Exploring Archetypes, History, and the Collective Psyche
“At the third [Terry Yale] lecture it was crowded with people standing and sitting everywhere. ‘Yet,’ he said, ‘it was very difficult stuff and probably none of them understood it; but they “got it” – the numinous quality.’ When he went out after the last lecture he found the Dean’s wife getting tea with tears streaming down her face. C.G. thought it must be some domestic trouble. She apologised and said she was crying. ‘Yes, I see,’ said C.G., and asked if he should withdraw. ‘Oh no,’ she answered, ‘I didn’t understand a word of it, but I feel it.’ ‘That’s it,’ remarked C.G., ‘she got what was there – like the Mass – didn’t understand, but was in it.’ “~
E.A. Bennet, Conversations with Jung, Pages 31-36
Ed Reither
“A mere suppression of the shadow is just as little of a remedy as beheading against headache”
New York Times, ‘Shadow Carried By All, Says Jung’, October 23, 1937
***
While reading Carl Jung’s Psychology and Religion, I am drawn and amazed by his exploration of archetypes and the collective unconscious and their importance to my understanding and the ‘conversation’ at large in today’s psychedelic and purported ‘enlightened’ time. What began as an academic study has become a thrilling discovery into how these deep, unconscious patterns shape our world, personally and collectively. Jung saw archetypes as abstract theories and living forces that shape and influence our myths, dreams, personal identity, and even history.
While reading Psychology and Religion for a course I’m taking, my previous study and understanding brought by these lectures go beyond Jung himself. These ideas refer to early thinkers like Plato and Philo of Alexandria, who had similar insights into universal patterns. Through this essay, I want to reflect on what I’m learning, tying together historical insights with modern perspectives and, most importantly, considering how these ideas apply to the present moment in 2025.
Jung describes archetypes as fundamental patterns within the psyche that are inherited through the collective unconscious.
But just as there is no individuals differentiated to a condition of absolute uniqueness, so also there are no individual products of an absolutely unique quality. (There are)…certain motives (all people have that) repeat themselves in almost identical form. I have called those motives archetypes and by them I understand forms or images of a collective nature which occur practically all over the earth as constituents of myths and at the same time as autochthonous (a concept or mythology of a people born from the land; locality, of earth), individual products of unconscious origin. The archetypal motives presumably start from the archetypal patterns of the human mind – p. 63
These unconscious patterns are not only transmitted by tradition and geography but also by heredity. What intrigues me is how how not only how universal they are but how dominate they play out in peoples lives. Even though each person has their own unique experiences, the same identities—the hero, helper, professional, shadow, the wise elder, the trickster—appear in myths, dreams, and stories across cultures.
This ideas that turn into ‘idendities’ are far from being ‘invented’ by Jung. As he say, “
The theory of preconscious, primordial ideas is by no means my own invention, as the term “archetype,” which belongs to the first centuries of our era, denotes. With special reference to psychology we find this theory in the works of Adolf Bastian and then again in Nietzsche. In French literature Hubert, Mauss and Levy-Bruhl mention similar ideas. I gave only an empirical foundation to the theory of what were called formerly primordial or elementary ideas, “categories” or “habitudes directrices de la conscience,” “representations collectives,” etc., by undertaking certain researches into detail.” – p. 64
Even in the history of ideas Plato’s Theory of Forms suggested that ideal patterns exist beyond time and space. Philo of Alexandria saw divine archetypes structuring reality. These thinkers, like Jung, recognized that human consciousness isn’t just shaped by individual experience—it’s part of a deeper, shared reality.
Jung didn’t just see archetypes in mythology—he saw them playing out in historical and political movements. This is where things really started to click for me. He argued that when societies fail to integrate their unconscious material, they end up projecting their fears and conflicts onto external enemies, leading to division and violence.
One of the clearest examples is the Shadow archetype, which represents the repressed aspects of the self. Jung saw this play out in totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, where entire nations became consumed by the projection of their own unconscious fears onto scapegoats.
“(The) rapid increase of science and technics which attracted human consciousness to such an extent that it forgot the unaccountable forces of the unconscious mind. The catastrophe of the Great War and the subsequent extraordinary manifestations of a profound mental disturbance were needed to arouse a doubt that everything was well with the white man’s mind. When the war broke out we had been quite certain that the world could be righted by rational means. Now we behold the amazing spectacle of States taking over the age-old claim of theocracy, that is, of totality, inevitably accompanied by suppression of free opinion. We again see people cutting each other’s throats to support childish theories of how to produce paradise on earth. It is not very difficult to see that the powers of the underworld—not to say of hell—which were formerly more or less successfully chained and made serviceable in a gigantic mental edifice, are now creating, or trying to create, a State slavery and a State prison devoid of any mental or spiritual charm. There are not a few people, nowadays, who are convinced that mere human reason is not entirely up to the enormous task of fettering the volcano.” – p. 15
On July 29, 1942 the well known and respected spiritual giant Sri Aurobindo said:
Sri Aurobindo Ghose and World War II
“You should not think of it as a fight for certain nations against others or even for India; it is a struggle for an ideal that has to establish itself on earth in the life of humanity, for a Truth that has yet to realise itself fully and against a darkness and falsehood that are trying to overwhelm the earth and mankind in the immediate future”
29 Jul 1942
SRI AUROBINDO: You have said that you have begun to doubt whether it was the Mother’s war and ask me to make you feel again that it is. I affirm again to you most strongly that this is the Mother’s war. You should not think of it as a fight for certain nations against others or even for India; it is a struggle for an ideal that has to establish itself on earth in the life of humanity, for a Truth that has yet to realise itself fully and against a darkness and falsehood that are trying to overwhelm the earth and mankind in the immediate future. It is the forces behind the battle that have to be seen and not this or that superficial circumstance. It is no use concentrating on the defects or mistakes of nations; all have defects and commit serious mistakes; but what matters is on what side they have ranged themselves in the struggle. It is a struggle for the liberty of mankind to develop, for conditions in which men have freedom and room to think and act according to the light in them and grow in the Truth, grow in the Spirit. There cannot be the slightest doubt that if one side wins, there will be an end of all such freedom and hope of light and truth and the work that has to be done will be subjected to conditions which would make it humanly impossible; there would be a reign of falsehood and darkness, a cruel oppression and degradation for most of the human race such as people in this country do not dream of and cannot yet at all realise. If the other side that has declared itself for the free future of humanity triumphs, this terrible danger will have been averted and conditions will have been created in which there will be a chance for the Ideal to grow, for the Divine Work to be done, for the spiritual Truth for which we stand to establish itself on the earth. Those who fight for this cause are fighting for the Divine and against the threatened reign of the Asura.1
-
This letter and the one that follows were later revised and issued as messages, first to the members of the Ashram, then to the general public. They are published, as revised, in Autobiographical Notes and Other Writings of Historical Interest, volume 36 of THE COMPLETE WORKS OF SRI AUROBINDO, pp. 463-68. In the present volume they are published as originally written.—Ed.
Aurobino’s interpretation of World War II was a battle between divine truth and dark, Asuric forces. This is more than myths, dreams, and personal identity Jung’s theory of ‘archetypes’ and ‘collected unconscious’ refers to. Still, as Jung does elude to these ideas, though not so prominently, they both recognized that deep, unseen forces drive human history. Jung kept this more profound framework of his ideas less prominent and only spoke about them later in his life. When talking about ‘mystical’ ideas in his lectures he says: “
“I myself, as well as my colleagues, have seen so many cases developing the same kind of symbolism that we cannot doubt its existence any longer. My observations, moreover, date back as far as 1914 and I waited fourteen years before I alluded publicly to them.”
“nobody is capable of recognizing where and how much he himself is possessed and unconscious, one simply projects one’s own condition upon the neighbor, and thus it becomes a sacred duty to have the biggest guns and the most poisonous gas.”
Today, these same dynamics are still at play. The Hero-Victim-Oppressor narrative is everywhere in politics and social movements. People get swept up in mythic narratives without realizing they’re enacting age-old patterns. When I hear the voices of today speak in terms of ‘Hitler, Mussolini, or Napolean when referencing the U.S. President or when remnants of the Ottoman Empire are still being fought along the Black Sea and Abramanic wars are still active, one begins to wonder. Are we thinking for ourselves, or are we just playing out archetypal roles? That’s something I keep coming back to.
As I read more of ‘Psycholgy and Religon’, I started thinking about these influences in various disciplines. Take Ken Wilber for instance and how his model of pre-rational, rational, and trans-rational consciousness echoes some of Jung’s ideas. Wilber maps human development in structured stages, whereas Jung sees individuation as a more organic, unfolding process. Still, they both emphasize the importance of integrating unconscious material rather than being ruled by it.
Jung warns that failing to do this leads to regression—whether that’s personal neurosis or full-blown societal collapse. Wilber’s take on development aligns with this but frames it within an evolutionary model where consciousness progresses through structured phases. It’s interesting to consider how these perspectives complement each other.
So, where does all this leave me? More than anything, I find myself wondering: how do these unconscious forces play out in my own life? Jung’s work isn’t just about understanding history—it’s about becoming aware of the patterns that shape our thoughts, behaviors, and identities.
Are we truly conscious of the roles we play, or are we acting out scripts dictated by unseen archetypal forces? Do we recognize the Shadow in ourselves, or do we project it onto others? These questions feel more relevant than ever in today’s world of ideological battles, technological upheaval, and social fragmentation.
Jung believed that real transformation begins with awareness—not just intellectual knowledge, but a lived, embodied recognition of these forces at work. That, to me, is the real challenge and the real opportunity. Recognizing archetypes isn’t just about understanding the past; it’s about navigating the present—and maybe even shaping the future in a more conscious way.
***
Yesterday is Today Being Enacted as if Meant Tomorrow
“Look at all the incredible savagery going on in our so-called civilized world, all of which is derived from human beings and their mental condition ! Look at the devilish means of destruction ! They are invented by perfectly harmless gentlemen, reasonable, respectable citizens, beingall we hope to be. And when the whole thing blows up and causes an indescribable inferno of devastation, nobody seems to be responsible. It simply occurs, yet it is all man made. But since every person is blindly convinced that he is nothing but his very modest and unimportant consciousness, which neatly fulfils duties and earns a moderate living, nobody is aware that this whole rationally organized crowd, called a state or a nation, is run by a seemingly impersonal, imperceptible but terrific power, checked by nobody and by nothing.
This ghastly power is mostly explained by fear of the neighbouring nation, which is supposed to be possessed by a malevolent devil. As nobody is capable of recognizing where and how much he himself is possessed and unconscious, one simply projects one’s own condition upon the neighbour, andthus it becomes a sacred duty to have the biggest guns and the most poisonous gas. The worst of it is that one is quite right. All one’s neighbours are ruled by an uncontrolled and uncontrollable fear just like oneself. In lunatic asylums it is a well-known fact that patients are far more dangerous when suffering from fear than when moved by wrath or hatred.” – Carl Jung, Psychology and Religon, p. 15, 1938
October 22, 1937
‘Shadow’ Carried by All, Says Jung’
Special to The New York Times
New Haven, Oct. 22–Dr. Carl G. Jung, Professor of Analytic Psychology at Zurich, said today in the third and last of the annual Terry lectures at Yale University that not only is there an authentic religious function in the unconscious mind, but the manifestations of it have followed the same pattern for more than 2,000 years.
Man’s struggles with anti-social tendencies were vividly illustrated by Dr. Jung as suppression, a conscious moral choice, or repression, a sort of half-hearted letting go of things.
“To live with a saint,” he said, “might cause an inferiority complex or even wild outburst of immorality in individuals less morally gifted. You cannot pump morality into a system where it is not indigenous, though you may spoil it.
“Unfortunately there is no doubt about the fact that man is, as a whole, less good than he imagines himself or wants to be. Every one carries a shadow, and the less it is embodied in the individual’s conscious life, the blacker and denser it is. If an inferiority is conscious, one has always a chance to correct it.
Furthermore, it is constantly in contact with other interests, so that it is steadily subjected to modifications. But if it is repressed and isolated from consciousness, it never gets corrected. It is, moreover, liable to burst forth in a moment of unawareness. At all events, it forms an unconscious snag, blocking the most recent attempts.
“We carry our past with us, viz: the primitive and inferior man with his desires and emotions, and it is only by a considerable effort that we can detach ourselves from this burden. If it comes to a neurosis, we have invariably to deal with a considerably intensified shadow. And if such a case wants to be cured it is necessary to find a way in which man’s conscious personality and his shadow can live together.
“This is a very serious problem for all those who are either themselves in such a predicament, or who have to help other people to live. A mere suppression of the shadow is just as little of a remedy as beheading against headache. To destroy a man’s morality does not help either because it would kill his better self, without which even the shadow makes no sense.
“The reconciliation of these opposites is a major problem. It is natural that the more robust mentality of the fathers could not appreciate the delicacy and the merit of this subtle and, from a modern point of view, immensely practical argument. It was also dangerous, and it is still the most vital and yet the most ticklish problem of a civilization that has forgotten why man’s life should be sacrificial, that means, offered up to an idea greater than man.”
Applying the struggle to European upheavals, Dr. Jung stated that the mental effort has gone on until now there is no civilized country where the lower strata are not in a state of unrest, and that in some European nations such a condition is overtaking the upper strata, too.
“This state of affairs,” he declared, “is the demonstration of our psychological program in a gigantic state. Such problems can only be solved by a general change of attitude. It begins with a change in individuals. The accumulation of such individual changes only will produce a collective solution.”
Study more;