I see this differently. The ride is not over, as much as, the balance is achieved. The two made into one. Perfect assimilation, and the achievement of personality.Yet consider if the two riders were to sit still in horizontal equilibrium--all processing has stopped; true, a balance has been achieved, but the ride is over, i.e., the process of individuation and the development of personality is stymied because the energy has been withdrawn given a lack of tension between the opposites.
Once the balance is obtained, I feel the ego is no longer required. Interestingly…The reason why this analogy doesn't work as well, though, as the standard analogy that I shared is because the ego doesn't have its necessary role; and the fulcrum as ego doesn't work because the fulcrum is invariably stable no matter what the process. Neither does the fulcrum as the threshold of consciousness work because it’s is incapable of being moved, i.e., raised or lowered.
IMHO, striking the balance brings us to this “higher consciousness” if only because the persona has been tamed and subdued to live in accord with the instinct of humankind.“As a matter of fact, this psyche, which in Indian philosophy is called the “higher” consciousness, corresponds to what we call in the West call the “Unconscious””.- Jung
I perfectly agree here. The see-saw may eternally go back and forth. I’m just an idealist.To strive for wholeness does not mean to be balanced in functioning at all times, and should you aim for that, you'll never be satisfied with the progress that you do make. Individuation is an ongoing process as is the creation of personality.
I understand your point. The best I can hope for is to strive to achieve balance. However, I’m pretty good at “balancing the beans”.And, Neoplato, wholeness is an ideal that is rarely if ever achieved in actuality; the individuation process continues until we take our last breath. It’s those extraordinary figures such as the Christ or the Buddha who can be said to have achieved wholeness and a completed individuation. Our goal—well, mine, anyway, since, who knows, perhaps it is within your potential to achieve a completed individuation --is to ever approach wholeness. We're in a continual state of becoming.
“Conscious, Unconscious, and Individuation” CW 9 i, pars. 489-524Would you please do me a favor, Neoplato, when you have the time? I’d like to know the title of the essay that you’re referencing with this quote and, if you can locate it in your book, its original source since I don’t have the same compilation of essays that you do. It’s unclear to me what the link is supposed to be between these men’s ideas as you presented it. Thanks.
Again, I see your point Cindy. However, I am also trying to assimilate Jung and his terminology into my schema. From what I can tell, in Jungian terms, the ego can’t be dissolved because this is the vehicle that lets us “think”. However, in other models, the term “ego” is more aligned to the idea of persona.Neoplato, I’m sorry to say that you’ve misunderstood. The ego does not “disappear” during the course of personality development and individuation—it grows ever more in its functioning and influence as one approaches wholeness. “Assimilation” refers to the integration of previously unconscious contents and processes into conscious awareness.
When I compare these other models to Jung, the “elimination of the ego” can only mean in Jungian terms, the balance of the consciousness and unconsciousness. When that occurs I can see the ego becoming nothing more than a pass-through regulating function. It still may exist, but it may be perceived as being eliminated.
I guess you can say that I'm trying to assimilate "assimilations". But then again, that's what us Neo-Platonists enjoy doing.