Note from Noah, October 17, 1999

To the BCN Group:

I think Anne has composed a very informative summary of Jung's work with regards to collective unconsciousness, Archetypes, Anima and Animus, psyche vs. soul, etc. I'd like to talk a little more about the psyche, as presented by Jung. As a preface to this discussion, I'd like to say that I'm sure many people are much more familiar with Jung than I, so feel free to correct me if I go off the deep end. I also want to say that I am only vaguely aware of current Gaia work, so I hope not to offend.

To begin, the collective unconscious is a term used, by Jungians, to describe all unconscious thought processes that are common among humanity. This covers the broad realm of what are called archetypes, which can be considered as residing within the realm of the collective unconscious. Thus, the thought is that all of humanity shares an unconscious foundation in how they interact with their environment, both social and physical.

The psyche, as described by Jung, is "The totality of all psychic processes, conscious as well as unconscious" (quoted from Anne). It is easy to see, then, that the psyche of all humans may a common foundation in the collective unconscious. A logical extension of this would lead to the concept of a collective psyche. This would be an aggregate of all conscious and unconscious thought. In order to make this idea palatable, we must examine how conscious and unconscious thought can be "collective." Conscious thought can be thought of as the product of the interaction of one's unconscious thought processes and his or her current environment. Conscious thought has a unique position in that it both reacts to the environment and also shapes it.

Thus, one person's conscious thought has an effect, either direct or indirect, on the conscious thought of those around him or her. Unconscious thought, upon which conscious thought is dependent, is also influenced both by an individual's unique experiences. Assuming the collective unconscious to be shared among all humans, we can see that individual experiences are also shaped by the thought (and hence actions or inactions) of those around them.

As a simplified example, take a case of a man Fred and his son, Wally. Fred, as a young child, became lost in a cave and was rescued only after many traumatizing hours. His trauma then manifests itself as a phobia towards caves or dark, constricted spaces. Consequently, Wally is raised with little exposure to these environments, and is most likely warned of the dangers of such places. In Wally's interaction with his friends, he avoids playing in caves and passes on the stories about his father. Fred's unique experiences have become part of a collective psyche, affecting both conscious and unconscious thought patterns of others.

As the circle of communication spreads, the effect of an individual's unique experiences becomes more diffuse, leaving only those "unique" experiences which are widely experienced to make a significant mark on the collective psyche. So the collective psyche then becomes an aggregate of the collective unconscious and common experiences. I would then like to ask, what about other creatures that live on the earth? Do they, too, have a role in the collective psyche? Can there be a "collective psyche of the earth" which manifests itself as a force termed Gaia? Obviously, a person's experiences with flora and fauna will color his or her individual psyche, which then may or may not become part of the collective psyche. Only those experiences which are widely shared will become part of the collective psyche, so which types of experiences are those? They are experiences in which the fauna (or flora) behave in a "typical" manner. If we postulate the existence of a collective unconsciousness for animals (instincts, perhaps), then it becomes possible for the collective psyche to include the collective unconsciousness of all animals with which humans have repeated contact.

Postulating a collective unconsciousness of plants seems somewhat far fetched, but perhaps others have more convincing arguments that would suggest their inclusion as well.

So, from basic concepts about the psyche and collective unconscious, it is possible to conjure the image of a collective psyche, consisting of all predominant thought patterns of all forms of life on the earth.

Is this a valid image? What ramifications does this have? Is this perhaps a theory of Gaia that could become widely accepted and studied? Those are questions I leave to people better qualified than I.

Respectfully,

-Noah