Global Thought, Shadow Projection and Coloniality: A Quantum Case for Religious Practice

Religious practice is essential for global thought because it cultivates a personal relationship with the transcendent, helping to resolve inner antitheses that otherwise get projected onto others as shadow projections—a key driver of crises like Israel's genocide in Gaza. Drawing on Carl Jung's quantum metaphysics and Enrique Dussel's liberation philosophy, the argument shows how rigid dogmatism in institutionalized religion stifles this relationship, while genuine religious practice challenges dogmas and reconciles us with the shadows they cast. Dussel emphasizes grappling with history and materiality to understand infinite responsibility to the Other through recognition of difference, enabling truly global thinking.

Study at a glance

Abstract

In this paper I argue that religious practice is key to global thought. To demonstrate this, I explore the work of two thinkers: psychologist Carl Jung and Marxist liberation philosopher Enrique Dussel. As a means of addressing the implicit ontological biases which close the minds of many to spiritual wisdom, my discussion makes use of the quantum metaphysics developed by Jung in correspondence with his patient, Wolfgang Pauli. For Jung ([1957] 2010, 13), real religion is defined by an ongoing relationship to the transcendent, while the rigid dogmatism common to modern institutionalised religion serves to stifle this relationship. Religious practices help us to cultivate our own relationship to the transcendent, and thus to resolve antitheses which we will otherwise externalise into the social world, projecting the qualities which we do not want to see in ourselves onto the Other (Jung [1957] 2010, 3). This “shadow” projection is a key driver of the ongoing crisis in global thought, exemplified by Israel’s genocide in Gaza (Albanese 2024). Furthermore, the coloniality and dehumanisation wrought by shadow projection is both perpetuated and capitalised upon by military-industrial-complexes which are materially incentivised to manufacture consent for endless wars in defence of “liberal-democratic” ideals. Religious practices are key means of challenging dogmas, religious, liberal, conservative or otherwise, and reconciling ourselves with the shadows they cast. Dussel shows us what this means on the collective level, emphasising the need to grapple with history, and with the materiality of the present, if we are to understand our infinite responsibility to the Other through recognition of their difference, and, thus, to think globally.