "spirit" & no concept of community
2. No Social Consciousness: Allport (1927): "There is no psychology of groups" & consciousness confined to the firing of neurons
3. No role for the "Teachings of Religion" in the psychology of religion such as forming a sense of community
4. No concept of spirituality and religious beliefs as major drive or motivation
5. Extreme forms of violence historically evidenced by genocides, atrocities and racism left out of social identity theory As Kay Deaux points out the Academic Materialist fixation with experiments excludes this factor.
6. Dr. Neal, a psychiatrist, trained at Johns Hopkins, states she has no education/training in people who have spiritual-psychic experiences. J. E Kennedy states “Very little research has been aimed at investigating the overall effects of paranormal experiences.” That appears true from my research
Academic Materialism is a Mindset and Ideology and from that list of major flaws it should be clear that the Materialist Mindset has indeed skewed the orientation of scientists and religious people alike! Academic Materialism deviates from “scientific” materialism - in part due to the Definist fallacy & false premises, + as Kay Deaux highlighted a fixation with laboratory experiments
Link to my academia profile which went viral with over 70,000 - with zero criticisms - if interested
Content Copyrighted Charles E Peck Jr. Copyright ©
References and Footnotes