{"title":"诺斯罗普·弗莱,c.g.荣格,与事物的大计划:绘制心理神话宇宙","authors":"G. McCullough","doi":"10.1086/723647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Northrop Frye and C. G. Jung both attempted to summarize their respective life’s work in the form of a grand diagram. Remarkably, these two diagrams are virtually identical in both form and content, and they seem to have been formulated independently. Both diagrams take the dual form of an axis mundi with four segments and a circle with four quadrants, and both are defined using the Eastern concept of the mandala. The diagrams attempt to map the development of the Western psyche (Jung) and its expression in myth and literature (Frye) over some two thousand years of the common era. While the scope of these schemas offers a stunning panorama, at their heart are four religious symbols. Frye, following biblical symbolism, called them (1) the Mountain, (2) the Garden, (3) the Cave, and (4) the Furnace. Jung, following certain Gnostic sources, called them (1) Anthropos, (2) Shadow, (3) Paradise, and (4) Lapis. We will journey through this fourfold kaleidoscope and conclude with some reflections on the narrowing of horizons in the contemporary academy of religion. Our current methods, and the objects they reveal, have become largely restricted to only one quadrant in this grand schema: the fourth quadrant, which saw the rise of modern scientific thinking. By using a subordinate category (modern science) to try to understand a superordinate category (religion), it is not surprising that our discipline has lost its way.","PeriodicalId":45199,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Northrop Frye, C. G. Jung, and the Grand Scheme of Things: Mapping the Psycho-Mythical Cosmos\",\"authors\":\"G. McCullough\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/723647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Northrop Frye and C. G. Jung both attempted to summarize their respective life’s work in the form of a grand diagram. Remarkably, these two diagrams are virtually identical in both form and content, and they seem to have been formulated independently. Both diagrams take the dual form of an axis mundi with four segments and a circle with four quadrants, and both are defined using the Eastern concept of the mandala. The diagrams attempt to map the development of the Western psyche (Jung) and its expression in myth and literature (Frye) over some two thousand years of the common era. While the scope of these schemas offers a stunning panorama, at their heart are four religious symbols. Frye, following biblical symbolism, called them (1) the Mountain, (2) the Garden, (3) the Cave, and (4) the Furnace. Jung, following certain Gnostic sources, called them (1) Anthropos, (2) Shadow, (3) Paradise, and (4) Lapis. We will journey through this fourfold kaleidoscope and conclude with some reflections on the narrowing of horizons in the contemporary academy of religion. Our current methods, and the objects they reveal, have become largely restricted to only one quadrant in this grand schema: the fourth quadrant, which saw the rise of modern scientific thinking. By using a subordinate category (modern science) to try to understand a superordinate category (religion), it is not surprising that our discipline has lost its way.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45199,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGION\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/723647\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723647","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Northrop Frye, C. G. Jung, and the Grand Scheme of Things: Mapping the Psycho-Mythical Cosmos
Northrop Frye and C. G. Jung both attempted to summarize their respective life’s work in the form of a grand diagram. Remarkably, these two diagrams are virtually identical in both form and content, and they seem to have been formulated independently. Both diagrams take the dual form of an axis mundi with four segments and a circle with four quadrants, and both are defined using the Eastern concept of the mandala. The diagrams attempt to map the development of the Western psyche (Jung) and its expression in myth and literature (Frye) over some two thousand years of the common era. While the scope of these schemas offers a stunning panorama, at their heart are four religious symbols. Frye, following biblical symbolism, called them (1) the Mountain, (2) the Garden, (3) the Cave, and (4) the Furnace. Jung, following certain Gnostic sources, called them (1) Anthropos, (2) Shadow, (3) Paradise, and (4) Lapis. We will journey through this fourfold kaleidoscope and conclude with some reflections on the narrowing of horizons in the contemporary academy of religion. Our current methods, and the objects they reveal, have become largely restricted to only one quadrant in this grand schema: the fourth quadrant, which saw the rise of modern scientific thinking. By using a subordinate category (modern science) to try to understand a superordinate category (religion), it is not surprising that our discipline has lost its way.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Religion is one of the publications by which the Divinity School of The University of Chicago seeks to promote critical, hermeneutical, historical, and constructive inquiry into religion. While expecting articles to advance scholarship in their respective fields in a lucid, cogent, and fresh way, the Journal is especially interested in areas of research with a broad range of implications for scholars of religion, or cross-disciplinary relevance. The Editors welcome submissions in theology, religious ethics, and philosophy of religion, as well as articles that approach the role of religion in culture and society from a historical, sociological, psychological, linguistic, or artistic standpoint.