Any individual, society or belief occupies a point on the above scale at any time. That point is never static but the speed of its motion is faster toward the centre. Think of it like a metronome or like trying to balance the end of a pole on one finger: providing minor adjustments are continuously made then a person or society is "well balanced". Within a society, individuals will be positioned in various places on the scale and together they will form a bell-curve. I tried to represent this idea in the diagram by using the tonal gradation. If minor adjustments are not continuously made, however, the drift will continue in the same direction until there is a wild swing, at some point, in the opposite direction.
If an individual is positioned too far toward the mythos end then the society will view them as a psychopath who has little grounding in reality. In the extreme, such people will have no contact with reality at all and will not be able to function in the society. If they are somewhere between the mythos end and the centre, most people will see them as "creatively eccentric": the "crazy artist", "outsider" or "absent-minded professor" etc. If they are positioned too far toward the logos end, most people will see them as the sociopath or dictator, but if somewhere between the logos end and the centre, they could be a lawmaker or a technologist of some sort ― anything that would require a greater sense of order.
How accurately society perceives people on the edges depends on the position of the society, itself. In a shamanistic society, a person might be seen as having been given a spiritual gift while in an urban society, that same person might be seen as "crazy". each society will have its own way of dealing with such people.
As we cannot see far into the future, we can only accurately predict things fairly close to us in time. So if a society or some aspect of it is too far toward either mythos or logos, its inevitable swing toward its opposite state will come as a surprise: a "black swan event".
If the state of a society is way too far toward one end, its swing to its opposite might never happen because the society might not survive to see it.
Think about these things for a while and ponder the word "utopia", and I will elaborate with examples tomorrow.
"The intellect has little to do on the road to discovery. There comes a leap in consciousness, call it Intuition or what you will, the solution comes to you and you don't know how or why".
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.” "The only real valuable thing is intuition."
Albert Einstein
It's always gratifying to discover that Albert Einstein is on your side, but it's not too remarkable if the subject is intuition and you are an Introverted Intuitive type. Einstein was an INTP and I'm an INFJ. However, once you go past the Introverted iNtuitive stages of problem-solving, the two types have little in common. Also, these are somewhat approximate, or perhaps average, traits that are recorded in these definitions. There are 16 personality types in the Myers-Briggs typology and billions of separate personalities in the world. For example, the linked INFJ definition opines: "No other personality type is better suited to create a movement to right a wrong, no matter how big or small".
I can't really imagine myself creating a movement to right some wrong although I have supported (but not joined) such movements in the past. My intuition tells me that while movements can do great things, whenever they get too large there is a tendency for them to divide into factions and then spend more time arguing or even fighting over things than actually doing anything.
When the movement is of a type where the individual can have little influence, my interest wanes. When Wayne Sayles invited me to handle the public side of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, I gave it serious thought before I agreed, but then set about things with enthusiasm. After helping to get overwhelming public support against U.S. import restrictions on ancient coins, I discovered that the public opinion process was just a sham and was categorically ignored by the U.S. government. Even worse, I realized that the U.S. government's aim in these procedures was not to protect "cultural heritage" but to obtain concessions from various countries by doing so, These concessions were secret and even the court system did nothing to bring them before public scrutiny. People were "buying a pig in a poke", but to add insult to injury, it was a forced sale. I realized that my task was redundant and I resigned. It seemed to me that the legal route at least had some chance of success, but minority groups are mere cannon-fodder for political/economic purposes. Our opposition, though, was even worse off because they thought that they were being given greater credit. Sooner or later, their own interests will be squashed in the same manner for some other political/economic gain.
The Zeitgeist Movement and the Venus Project have split. Various reasons have been offered but I tend to think that this is evolutionary. Such splitting is quite common in belief systems and thus organized religions are the commonest expression of that. The degree of agreement between two sects of the same religion acts as the fuel for hostilities and religious wars are most noticed between beliefs that share more things. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (chronologically sorted) not only share certain beliefs, prophets etc, but are often in close geographical proximity, so mutual distrust is combined with the opportunity for conflict between the great religions and between various sects of such and nationalism is always there to fan the flames by adding xenophobia to the mix.
I was watching a Zeitgeist Movement's video the other day and the speaker was talking about how the world would be run by computers as they are so "scientific", have no agendas, personal opinions, ambitions and so forth. As he was talking about this, my first thought was "gigantic solar flare". Besides producing really nice northern lights, such things can wreak havoc on electrical equipment. There was a really huge solar flare in the nineteenth century which destroyed the new telegraph communication system. Undoubtedly there were many others before that event, but apart from pretty northern lights, no one would have noticed because there was no use of electricity in the world. Unlike with variable earth conditions, the sun does not get much in the way of external influences and we know that if there was one giant solar flare then there will be others when the same cycle rolls around again. The problem is that we only know of one event and cannot know if the next one will be tomorrow or in the very distant future. All of the eggs in the Zeitgeist basket would become instantly scrambled when that happens. They would not even be able to issue a "Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible" notice. The hill people would be fine, though, and life would go on. Evolution would "select out" the Zeitgeist believers.
The speaker then went on to say how the Computer would weight variables in complex decision making situations. He did not elaborate on that statement or even give the correct term "fuzzy logic" so the audience never got to hear that such algorithms' parameters are set up by people. A computer only does what it has been told (and as we all know, can sometimes screw that up too). It cannot think. When I built my first expert system, I had never heard of expert systems. It was Bob van Arsdell who noted that my identification chart for Coriosolite staters was an expert system. I don't really like the term. Undoubtedly, there are expert systems which mimic the thought processes of an expert, but I built mine very differently. After I had become computerized, I built an html version which eliminated some people's tendency to skip steps in the paper system and thus end up in the wrong place. Ironically, it was people who had some "expertise" who were doing that. Anyone who had no knowledge of the subject matter never failed in getting to the right destination. I have seen expert systems which use fuzzy logic and they are of limited use. For such applications as Zeigeist envisions, they would not work at all, regardless of solar activity. Think about it, a washing machine can deliver water at the right temperature for you laundry, but if your maintenance man had forgotten to turn the cold tap on after doing something, some of your clothes will shrink.
The reason that the more knowledgeable people failed sometimes is because they thought that my system had the same structure as their minds and was acting like an expert. The problem was that I had not built it that way. I had constructed it by sometimes trying for a 50% division of the data, and sometimes by eliminating very short paths to allow for the remaining data to be more easily split according to my 50% goal. It was "organically grown" and resembled some evolutionary biological processes. Unlike my Coriosolite chronologies, it was not entirely built along cladistic lines. (for more information, enter cladistic and expert in the search box in the top bar of this blog).
When the expert system first went online in 1996, there was quite a reaction to it from different sources. Most of them were enthusiastic and from various honest people without sinister agendas, but two of the reactions were of a different sort. One was from a man from southeast Asia who claimed to be a student and wanted me to help him understand what was going on under the hood, so to speak. His English was not very good, but there was something about his message that made me suspicious, so I tracked him down. He was not a student; his English was very good; he owned a company that built expert systems.
The next response was from Lockheed Martin and written by a woman who officiously demanded that I tell her how I built it. At first I thought that this might mean business for us, but Carrie looked at their web page and saw that they were emphasizing ethics. She told me that companies who would go to some lengths to emphasize their ethics most likely did not have any. I started to wonder if it would be good plan to have dealings with a company who could build a missile that knew where I lived. I took a leave out of southeast Asian friend's book and replied "I did it in html". She knew she had been "found out" and did not ask me to elaborate.
What neither of us knew at the time was revealed several years later by a Texas I.T. developer who flew up to Calgary to talk to us about my new map technology (I had been able to produce more levels of easily understandable data in a map than was previously thought possible). He explained that this would have to be first introduced into the US private sector before it could be offered to the military as, otherwise, it would fall under their official secrets policies and could never again be used commercially. His interest in my technology was, ultimately, for military use.
Later, I was producing maps for a huge utilities company and they tried to reverse engineer my methods (unsuccessfully -- it cannot be reverse engineered) after violating our contract. After we started to spend thousands of dollars on lawyers, the company went into a partnership with the Canadian government to destroy us. After all, the utility company paid the government a huge amount of tax money. One of the government minions told my wife on the phone: "We know what we are doing, we are putting you out of business." Our bank accounts (by then most of our money had gone to expensive lawyers) were seized and our other clients were scared off. Carrie suffered unbearable stress from all of this and as a direct result her breast cancer which had been gone for eight years returned, metastasized, and with its inevitable prognosis of death. A utility company and our own government killed my wife as surely as if they would have used a gun. It was just a slower death. I got off light with a minor heart attack and years of grief. I made two decisions: I would never again conduct business in Canada and my map technology would never be used anywhere. It will die with me (it also has a "perceptual engineering" component and that always worried me as such things can control minds too easily, and can be applied to far more than just maps). The problem with idealism is that it mostly fails to notice the dark side.
But I will end on a light note: Are you troubled by evidence of garden pests? Perhaps you have elephants in your garden. I built this silly little expert system so you can find out. It is full of misunderstood "facts" and absurd observations. All of the drawings and animations are by Carrie. Click here to explore it and to discover if your garden is infested by elephants.
More on the Zeitgeist theme on Monday. Have a great weekend.
I've been thinking about the Zeitgeist movement lately, and while the films certainly make some good points, it is such a broad subject with so many different political and economical factors to consider that I'm not sure if anything much will come from it all. The problems with "movements" is that they are just another aspect of the society which is being criticized and can too easily fall into similar traps. Yet, public opinion seems to have brought about important changes in societies, so perhaps if there are enough movements...
My biggest problem with the Zeitgeist films is that their perspective comes out of high modernism and this has a psychological leaning toward the attitudes of some types of extraverts. So when they imagine that everyone will start to think that way, it is just that: imagination. For example, competitiveness is not due to society acting in erroneous ways, it is part of our evolutionary make-up. I don't think that this can be treated so cavalierly.
Another critic of Zetgeist is James Scott (Yale) and I watched several hours of his talks before picking the one that, I thought, combined enough good points in combination with the sound quality of the video. It is an interesting look at states and comes from James Scott's intimate knowledge of people who have rejected them. There will be more in this theme in subsequent posts, but for now, enjoy the movie.
Very few photographs of the recent Jersey hoard coins have yet been made available to the numismatic community, but already, the nature of the hoard appears to confirm the theory I developed more than twenty years ago that the Jersey hoards of Celtic coins are secondary hoards. I use the latter term to describe hoards that consist of groups of coins gathered from diverse locations that had either been stored above ground or previously buried.
The profile of such hoards is easy to recognize if you understand the issues (series) and their internal chronology: each series has a peak in the numbers of coins within the hoard that reveal the relative time they were gathered together and something of the location where this happened. The previous failure to understand the three series as products of different mints occluded their distribution patterns until I reclassified the coinage. The major reattribution was the dominant type in the Jersey hoards formerly given as Class II Coriosolite, but in my new classification as the issue of Viridovix of the Unelli in Normandy (John Hooker, Notes on part of the Le Catillon Hoard purchased by the Société Jersiaise in 1989, Société Jersiaise Annual Bulletin for 1993, p. 113-115)
The hoards from Brittany most resemble Gallic War refugee hoards: they are much smaller hoards and the peaks in Series X and Y are more closely aligned than in the Jersey hoards. The Jersey hoards are what I have called "recycling hoards", that is, coins and other material gathered for eventual reprocessing to extract the silver. Jersey was picked as a repository for such coins as Roman ships would have had difficulty landing on Jersey because of shallows, sand bars etc. (pers. comm. Douglas Corbel, Société Jersiaise). It is important to realize that these coins were minted to finance battles with Caesar's troops and no small-market monetary economy existed before or shortly after these coins were struck. After the war, the coins had no function apart from the intrinsic value of the alloy. Colin Haselgrove thinks that the Jersey hoards were deposited sometime in the third quarter of the first century BC, but I maintain that the last hoards would have been contemporary with the Roman destruction of the Coriosolite port at Alet and also with the eventual absence of silver in British Durotriges coinage (Coriosolite coins and billon ingots have been found at Hengistbury Head). In other words, circa 10-20 AD. We both have good reasons for our attributions that are based on different factors.
There are two photographs that show stratigraphy evidence. The first of these is shown here and appears on this blog. I think that these coins were the very first of the hoard found (which was reported as containing a gold coin). The gold coin in the photograph is a "bullet" stater of the Senones to which I would agree with Haselgrove's date of 200-125 BC. This coin must have been an heirloom when it was buried. To the left of the Senones stater is a billon stater variously attributed to the Veneti or a Veneti/Coriosolite Group a "hybrid". some of the confusion over these early billon issues is due to, perhaps, that the same die cutter was employed by different issuers, Coriosolite, Series Xn (formerly Abrincatui) and Veneti. The latter is not as clear to me as the former two. Series Xn is a mess: some dies were reused later after they had been badly damaged and the die links are all over the place. This makes aligning typology and metrology rather tricky. Most of the rest of the coins in the photograph are very rare in the Jersey hoards. These are the coins of Series X, group b (see illustration above). I see eight examples that are certainly group b, but there could be more. The coin to the right of the Senones stater is only partly visible and could be either group c or d. No later coins of Series X (e to g) are to be seen in the photo. By way of comparison, the first Le Catillon hoard contained only 1.7% of the coins of groups b to d (formerly Class V). The commonest type in the big Jersey hoards is Series Z (Viridovix) and is represented by more than 50% in each hoard. Yet, in this photograph, only one Series Z is visible (the oval shaped obverse at the bottom near the right hand corner which only shows the head down to the eyebrow). There are also a couple of quarter staters contemporary with the Coriosolite staters in the photo. If I had seen this group described as a complete hoard I would have said that it probably would have been found in the same general area as the Merdrignac hoard from Brittany.
The other photograph is a complete contrast: mostly Series Y (mint site west of the River Rance) and especially group L, they represent a very small part of the chronology. These coins are more difficult to see and I had to enlarge the photo by several 10% increments in order to get a larger image in decent resolution.
The stratigraphy apparent here is obviously not representative of the other Jersey hoards and we most likely will find other areas where the stratigraphy points to discrete "parcels" within the hoard. Only when the complete hoard is disassembled and properly catalogued will the percentages of each group be fully known, but a cross section might give us some idea of the hoard's complete contents.
Although Jersey does not have a very good record of publishing photographs and providing catalogues of the previous hoards, and many thousands of Coriosolite coins were stolen from the museum and never recovered (I worked with Interpol on that case), This hoard is recent and they will, hopefully, share the photographs with the public along the lines of the British Museum's web site which allows scholars to post photos for non-profit, educational use. The Wikimedia images are all of uncleaned coins and useless for typological studies.
Great care must be taken with the analysis of the "parcels"within the hoard and with the organic/mineral residues on and around the coins in each parcel. It is even possible that a 2,000 year old itinerary might be reconstructed, but just one or two mistakes could negate that possibility.
I don't like the word "devolution" for any of its definitions. Recently, its main usage has been for the transference of political and economic powers to regions, but let's start with the idea of a retrograde evolution. I don't think such a thing exists at all. An example given in the linked definitions is: "the gradual devolution of the neighbourhood from a thriving community of close-knit families to a drug-ridden slum."
If this was truly devolution than the neighbourhood will have reverted back to the drug-ridden slum which it had been prior to its becoming a "thriving community of close-knit families". In every case I can think of, the community evolved to a drug-ridden slum. Evolution has nothing at all to do with us changing, over time, to some imagined ideal state. It only means that we have adapted to changing conditions. So what happened with the drug-ridden slum? A series of economic situations and mismanagement allowed the houses to fall into disrepair; property prices fell; local opportunities in education and work diminished; most of the community became poor and with little hope for improvement. A few individuals then sought to improve their lot and about the only route for them to take was toward criminal activities. Drugs came to the forefront because a certain segment of the community felt the need to escape from their misery through chemical means. As this was illegal, survival-oriented individuals saw a way that they could lessen their misery by supplying such drugs. They learned to adapt. They evolved.
When I look at Cicero Moraes reconstruction of Homo erectus pekinensis, I can easily believe that this early man was quite capable of adapting to changing conditions. Decades ago, various sorts of hominids were portrayed as unintelligent louts. Slack-jawed and hunched over, they appeared more like legendary monsters than survival-oriented individuals. We had a habit of building ourselves up by denigrating our ancestors. Now we are even starting to wonder if we are actually becoming less intelligent as a species.
For the political usage of the word it is advisable to look at primitive governments (and to take "primitive" as "primal" rather than "less developed along evolutionary lines". When I started looking into ancient Irish Law, I was impressed by how it had evolved to take care of any difficulties on a local level. There seemed no need for police and for prisons: if someone stole your cattle you would be more than compensated, if not by the culprit, then by his family or even by anyone who allowed the stolen cattle to graze on their land. These laws were tailored to local conditions and sought to regain equilibrium in their execution. They were not intended to punish as much as to dissuade people from any wrong-doing. Just because we are now thinking that local and small government works better for everyone than distant and big government, does not mean that we are devolving, it is just that we allowed ourselves to stray from some survival behaviours of earlier times and now, finally, we have decided to adapt, yet again. It's still evolution, even if it strayed for a long time.
What I personally found most interesting about the story was not any particular discovery but was its glimpse into the nature of research. Of course, there are many sorts of research from simply asking someone for an opinion through looking at previous research and checking its results. This sort of research is hardly time consuming and very little is invested in it. The research that Dr Owens speaks of with regard to the Phaistos disc and Linear A is another matter entirely. It always takes years and there is little guarantee of success. Often, it takes the work of many people, including specialists from related topics and disciplines. A "researcher" can often thus, more accurately, be called a "research coordinator". On some of the tougher research problems, reference is often made to the Rosetta Stone in looking for an important key to the solution as it was in the video. This key might be discovered through painstaking attention to details; through a hunch, or even through a dream as in the case of the discovery of the benzene ring. I used the phrase "Rosetta Stone" myself in reference to the key which enabled me to discover the chronology of Coriosolite coin die manufacture. When the mind is working very hard on such problems, much of these processes are going on in the unconscious mind and might present their solutions through dreams, visions, or just hunches. Only fools do not take such things seriously.
I remember the first time we bought an important work of art. It was a linocut by Sybil Andrews. We brought it home from the gallery and hung it on a wall in the living room. We thought that it would lift the tone of the living room, but it succeeded only in making everything else look shoddier than before.
Nara presented the start of a new paradigm and, suddenly, what had existed before seems shabby and tired out. Most of the players are stuck in the same holding pattern: find an incident where some collector, dealer, detectorist, or curator goofs or commits a crime and then show how this is indicative of the behaviour of all collectors... , or say that collectors do not demand a solid collecting history for their purchases knowing that not only most items do not have such a history, but it is usually illegal to pass on the identity of a previous owner for goods classified as "second-hand". For the US State Department: identify where a nation is being difficult over some American interest like the expansion of Monsanto or the setting up of another military base, and then use minority groups like collectors or archaeologists as pawns to grant import restrictions that benefit said nation in return for their capitulation on the important matter. Minority groups are so easy.
The one thing a shiny new paradigm does bring is an awareness that where it is not acknowledged, purposes other than what have been stated are the real purpose for the conflict. The new paradigm reveals such deceit and the pawns become aware of their role within it.
The Nara conferences came about because Japan was increasingly becoming aware that UNESCO's views of cultural heritage were not in harmony with the Japanese experience. This was not the first time that Japan had seen the need to adjust the west's attitude toward its culture: in the Meiji era, Ninagawa Noritane (1835-1882) sent gifts of traditional Japanese pottery to British and American museums, explaining to them that their displays of Japanese porcelain did not represent his culture, which preferred, and had evolved cultural expressions around, the humbler pottery of the people. The porcelain, he explained, was a technology they had learned from China, and while it had gained Japanese cultural themes and styles, it was only produced for export to the west. The museums followed his advice.
What was different with Nara, was the realization that other cultures faced similar problems, and ideas about what defines cultures had evolved to be more focused and specific. There came about an awareness, too, that the boundary of a culture was diffuse and that influences mingled across many subjects. It was realized that even contemporary world-wide virtual communities were cultures in their own right. A nationalist-aimed, top-down, international cultural heritage policy starts to take on the aspect of a steam-roller.
A current fashion is to see the contents of museums as the spoils of long-ago wars, and now, whether because of feelings of guilt, or sour grapes over shrinking empires, everything must go back. I attended a school in north London that stood on the grounds of Cecil Rhodes' house. Of the house, itself, only the façade had survived with its four pillars. The school badge showed those four pillars as representing four human virtues exhibited by Cecil Rhodes. Later, it was realized that Cecil Rhodes had none of these qualities at all, but that was the story I was fed. When I returned to England for three weeks in 1999, I watched a TV show using the same sort of rhetoric I got at school, but it was now promoting the opposite views to what I had been taught. I gained a new respect for George Orwell. Neither of these views had authenticity.
The Trojan horse serves me as a useful metaphor: the soldiers hidden in the horse can bring victory to the invaders. With cultural objects, what is hidden inside are not soldiers but ideas and shared concerns. The artificial walls between peoples start to fall.
On the reverse of Caesar's denarius to the left is a battlefield trophy of captured Celtic equipment. Such trophies were displayed for only a limited time so as to allow old hostilities to heal. Caesar did mention that some Gaulish tribes had permanent sacred displays of booty and no one could take anything from it under penalty of death, but I suspect that this law was to prevent its reuse by potential warlords. The pictorial treatment of the enemy was harsher and could include a couple of bound captives seated at the base of a trophy on some coins.
When museum exhibits become repatriated, they are usually set up in a display by the receiving country to commemorate the victory: old spoils have been recaptured. History is the handmaiden to all of these different views and we can choose the metaphors to reflect that which comforts us best.
Intuition is a funny thing. While many might think that it will deliver nice clear-cut answers to you, it most often only gives you a feeling that a particular course of action is either attractive or unattractive. It is only later that you discover why. Many decades ago, I decided that I would only tell the truth (at least, as I see it at the time). Since then, I have not even told white lies. Women who know me never ask "Does this dress make me look fat?" If I cannot state the truth about something for some reason then I say nothing at all. Since the mid-nineties I have written thousands of things for web pages and Internet discussion groups, Search as hard as you like, you will not find a single lie in all of it. You will find examples where my opinions have now changed, and you will find examples where I might have some detail wrong (especially when it comes to very old memories and my faulty sense of personal chronology), but none of that is lying.
The painting shows the naked figures of Truth and Time trampling on Deceit. To the left is Felicitas and to the right is Bonus Eventus. Some commentaries say that Truth had fallen in the well and Time had rescued her, but I see it as meaning that the truth can remain hidden for a long time, but eventually, all will be revealed. It is also said that Truth is looking in the mirror, but it seems to me that she is holding the mirror at such an angle that Bonus Eventus can see her face reflected in it. If you keep to the truth, it will eventually pay off.
When I read the latest Nara document, I wondered if its message of authenticity, reliability and truth would be ignored by the cultural heritage blogosphere, so I was not surprised by the absence of its mention on certain blogs that I follow. It is a very "inconvenient truth". I did this morning, however, see that truth was the main topic of a piece by John Howland on the latest Stout Standards blog (Dick Stout).
So, while these things were running around in my mind, I started thinking about "and the truth will make you free" (John 8:32), and why I thought that most people have completely misunderstood that passage. And then, inevitably, I started thinking about Bertrand Russell's essay on Nice People. From that, I remembered a small book that my wife had written under her Jesse Ancona nom de plume (the name refers to a gessoed panel, and Carrie was in the process of preparing the same. She would slake her own plaster to produce gesso sottile according to Cennini's method. I would sometimes help her by stirring the bucket. The stuff smells like rotten eggs. I missed, unfortunately, an incident from some time before we met when Carrie was still experimenting with the method. Working topless, she was up past her elbows in wet plaster when it started to rapidly set. The Fire Department had to be called).
Anyway, she titled her book Lying with the Truth, which was a fairly well known phrase, and it was about her experiences of leaving a cult just before we met. Upon finding the link and reading some of it again, I was happy to see that I had been given a mention:
"I am thankful that I have been blessed, from the very beginning, by knowing people who have fought other cults. Because my husband was one of them, I was not able to squirm away from learning the mechanisms and their distinctive, subtle signs -- because he made me face the truth (just like he made me go to the doctor when I found a lump in my breast). Thanks to him, I can see cults more clearly than most, though I am still somewhat disadvantaged by my own emotional reactions."
I might have forgotten about that passage, or might have read an earlier draft, but I was pleased to see it and thought it rather timely. Truth often finds me.
The well in the painting, of course, leads to the unconscious where Truth finds a restful home ― knowing that anyone looking for the truth would never think to look there. Before remembering Carrie's book, I had decided to close with a paragraph (425) from Jung's On the Nature of the Psyche. Its contents explain quite well why Nara +20 can be conveniently ignored and the sort of mind that would do so. But as everything is related, it fits quite well with everything else:
"If the subjective consciousness prefers the ideas and opinions of collective consciousness and identifies with them, then the contents of the collective unconscious are repressed. The repression has typical consequences: the energy-charge of the repressed contents adds itself, in some measure, (Note 124) to that of the repressing factor, whose effectiveness is increased accordingly. The higher its charge mounts, the more the repressive attitude acquires a fanatical character and the nearer it comes to conversion into its opposite, i.e., an enantiodromia. And the more highly charged the collective consciousness, the more the ego forfeits its practical importance. It is, as it were, absorbed by the opinions and tendencies of collective consciousness, and the result of that is the mass man, the ever-ready victim of some wretched "'ism." The ego keeps its integrity only if it does not identify with one of the opposites, and if it understands how to hold the balance between them. This is possible only if it remains conscious of both at once. However, the necessary insight is made exceedingly difficult not by one's social and political leaders alone, but also by one's religious mentors. They all want decision in favour of one thing, and therefore the utter identification of the the individual with a necessarily one-sided "truth." Even if it were a question of some great truth, identification with it would still be a catastrophe, as it arrests all further spiritual development, Instead of knowledge one then has only belief, and sometimes that is more convenient and therefore more attractive."
Note 124: It is very probable that the archetypes, as instincts, possess a specific energy which cannot be taken away from them in the long run. The energy peculiar to the archetype is normally not sufficient to raise it into consciousness. For this it needs a definite quantum of energy flowing into the unconscious from consciousness, whether because consciousness is not using this energy or because the archetype attracts it to itself. The archetype can be deprived of its supplementary charge, but not of its specific energy.
.JPG)