Response to John Dourley's The Religious Significance of Jung's Psychology
Dourley's assertion that Jung's thought excluded the possibility of a transcendent divinity that addresses human beings is challenged. Jung translated Kant's categories into psychological processes, but it is also possible to contend that the experience of the Kantian call to morality...
| Published in: | The international journal for the psychology of religion |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
[1995]
|
| In: |
The international journal for the psychology of religion
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Summary: | Dourley's assertion that Jung's thought excluded the possibility of a transcendent divinity that addresses human beings is challenged. Jung translated Kant's categories into psychological processes, but it is also possible to contend that the experience of the Kantian call to morality could be understood as more than an intrapsychic event. This possibility, that some reality stands over against humans, can also apply to Eastern religions that are nontheistic. There is a cosmic reality to which devotees of these religions are called to relate. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1532-7582 |
| Reference: | Kritik von "The Religious Significance of Jung's Psychology (1995)"
Kritik in "Response to Bock and Coward (1995)" |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The international journal for the psychology of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr0502_3 |