Quotes About Individual

NevÄ›domá anima je vyslovenÄ› bezvztahovou a autoerotickou bytostí, která netouží po ni?em, kromÄ› úplného ovládnutí jedince, ?ímž se muž stává zvláÅ¡tním a nepÃ…â"¢íznivým zp?sobem zženÅ¡tilým.

Jung believed that there was a natural and proper path of development for each individual; and that neurosis might actually be a valuable signal which indicated when, through intellectual arrogance, a false set of values or an evasion of responsibilities, a person was straying too far from his own true path.

Psihologia individului corespunde îns? psihologiei naÈ›iunilor. Ceea ce fac naÈ›iunile face È™i individul È™i, atâta timp cât face individul, face È™i naÈ›iunea. Doar schimbarea atitudinii individului este începutul schimb?rii psihologiei naÈ›iunii. Marile probleme ale omenirii nu au fost niciodat? rezolvate prin legi generale, ci întotdeauna doar prin reînnoirea atitudinii individului.

Es sorprendente la transformación que se opera en el carácter de un individuo al irrumpir en él las fuerzas colectivas. Un ser humano afable y sensato puede tornarse un maníaco o una bestia salvaje.

In order to free the fiction of the sovereign State – in other words, the whims of those who manipulate it – from every wholesome restriction, all sociopolitical movements tending in this direction invariably try to cut the ground from under the religions. For, in order to turn the individual into a function of the State, his dependence on anything beside the State must be taken from him.

Ä°nanc?n temeli bilinç deÄŸil, bireyin inanc?n? Tanr? ile dolays?z yolla iliÅŸkilendiren, spontan dinsel deneyimdir.

The relation of the individual to his fantasy is very largely conditioned by his relation to the unconscious in general, and this in turn is conditioned in particular by the spirit of the age. According to the degree of rationalism that prevails, the individual will be more disposed or less to have dealings with the unconscious and its products.

The mass crushes out the insight and reflection that are still possible with the individual, and this necessarily leads to doctrinaire and authoritarian tyranny if ever the constitutional State should succumb to a fit of weakness.

When religious symbols that are partly different from those we know emerge from the unconscious of an individual, it is often feared that these will wrongfully alter or diminish the officially recognized religious symbols. This fear even causes many people to reject analytical psychology and the entire unconscious.

Interpretation in any given case depends as always on individual circumstances and must be modified accordingly.

In both its positive and its negative aspects the anima/animus relationship is always full of "animosity," i.e., it is emotional, and hence collective. Affects lower the level of the relationship and bring it closer to the common instinctual basis, which no longer has anything individual about it. Very often the relationship runs its course heedless of its human performers, who afterwards do not know what happened to them.

The individual who is not anchored in God can offer no resistance on his own resources to the physical and moral blandishments of the world.

It is in the nature of political bodies always to see the evil in the opposite group, just as the individual has an ineradicable tendency to get rid of everything he does not know and does not want to know about himself by foisting it off on somebody else. Nothing has a more diverse and alienating effect upon society than this moral complacency and lack of responsibility, and nothing promotes understanding and rapprochement more than the mutual withdrawal of projections.

The relation to ideas can be more emotional or more reflective according to whether the individual belongs more to the feeling or to the thinking type.

But in the second case the subject is and remains the centre of every interest.

If statistical reality is the only one, then that is the sole authority. There is then only one condition, and since no contrary condition exists, judgment and decision are not only superfluous but impossible. Then the individual is bound to be a function of statistics and hence a function of the State or whatever the abstract principle of order may be called.

Myth is more individual and expresses life more precisely than does science. Science works with concepts of averages which are far too general to do justice to the subjective variety of an individual life.

An epoch is like an individual; it has its own limitations of conscious outlook, and therefore requires a compensatory adjustment. This is effected by the collective unconscious in that a poet, a seer or a leader allows himself to be guided by the unexpressed desire of his times and shows the way, by word or deed, to the attainment of that which everyone blindly craves and expects—whether this attainment results in good or evil, the healing of an epoch or its destruction.

Here, it seems to me, Schiller has put his finger on something very important, namely, the possibility of separating out an individual nucleus, which can be at one time the subject and at another the object of the opposing functions, though always remaining distinguishable from them. This separation is as much an intellectual as a moral judgment. In one case it comes about through thinking, in another through feeling.

Kdo to ale vlastnÄ› je ten stát? Je to nahromadÄ›ní vÅ¡ech bezvýznamných, z nichž se skládá. Kdybychom jej mohli personifikovat, získali bychom individuum, ?i spíÅ¡e monstrum, které by stálo v duchovním i etickém ohledu daleko pod úrovní vÄ›tÅ¡iny jednotlivc?, jež ho tvoÃ…â"¢í, neboÃ…Â¥ stát pÃ…â"¢edstavuje nejvýÅ¡e umocnÄ›nou psychologii masy.

La verdadera historia del espíritu no se conserva en los libros doctos, sino en el organismo vivo, anímico, de cada individuo.

As I argued, when you delegate productivity decisions to the individual, it's not surprising that you end up stuck with a simple, flexible, lowest common denominator–style workflow like the hyperactive hive mind.

Generally speaking, as knowledge work makes more complex demands of the labor force, it becomes harder to measure the value of an individual's efforts.

In a post-Enlightenment world we have tasked ourselves to identify what's meaningful and what's not, an exercise that can seem arbitrary and induce a creeping nihilism. "The Enlightenment's metaphysical embrace of the autonomous individual leads not just to a boring life," Dreyfus and Kelly worry; "it leads almost inevitably to a nearly unlivable one.