Naturalism, Religiosity and Panpsychism: two distinct paths for William James and Carl Jung.
PsyArXiv April 4, 2023 preprint DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/cu2j9 (opens in new tab)
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractWilliam James and Carl Jung, despite both rejecting reductive materialism, diverged in their responses to naturalism and religiosity. James remained a naturalist who defended a pragmatic, pluralistic view of religious experience, while Jung developed a psychological system that treated religious symbols as archetypal expressions of the collective unconscious. Panpsychism, the view that mind is a fundamental feature of reality, appears as a shared but differently interpreted theme: James entertained a panpsychist metaphysics grounded in pure experience, whereas Jung's panpsychism was more symbolic and aligned with his concept of the unus mundus. The essay traces how each thinker's path reflects distinct commitments to science, metaphysics, and the sacred.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Argues that William James and Carl Jung took distinct intellectual paths from a shared concern with religious experience, with James embracing naturalism and Jung developing a panpsychist metaphysics. |
Abstract
Naturalism, Religiosity and Panpsychism: two distinct paths for William James and Carl Jung.