this sounds much like the humanecology and the philosophy of humanecology idea. I appreciate it however it is presented.

I attended a school that onlyoffered one degree...it was called humanecology...we were required to take a humanecology core class where racheal carson was a name dropped frequently as an introduction to the class as well as the ideology of genetic engineering to animal and human behavior was discussed etc,and etc.,.

From what I could read it seemed to ride the same wave as what I quickly read through on the link you provided for Ecopsychology. I smiled when I saw it, I thought- how refreshing of an angle.

Thanks for the read Althea.

That quote, Althea, is poppycock. I am close to the workings of Pacifica Graduate Institute (of Jungian Depth Psychology, Clinical Psychology, Mythology) and ecopsychology has been part of the core curriculum for more than a decade. Your author is correct about the limited production of textbooks; the Pacifica courses are support by extensive "bound" compilations of articles as well as annotated readings lists for further study. Jungian approaches to psychology have long delved deeply into the human psyche's relationships with its internal and external environment, including the natural environment. Modern urbanized folks have been divorced from Nature for many generations. Thus this current surge in interest about "getting back to the earth", 21st century style.

Marshall, did you notice that the quote is from 1991? I'm meaning to dismiss the Pacifica Graduate Institute program. I sent for info about Pacifica's graduate program in 1984 or '85 when I used to spend a lot of time reading Jung. I even visited the Jung Institute in Zurich as a sort of pilgrimage. Jung was one of the people I first thought of when reading the link above, wondering if his philosophy may be a foundation for some of the ideas. There are a few schools attempting to work these ideas into their curriculum. I doubt that alienation from nature is listed in the MMPI.

I guess what I was asking of others is whether you think people's alienation from nature is so complete that it isn't even recognized as a problem?

This is a link to an article about Jung's thoughts on nature.

Here is a link that might be useful: resurgence

Vygotsky was into the Zone of Approximate Development, more into education but the application of how ones environment effects ones development in geometric ways. It can also be the Zone of approximate Disaster as so the case seems with how the alienation from nature has occured. Vygotsky wasnt as big of a name as Jung... and Jung as Althea's link spoke of and as I remember studying him was an embodiment with nature. I have a difficult time taking him too seriously as he seems too much a "free spirit" . I got a bit turned off by Jung as he was a spin off of Freud.

I do like the idea of having awareness in regards to acting in ways to help out with our environment.

Althea, sorry for missing the Fox publ. date. And many thanks to the link to Meridith Sabini's excellent essay. I met her for the first time last week at Pacifica where she has taken up what I think to be an Adjunct Professorship for the coming academic term. I have to be enthusiastic about her because she was so appreciative of our organic gardens and farm that she looked for me and personally ordered produce to take back to Berkeley.

It's a bit eerie to read her thoughts after speaking on similar issues of sustainability and the value of having an eco-centered horticultural and agricultural landscape at Pacifica for the benefit of students (and faculty/staff) and the larger community.

Cool Marshall. Synchronicity huh? :~)

I meant to say in my last post, I'm [NOT] meaning to ... . I hope it was understood to mean that because of the context.

Sue, I couldn't disagree with you more about your belief that Jung was a spinoff of Freud. (I also visited Freud's office in Vienna on somebody elses pilgrimage.) Freud remained firmy rooted in a biological reductionism of his own invention. Jung went far beyond his own personal and cultural trappings in both his theories and sources of knowledge. It is hard to find a more open minded 20th century scientist, at least in this field. I'm not familiar with Vygotsky.

This topic title sounds more like future smear ammo for Limbaugh....get ready for "Ecopsychopaths".

Jung's writings remind me alittle of Thoreau's contemplations at Walden Pond on the simple life spent close to nature.

Vgkg, I suspect you are among the many who didn't read the link (Gasp!). Robert Greenway coined the term psychoecology in 1963. Successors of the idea wisely chose not to go with that term to avoid the very hecklers you note, who would bend the term to read psycho-ecologists.

Good analogy KT. Both recognize association with nature as an essential need, not a romanticized yearning, but a here and now everyday participation.

You are quite the perceptive one O' Althea. Got thru the first paragraph only....:o( vgkg

Ahem. Vgkg, did you mean the italicized introduction? This is included in the first paragraph:

"One of the many paths of ecopsychologyÂs origins can be traced to Robert Greenway, who (while serving as a writer for Abraham Maslow) coined the term psychoecology in 1963 in an essay he wrote at Brandies University, Boston (Greenway, 1994, 1999)."

/;~)

One of the many "paths" LOL!...slipped right by me...

Jung studied under Freud and left because he didnt like where Freud was venturing in his work. However, being a ministers son and being married, I felt (Jung)his use of muses or his patients was inappropriate and unprofessional (IMO) If I was his wife, I would not have served his mistresses dinner (I would have burned it and then thrown it on her and kicked them all out).
And he didnt just have one affair either, and his affairs lasted for quite a while.

But then he was more open minded than I could ever be.

However, if I could get by that (and not be so closed minded )I could whole heartedly agree with Jung and the influences he served as a forerunner of the hippie movement and as a great influence to helping humans get back to nature. He was very influencial and probably will be to the end of time.

Sorry, didnt mean to slam this one Althea, I guess I believe in the institution of marriage...or at least feel I need to avoid the "free love" as part of my marriage.

I always enjoy reading your comments vgkg, no matter where the path may lead.

Sue, see my earlier post regarding biological reductionism.

Back at ya Althea....I readily admit that my paths lead down some unfamiliar (ie, what the?) roads at times.

I am hoping you are steering me in a direction of enlightenment and not a slap on the hand!:)

Wasnt it Jung who was good buddies with Freud. Later it was Freud who was too uncomfortable and denied the friendship thus pushing Jung away to go places that Freud was not able to.
In retrospect perhaps Jung saw that he was a threat to Freud or just frustrated him so. Anyways, what Jung brought on was just lables for what was already out there. He brought the more understanding to the table about where we came from as humans unique and why people are the way they are conscienciously and unconsciencoulsy. I personally love the animus/anima and the archetypal theories- it works for me.

Jung was very connected and metaphysical so much more rich (open minded)than Freud ( I hated the horse and hans diagnoisis and how Freud handled that one) .

I agree with your statement that Freud as a biological reductionist.

Sue, I think the rap on the head helped :)

I don't agree with everything Jung has written, although I allow the possibility that he might be right. A good place to start is by understanding the theories before resorting to cliches to reject them.

IMU, Freud was dogmatic with his insistence that conciousness be limited to the personal and subjective. Jung's collective understanding is a metaphysical position Freud wouldn't touch. A good explanation of the differing positions, from Jung's point of view, can be found in "On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry". Another essay worth reading is "The Difference Between Eastern and Western Thinking", if you're interested in following this line of thinking further.

I haven't read much Freud, "Civilization and Its Discontents", The one about pyschoanalysis - Basic Writings(?) and a case history, "Dora", in a womens studies class which left us on the floor in tears of laughter.