Coronavirus: does its activation of archetypes of evil cause added psychological suffering?

Fear and grief caused by the pandemic have produced a powerful unconscious narrative in the collective psyche that the coronavirus is driven by an innately evil, and possibly divine, force. The resulting archetypal dimension of fear causes an extra layer of psychological suffering in individuals. This paper discusses how and why this narrative was created and why it is so compelling by looking at 1) the myth-making nature of the human psyche, 2) the psychodynamics of fear that drive the narrative, 3) the properties of the coronavirus and the pandemic that activate negative poles of some archetypes, in particular, archetypes of evil, and 4) asking how analytical psychology can help ease psychological suffering caused by these negative narratives, where one possibility is to invoke the transcendent function. The author’s personal experiences as both biochemist and analytical psychologist elucidate how the transcendent function can promote healing.     

A VIROCENTRIC PERSPECTIVE ON EVIL

Abstract. The coronavirus pandemic has stirred interest in viruses. This has been accompanied by a proliferation of popular works trying to explain how viruses fit into the Christian worldview. In an anthropocentric perspective, viruses are easily regarded as malicious entities. This article, however, shows that a proper understanding of the biology of viruses actually adds another level of complexity to our perception of good and evil. Interestingly, this additional layer of complexity might help us solve some of the most urgent difficulties in the discussion about good and evil, if we recognize the subjective nature of what we call natural evil. We need to be more nuanced not merely in our theological discussion about good and evil, but also in the way we talk about viruses.     

Crime: Self and Society: Psychoanalytical Perspectives on Taking Responsibility and Moving Forward

The occurrence of a tragic and unnecessary act of evil (crime) induces in us a need to search for blame, to find who or what is responsible. Often this search amounts in a Kleinian splitting between personal and social responsibility – we either blame the person or blame the society, or oscillate between the two. In fact, even movement into a more integrated, depressive position does not solve the problem—the evil of the event is too hot to be contained anywhere. True healing from crime will not result by perfecting the “assigning blame” mechanism in ourselves or our criminal justice system, but rather when we recognize the futility of that search. To use Lowe’s concept of creative limits, only by recognizing our own limitedness will creative and healing spaces that allow the return to innocence occur. Jessica Van Denend serving as an intern chaplain at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility for the past 2 years, became increasingly interested in the complexity of societal and personal complexes wrapped up in the criminal justice processes, and their manifestation in the prison system. While studying under Prof. Ann Ulanov (in the Psychiatry and Religion program at Union Theological Seminary), the author had time to examine what some psychoanalytical tools might have to say about crime and its repercussions.     

Review

Book reviewed in this article:
Jean Porter, Natural and Divine Law: Reclaiming the Tradition for Christian Ethics     

绝对与人类自由--谢林《自由论》探析

本文集中探讨谢林的《自由论》及其在西方哲学史上的意义,作者在指出这部著作不足的同时,充分肯定谢林对自由及与之相关问题的发问,并认为这是近现代西方哲学对人类自身命运的一次重要思考。     

A Model for Structural Changes of Belief

The paper suggests a way of modeling belief changes within the tradition of formal belief revision theories. The present model extends the scope of traditional proposals, such as AGM, so as to take care of “structural belief changes” – a type of radical shifts that is best illustrated with, but not limited to, instances of scientific discovery; we obtain AGM expansions and contractions as limiting cases. The representation strategy relies on a non-standard use of a semantic machinery. More precisely, the model seeks to correlate knowledge states with interpretations of a given formal language L, in such a way that the epistemic state of an agent at a given time gives rise to a picture of how things could be, if there weren’t anything else to know. Interpretations of L proceed along supervaluational ideas; hence, the model as a whole can be seen as a particular application of supervaluational semantics to epistemic matters. Presented by Hannes Leitgeb     

Demons are everywhere: The effects of belief in pure evil,demonization, and retribution on punishing criminal perpetrators

Do preconceived beliefs about evil influence perceptions and punishments of those who harm others? We examined the effects of belief in pure evil (BPE), demonization, and belief in retribution on punishment of a stereotypically (vs. non-stereotypically) evil criminal. Participants punished the stereotypically evil perpetrator more (i.e., greater recommended jail time, opposition to parole, and support for his execution) because of increases in demonization (i.e., greater perceptions of the criminal as wicked, evil, and threatening), but not increases in retributive feelings. However, regardless of the criminal’s exhibited stereotypically evil traits, greater BPE predicted harsher punishment of the perpetrator; both greater demonization and stronger retributive feelings mediated the relationship between BPE and severe punishments. Further, effect sizes indicated BPE (vs. the evilness manipulation) more strongly predicted demonization and punishment. Thus, some individuals naturally see perpetrators as demons, and retributively punish them, whether or not there is more explicit stereotypic evidence of their evil dispositions.     

荀子的经济制度伦理思想及其现代价值

当前学界对于荀子经济制度伦理思想的研究十分少见。荀子的经济制度及其制度伦理蕴涵源于人性恶的道德起源论,义利辩证统一的义利观、“欲”、“物”“相持而长”的可持续发展观和朴素的分配正义观念是其经济制度伦理思想的主体内涵,它对于当前我国的伦理经济和市场经济体制建设主要在“义利两有”、“以义制利”的制度伦理导向可以促进“经济人”和“道德人”的有效统一,保障市场经济秩序的稳定和谐与可持续性发展,以及树立分配正义观念,促进制度创新,提高制度运作效率等方面有一定的启示意义。     

"良知坎陷":牟宗三的思想脉络与理论开展

在牟宗三哲学发展中,"良知坎陷"说有认识论、历史文化论和存有论三义。"良知坎陷"说的理论开展,既表现为存有论意义上的理论综合,也体现在以"道德实践"对"坎陷"所作的理论规定。在"良知坎陷"说中,存在着文化诉求与哲学思考的思想纠结。由于对"坎陷"之辩证义的独特规定,牟宗三存有论意义的"良知坎陷"既不同于黑格尔绝对精神的辩证开展,也改造了康德现象与物自身超越区分的理论架构,展露出"彻底的唯心论"的基本意蕴,具有新的理论意义。