Major cultural developments include the rise of modern science, the rise of modern capitalism, the rise of representative democracy, the rise of the Industrial Revolution, and the rise of the Romantic Movement in philosophy, literature, and the arts.
In effect, Ong implicitly works with this media-ecology thesis in his massively researched book Ramus, Method, and the Decay of Dialogue: From the Art of Discourse to the Art of Reason (1958) - his major exploration of the influence of the Gutenberg printing press that emerged in the mid-1450s.
Now, taking various hints from Ong, I have written about our contemporary secondary oral culture in my essay "Secondary Orality and Consciousness Today" in the well-organized anthology titled Media, Consciousness, and Culture: Explorations of Walter Ong's Thought, edited by Bruce E. Gronbeck, Thomas J. Farrell, and Paul A. Soukup (1991, pp. 194-209).
Now, I am here using terminology that I have learned from reading the Swiss psychiatrist and psychological theorist Carl Gustav Jung's Chapter II in Part One of his 1952 extensively revised and re-titled book in German of his original 1912 book in German that has been translated into English as "Two Kinds of Thinking" in the revised 1967 edition of Symbols of Transformation, translated by R. F. C. Hull (1967, pp. 7-33).
In Jung's chapter titled "Two Kinds of Thinking," he refers to the two kinds of thinking as (1) directed thinking involving logic, and (2) fantasy thinking involving images and associative thinking.
In the present wide-ranging and, at times, deeply personal OEN article, I have used my fantasy thinking involving images and associative thinking.
I associate what Jung refers to as images with what the classicist Eric A. Havelock refers to as the imagistic thinking of the Homeric mind (i.e., what Ong refers to as the primary oral mind) in his 1963 landmark book Preface to Plato.
In my various other wide-ranging OEN articles, I have also used my associative thinking to introduce a wide range of ideas and thoughts.
In any event, there is more to my emphasis on images and imagistic thinking. You see, each of us carries within our psyches an early childhood image of our moms (or mother-figures) and an early childhood image of our dads (or father figures). Moreover, these early childhood images in our psyches are "married within" (i.e., intimately connected within) our psyches, figuratively speaking to libido in our psyches (i.e., sexually charged energy in our psyches). These early childhood images that are "married within" our psyches are referred to as endogamous kinship libido. At a certain stage late in life, we may experience the liberation of endogamous kinship libido "married within" in our psyches. That is, we may experience the liberation of the endogamous kinship libido "married within" our psyches to our early childhood image of our own mom (or mother-figure), and we may also experience the liberation of endogamous kinship libido "married within" our psyches to our early childhood image of our own dad (or father-figure).
Now, after heterosexual men of a certain age experience the liberation of endogamous kinship libido "married within" their psyches to their early childhood image of their own moms (or mother-figures) in their psyches, those heterosexual men of a certain age will then access the four optimal and position forms of the four feminine archetypes of maturity in the psyches: (1) the Queen archetype of maturity in their psyches; (2) the feminine Warrior/Knight archetype of maturity in their psyches; (3) the feminine Magician/Shaman archetype of maturity in their psyches; and (4) the feminine Lover archetype of maturity in their psyches.
Subsequently, heterosexual men of a certain age will also experience the liberation of endogamous kinship libido "married within" their psyches to their early childhood image of their own dads (or father-figures).
Subsequently, after heterosexual men of a certain age who have experienced the liberation of kinship libido "married within" their psyches to their early childhood image of their own dads (or father-figures) in their psyches, those heterosexual men will then access the four optimal and positive forms of the four masculine archetypes of maturity in their psyches: (1) the King archetype of maturity in their psyches; (2) the masculine Warrior/Knight archetype of maturity in their psyches; (3) the masculine Magician/Shaman archetype of maturity in their psyches; and (4) the masculine Lover archetype of maturity in their psyches.
With Douglas Gillette as his co-author, Robert Moore set for his theory of the four masculine archetypes of maturity in a series of five books in the early 1990s:
(1) King, Warrior, Magician, Lover: Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Masculine (1990);
(2) The King within: Accessing the King [Archetype] in the Male Psyche (1992a);
(3) The Warrior Within: Accessing the Knight [Archetype] in the Male Psyche (1992b);
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
