Jung as psychologist of religion and Jung as philosopher of religion

Abstract: Is it possible to be both a psychologist and a philosopher? Is it possible for a psychologist, or more generally a social scientist, to use social scientific findings to make philosophical claims? Specifically, is it possible for a social scientist to use social scientific findings to determine the existence of God? Did Jung profess to be only a psychologist or also a philosopher? If he professed to be both, did he enlist his psychological findings to make philosophical claims? Specifically, did he enlist his psychological findings to determine the existence of God?     

Japanese religion as ritual order

It is argued in this paper that beneath the superficial analysis of Japanese ‘religions’ such as Buddhism, Shinto, Confucianism and the New Religions, there is one dominant ideological complex which, following some Japanese scholars, can conveniently be dubbed ‘The Japanese Religion’ or Nihonkyo. This Japanese religion is a ritual order based on the hierarchical concept of ‘ie’ and its variations such as ‘kigyoushugi‘¹ at the level of the company and ‘katei‘² at the domestic level. This ritual order pervades all major institutions in Japan and the main mechanism for its reproduction is the school system. In analysing the latter a distinction between training and education is adopted, and it is argued that the concept of liberal education, which is based on the concept of the autonomous rational and moral individual, is essentially missing from the Japanese school system which is better described as a system of training. It is suggested further that training can be linked conceptually with ritual: training is a form of ritualized behaviour though with a heavily pragmatic content. It is hoped that the approach to Japanese religion which is argued here will prove more fruitful in the Religious Studies context than one which begins with an explicit or implicit concept of religion centred on beliefs about salvation, the supernatural and life after death.     

Psychoanalysis as medicine,psychoanalysis as religion

The author explores unfavorable comparisons between psychoanalysts and medical psychiatry, tracing the crisis in the mental health fields created by managed care. This current crisis is traced to an historical identification with the medical profession and a more recent dependence on third-party payments. He suggests reorganizing the profession as a religion or spiritual exercise as a way out of the crisis and as a way of revitalizing its practice.Richard A. Friedman, Ph.D., is a psychoanalyst in private practice in New York City, supervisor at the Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Study Center, and a faculty member and training analyst at the New York Center for Psychoanalytic Training     

Psychologic exploration of neurosis patients as a diagnostic-therapeutic process

A structure of exploration is presented as a hypothetic model of conditions of symptoms. The concept of exploration and difficulties of its realization are illustrated by a practical example.     

Psychotherapy as religion: Pros and cons

Psychotherapy and religiousness are closely linked without being identical. This theme is explored in the relationship between therapist and client, in a faith development theory, and in feminist perspectives which present potentials for transforming religiousness and psychotherapy. The main critique of psychotherapy as religiousness is its lack of both communal and ecological dimensions.     

Guilt and/or self-esteem as consequences of religion

Our discussion begins with a consideration of the various types of religion and of guilt. Both religion and morality function in different ways from individual to individual. All these factors need to be taken into account before we can turn to treatment for the painful experience of guilt and bring about an improved self-esteem.