Well, since I'm a pastor, it's difficult for me to start any kind of talk without going to the scripture to just kind of calm me down a little bit. So if you would turn to 2 Corinthians chapter 6 with me. 2 Corinthians chapter 6. And tonight we'll be looking at, of course, as was mentioned before, Jordan Peterson, and the title of the talk, which I just came up with about 30 seconds ago, would be a central Christian critique of Jordan Peterson. And so to begin, let's just start reading from 2 Corinthians 6, in verse 14. The scripture says, Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For ye are the temple of the living God. As God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord. And touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you. And now let's go together before our Father in a word of prayer. Father God, we come before you and Lord, we just thank you for the night that you've given to us. We thank you for the ability to come together and to study and to look at these things, these important issues of our time. And we just pray that you would give us all understanding in this matter. Lord, I pray that you'd be with me to help me to speak in a way that everyone will be able to understand. Lord, not to go off into rabbit trails on this, but to keep with the central issues that we're looking at tonight. And Lord, we just pray that in all things, of course, your son, Jesus Christ would be glorified. And it's in his name we pray. Amen. All right. So we're talking about Jordan Peterson. And a minute ago, Kyle said that Jordan Peterson is a phenomenon. And I'd just like to talk about him as a phenomenon for a minute. Of course, we might ask, who is Jordan Peterson? And he is a Canadian professor of psychology, clinical psychology. He is a YouTube personality and an author. And he began to receive a widespread reception just in the past 10 years or so. his current phase of entering into his public work that's been accepted. He began in the year 2013 where he opened up his YouTube account and he began to upload some of his materials to there, some lectures that he gave, some short interviews that he gave, and having to do with his beliefs on psychology that we'll be looking at, tonight. And until about the year 2016, he got a little bit of a following. A few people watched his videos, but not quite so many. He wasn't a household name yet. But in 2016, he began to oppose a bill called Bill C-16 in Canada. It was presented and passed by the Canadian Parliament, and this was a law that essentially said that certain government officials, certain government employees, could not refuse to use the preferred gender pronouns of transgendered persons. So if a biological man wanted to say that he was a woman, then these government officials could not legally refuse to use she, her pronouns. with this man. And he opposed this, calling it, rightly so he called it, an enforcement of speech that just goes beyond what is acceptable. And he uploaded several YouTube videos and made some lectures about that. And because of that, he started to gain a following. He was pushed into the front and so he started to get a sizable YouTube following since 2016. Durin, this time, after he had gotten this following, he published a couple of books. I have two of them here. These are not the only books that he's published. He published one other before he was popular, titled Maps of Meaning, and I don't have that in physical format, but these are the two books that he has written since he's become popular. The first is Twelve Rules for Life, An Antidote to Chaos. And in that book, he's trying to impose a sort of self-control on people. He wants to give people structure for their lives. He wants them to start picking up a routine. He wants them to follow certain self-imposed rules in order to get order back into their lives. As it says, an antidote to chaos. And then this book, which was just released this year, called Beyond Order, is the opposite side of that argument that he's trying to have, and we'll see why that is as we go on. But while this first book, Twelve Rules, had to do with Making a routine and making a structure in our lives. This book has to do with Leaving openness to disorder in our lives leaving openness to changing our routine to doing different things in our lives and in fact the title of this book beyond order It is derived from a book by Friedrich Nietzsche and the title of that book, which is beyond good and evil. So 12 rules for life and then beyond order or Beyond Good and Evil, where he got that title from. Anyway, he began to have some trouble in the past few years. He was hospitalized from the year 2019 until just the end of last year, 2020. And now he's only just starting to get back into his public work and uploading regularly on YouTube and having interviews and such. But as I said, he's become a big phenomenon. A lot of young people have really looked up to him as a kind of father figure, both young men and young women alike. They see that in our modern world, there's a lack of definite structure for young people. There's a lack of discipline that's taught to young people, and Jordan Peterson is teaching that. Jordan Peterson is providing that somewhat, especially with his first book we see. And Peterson, like Kyle said before, is extremely eloquent. He knows how to speak. He knows how to apply things and apply his principles to the lives of the people that he's talking to. in very practical ways. He knows how to speak to young people and apply these things to the specifics of their life. And it's something that really we could attempt to do a little bit better at. I believe that the church has always been a great and the pillar and ground of truth and will prevail. But nonetheless, we as individuals might do a little bit better in applying specifically what we're teaching to the lives of people. And so, that's Jordan Peterson, and we'll begin now to look at his ideas. And just a note before we get into them, is that we may mention a few mature themes here, a few themes that are found in Peterson and in Carl Young, which are, are not necessarily, they're age-sensitive, we'll just say, they're age-sensitive topics. And I've tried to minimize those, but we'll read through it anyway. So, like I said, we'll look at Peterson, but to understand Peterson, we have to understand another man. I've just spent a lot of time talking about Peterson, but I'll talk about another man for just a minute, and that is Carl Young. Carl Young is one of Peterson's strongest influences. Peterson is very open about his influences, he's told about his influences, and perhaps the most influential figure on him and his thought would be Carl Jung, and this is just an anthology that I have of Jung's books. Peterson often references him, he often says for himself that he relies on Jung, and I've never listened to a lecture or read a paragraph of Peterson where Jung was not at least implicitly behind that paragraph. So just quickly, Carl Jung, was a psychiatrist, he was a psychologist, a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who founded a school of psychology called Analytical Psychology and his work have been influential in many fields. He lived between 1875 and 1961. So he had a theory of psychology, and psychology is the theory or the way that we understand how the mind works and how the mind processes information and how we live based on that information. Jung's psychology was an evolutionary account of psychology. In the time that Carl Jung lived in, the latter part of the 19th century and into the 20th century, The evolutionary ideas were just kind of coming into their own. In fact, Darwin only published The Origin of the Species 16 years before Carl Jung was born. And so those ideas were just starting to really permeate academia and going into all the different corners. of it. And while Jung was studying psychiatry, these ideas were starting to take hold in psychiatry. They were asking questions like, what kinds of instincts did man inherit from his animal ancestors? or what might the psychological or the mental differences be between the various races of humanity? And so these were questions that were being asked by people at that time. It was commonplace. And Jung, of course, was no exception to this. He was in that time and he was in that milieu. And really, he took those ideas further than anyone before him had so far done. uh... and so when we look at young and i want us to really look at what young thought uh... i want us to to notice when peterson is drawing from young when he and young are in agreement on something in order to get a look into the mind of jordan peterson when he uses terms like god or when he used term like jesus christ uh... and and and such But to start let's start finally looking at this theory of psychology. And first we'll look at some terms in this psychology. We have to define these to get through. First we'll define ego or consciousness. Ego is in this psychology synonymous with consciousness. It is the individual that perceives something. It's you the you that is looking out from behind your eyes, the person that's perceiving, and all of the things that you're consciously aware of at the moment. That is what consciousness is. It is your field of consciousness. You and what you're paying attention to right now. So I'm paying attention to this room, I'm conscious of this room, I'm conscious of all of you, and I'm conscious that I'm the one perceiving all of this. Another term is the subconscious or the pre-conscious. They're kind of interchangeable terms. And these are mental things, like memories and emotions, that are not immediately conscious. So I'm conscious right now of the way that I'm feeling and the memories that I'm recalling, but I have other memories that I'm not conscious of right now. They are memories that I could recall later, that I could bring to consciousness later, but they're just not conscious right now and in a similar way i'm not conscious of the other room over there that is pre-conscious i could walk over and make it conscious but it is pre-conscious to me uh... and then finally there is the idea of the unconscious and these are memories and emotions and opinions and as we'll see psychological structures and processes that are not directly accessible to us. We cannot get to them. They are unconscious. We have no influence over them. We cannot recall them without going about it in a convoluted kind of way. And so they are unconscious and they cannot be immediately conscious to us. So ego or consciousness, what I'm aware of right now, what I'm paying attention to. Preconscious, which is things that I'm not immediately aware of, but I could become aware of later if I so chose. And there's the unconscious. These are things that are repressed. These are things that are unconscious in us that we cannot access. And so these are just some terms that I'll be throwing around as we move forward. Consciousness or ego, subconsciousness or pre-consciousness, and the unconsciousness. So now, what are some of the things that exist in that last category, unconsciousness? Let's talk about some of what Carl Jung and Jordan Peterson affirm are in the unconscious. And first we see in the unconscious there exists instincts. We all kind of know what instincts are. We know what they are in animals. We know kind of what they are in ourselves. But instincts of course are simple behaviors which are triggered by simple stimulus in an animal. and they are unconscious in the sense that they're not chosen to be acted on. So for instance if an animal feels hungry then it has by instinct a desire to eat. It feels hungry and so it has a desire to eat and a motivation to go out and find food. Another one would be a dog when he sees a cat running away from him. The dog doesn't choose to run after the cat or to choose to desire to run after the cat. He just runs after the cat by pure instinct or any other small animal. These instincts of course are inherited just by being born and Jung would say that they're inherited by evolution. They're just simple behaviors that are inherited from past generations. So we know what that is. And Jung took that kind of idea of an instinct a step further. When we think of instincts, we're thinking of simple behaviors and simple stimulus. So simple stimulus, the dog sees the cat, and the simple behavior, he chases after the cat, right? Jung thought of more complex instincts, which he called archetypes. These are behaviors and sort of instincts, meta-instincts, that have to do with more complex situations that we might find ourselves in. Like instincts, archetypes are unconscious. Archetypes work whether we are conscious of exactly how they work in our minds or not. How exactly they motivate us to do things or not. And they correspond with patterns of behavior. to kind of understand what this means, let's think of another kind of archetype. What is an archetype? An archetype, the word archetype, just simply means the first imprinter. It just means sort of a prototype or a proto-image for for something that comes after it. You might think about a mold being made for a toy in a factory. They make the mold, they pour the plastic into the mold, and they take the toy out. Well, the archetype is that mold that makes all of the different toys. And these archetypes are behavioral patterns or behavioral templates that are like instincts in that way. Another archetype in our existence would be the archetype of the family. Everybody, a universal pattern of human existence is that we have a mother and a father. We have a biological mother and a biological father. This is an archetype of human existence. And similarly there are universal patterns to what it means to be a good mother or a good father. There are behavioral patterns that are born into men and women just by being born, just by being human, for what it means to be, on an instinctive level, a good mother or a good father. This is what the idea of archetype is in Jung and in Peterson. So just think of archetypes as clusters of instincts, clusters of little instincts that have to do with being certain way or behaving a certain way like being a good father, being a good mother, being a good king, being a good... You name it. You name any situation we might find ourselves in. And so these are the archetypes for Jung. They're kind of instincts that are in us. And now, because they're unconscious, because they're in unconsciousness, we have to have some way of knowing about them, or they have to have some way of influencing us. If we can't just call to remembrance these archetypes to use them, how is it that they're any use to us? Well, they influence us through various different ways, various different unconscious ways by structuring the way that we perceive things, and the way that we express our own desires. So one way that Jung talked about this would be that the archetypes, they generate symbolism in our dreams. That they structure dreams in a certain way, in a certain kind of narrative in your dream. They tell a sort of story in your dream. in order to teach you something about, say, being a good father. They structure your dream in this way to teach you about these ways of being. And they also show up for Jung in mythologies and in religion that the religious stories and the mythological stories of the past are all just the same kind of narrative. That the archetypes are unconsciously influencing an individual or a group of individuals to come up with these stories that teach us something about being a good father or mother or what have you. In explaining the difference between archetypes and instincts, Jung writes in his work, Instinct and the Unconscious, he says, let us take as an example the incredibly refined instinct of propagation in the yucca moth. He's going to tell us about this particular kind of moth. He says, The flowers of the yucca plant open for one night only. The moth takes the pollen from one of the flowers and kneads it into a little pellet. Then it visits a second flower, cuts open the pistil, lays its eggs between the ovules, and then stuffs the pellet into the funnel-shaped opening in the pistil. Only once in its life does the moth carry out this complicated operation. So the moth is born and it only reproduces this one time on this one night of the year when the flower blooms for its only time and it carries out this really complex operation in order to lay its eggs. and it only does it one time and of course they don't have schools to teach this for moths so of course it has to do it by some kind of an instinct, it has to do it by some kind of very complex instinct and Jung continues by saying if we call instinct refined then the intuition which brings the instinct into play in other words the apprehension by means of the archetype must be something incredibly precise, even if we don't catch all of those words there, he's saying it must be incredibly detailed, incredibly precise. Thus the eucamoth must carry within it an image, as it were, of the situation that triggers off its instinct. this image enables it to recognize the yucca flower and its structure. So it's an incredibly detailed instinct that communicates its will to the moth by way of an image. And so he would say this is an archetype that is in moths, in these particular kind of moths. And he would say that the same would be true of us. That there are images or templates for images that we are given by our birth that teach us about living well in certain ways, that give us instincts about how we're to carry out these different things. and collectively all of these archetypes all of these images that we are born with in our minds Jung calls the collective unconscious this is the entirety of all of the different uh... images that we are born with uh... Edward Edinger who was an analytic psychologist he studied Jung he wrote in his book Ego and Archetype He says Jung's most basic and far-reaching discovery is the collective unconscious, or archetypal psyche. Through his researches, we now know that the individual psyche is not just a product of personal experience. it also has a pre-personal and trans-personal dimension. It's not just our experiences. We are born and we're kind of a blank slate and we go out into the world and we accumulate experiences and that's not all that's in us, according to Jung. According to Jung, there are things that came before us, that came first to our parents and our grandparents going back. and that those are in our mind, and that they're shared by all of us, and they're in the minds of us all. And so archetype therefore serves this purpose of regulating everyone's behavior, of teaching us how we're supposed to live in the world. Peterson, of course, often talks about archetypes. If anyone in here has listened to Peterson, read Peterson, then you've inevitably heard him talk about the archetypes. One place where he talks about it is in his YouTube lecture, Maps of Meaning, number nine, Patterns of Symbolic Representation. He talks about it. He's essentially saying the same thing that I'm saying here. He believes in archetypes. And for the most part, so far nothing really objectionable except for this evolutionary way of talking. There's not really anything objectionable except for that it's an evolutionary psychology for most of us in here. But now we'll start looking at some of these archetypes particularly and we'll start to get a feel for how this can be dangerous. And one of the archetypes, one of these images that Jung and Peterson say are in our consciousness or in our unconscious is the archetype of the shadow or we might call it the archetype of the evil doppelganger, the evil twin that we have. in our mind. The shadow archetype is the archetype or a collection of archetypes which represent socially unacceptable impulses that we have in us. They are impulses and instincts and tendencies in us that are either socially unacceptable or morally unacceptable to us. And because of that, we have repressed them. We've pushed them into the unconscious, and we've not allowed ourselves to express those things. So one such tendency might be the tendency for male aggression, that in especially our modern world, it's not really socially acceptable to express male aggression in the world. And so many people will thrust that instinct or that capacity to act aggressively into their unconscious. And that becomes For the individual it becomes this this image of the shadow self or this this image of the the self that does harm that hurts People that is in a sense evil and we'll see more of that as we go along young writes in his book ion chapter 2 he says closer examination of the dark characteristics that is the inferiorities Constituting the shadow reveals that they have an emotional nature, a kind of autonomy, and accordingly an obsessive or better possessive quality. So he says that the shadow is made up of these dark characteristics or these inferiorities that we have in ourselves and that is that is what the the archetype of the shadow is and one uh... image that he'll use for this uh... that's found in religion would be the satan image he would say that satan is the christian is one of the christian symbols for this shadow it is the the darker tendencies the evil tendencies that are within us that have been pushed into the unconscious uh... the shadow I'll just give an example of the shadow one more time. An example of this would be that a young man, say, has this male aggression and this desire to have some kind of authority in the world. But because he is, say, raised by a single mother, maybe he's raised in a situation that causes him to repress that desire in himself or that instinct in himself, he represses it and it becomes his shadow. It becomes the thing that he's psychologically afraid of in himself. And in this case, that desire to have authority, or for Jung, say, the archetype of the king, or the image of the king, will come forward in a disguised way. It'll be repressed, but it will still exert this pressure on the young man to try and cause him to express this male aggression. And since he's not able to do it overtly, he can't have authority for himself. Maybe he tries to steal that authority from other people by slander, by going behind their backs and lying about them and trying to take control of the situation. Notice we read earlier in Jung that he talked about how the shadow has a possessive quality, that it possesses in some way. And that's what he means by it. If this is repressed, that it can manifest itself in disordered behavior and actually it can for Jung manifest itself by mental illness and that's how he accounts for mental illness is that these archetypes are repressed, they're not allowed to function properly and so they find their own way to function. And so this is what the archetype of the shadow is. It's all of those things that are repressed in an individual. And Peterson, though it may come as a surprise, Peterson actually agrees with this concept. And in his book, Twelve Rules for Life, on page 288, He writes, Freud delved deeply into the latent, implicit content of dreams, which were often aimed, in his opinion, at the expression of some improper wish. Jung believed that every act of social propriety was accompanied by its evil twin, its unconscious shadow. Nietzsche investigated investigated the role played by what he termed resentment in motivating what were ostensibly selfless actions and often exhibited all too publicly. So Freud and Freud's idea of id, which is another story, and Jung's idea of the shadow and Nietzsche's idea of resentment, Peterson views these all as being the same thing, that they are unconscious forces which drive us to do certain things that we're not necessarily completely certain why we're doing them, because we've repressed these archetypes or these instincts into unconsciousness. And so now we finally come, I'd like to give a little bit, as we go along, some biblical analysis of the things that we come to as we come to some maybe objectionable ideas. And this idea of the shadow is not quite as objectionable as some of the other ideas, but we understand that it is a little objectionable. Turn to Ecclesiastes 7 verse 29. Ecclesiastes 7 and verse 29. The scripture says, Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright, but they have sought out many inventions. The Jungian account of the world and of the human psyche believes that man is partly evil by design. by our instincts, these things that have been built into us, these dark tendencies, remember, and later he'll even talk about explicitly evil tendencies within us, that they've been built into us as part of our design, as part of our evolutionary history. But the scripture says that God made man upright, but we have sought out many inventions. It was a conscious choice on man's part to go into sin, not an unconscious instinct that was driving him into sin. And so that's just a small point of criticism that we would have as Christians against the theology of Jung and the philosophy of Jung and Peterson. And so let's move forward and let's talk about another of these archetypes. And we'll talk about the archetype of the syzygy. That's an odd word, but the archetype of the syzygy, that's S-Y-Z-Y-G-Y. And these are called the polar archetypes. These are two opposing archetypes. The syzygy is a pair of archetypes that exist within the shadow between men and women. So they are sexual archetypes. that exist in the unconscious of men and women. The idea is that in every person there is an opposite gender image in their instincts. So this would be in a man, a man would have all of the instinctual elements of a woman in his psyche, in his mind, and for a woman there would be all of the instinctual elements of a man in her psyche, in her mind, and that these, because of the social propriety of that, and because of the morality of the day, Jung says that these would be pushed into the unconscious, that every man would push his unconscious feminine side, and he used the term anima, the anima, the The feminine tendencies he would push them into his unconsciousness so that he could present himself to the world as as being Masculine and that a woman would do the same for her animus or her masculine tendency. So these are these are contrasexual images or contrasexual instinct clusters that exist inside of every individual Young writes about this in his book ion again chapter 3 in paragraph 27 Since the anima is an archetype that is found in men, it is reasonable to suppose that an equivalent archetype must be present in women, for just as the man is compensated by his feminine element, so woman is compensated by a masculine. one. So he's talking about the anima and animus, these masculine and feminine elements in the opposite gender's mind. Jung also explains these in terms of two words, eros and logos. In Ion chapter three he writes, I use eros and logos merely as conceptual aids to describe the fact that woman's consciousness is characterized more by the connective quality of Eros than by the discrimination and cognition associated with Logos. In men, Eros, the function of relationship, is usually less developed than Logos. In women, on the other hand, Eros is an expression of their true nature, while their Logos is often only a regrettable accident. it gives rise to misunderstandings and annoying interpretations in the family circle and among friends. So he's saying that the Eros or the relation making property, the sort of, the sort of caring attitude that women have, that that is repressed in men into the unconscious and that the intellectual side, which is, uh, which he associates with men is usually repressed in the woman. And so that's the way that this works, is that these are two sets of instincts that exist between the sexes. And like the shadow, these tendencies towards acting out the opposite gender may be repressed and cause problems. Again, anything that's unconscious for Jung that's not allowed to be expressed can cause difficulties. In fact, this is the way that Jung explains homosexuality, is that he sees the homosexual as having developed his feminine tendencies while suppressing his masculine tendencies. And so those masculine tendencies he says are trying to be expressed in ion chapter three He writes he has lent he has learned these lessons only too well and remains true to his mother This naturally causes her the deepest anxiety when to her greater glory He turns out to be a homosexual for example and at the same time affords her an unconscious satisfaction That is positively mythological. So the he's he explains that, say, a man who is raised by a single mother and he represses his masculine tendencies and develops his feminine tendencies, that this is how a homosexual comes into existence. And the same would be true for, say, a man who has difficulty with too many women, with a lack of discernment about women, that he has developed his masculine tendencies But he has not learned anything about the opposite gender. He's not learned anything about women, say he was raised by a single father. And so he goes out and just says yes to any woman that will come his way. Peterson also speaks about the syzygy and he does so explicitly. This is not something that he's really hidden. He spoke about it in his 2015 lecture on YouTube titled, Personality Lecture Number 7, Depth Psychology, Carl Jung Part 2. And this is about the 29 minute mark he begins talking about the syzygy. He begins talking about these, the anima and the animus, the contrasexual tendencies in men and women. And so now let's, again, stop and look at this from the scripture, and so turn to Genesis chapter 2. There's no big surprise there, Genesis chapter 2. Genesis 2 and verse 18, and then we'll look at verse 21. The scripture says, And in verse 21, and the rib which the Lord God had taken from man made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called woman because she was taken out of man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. The account of the creation of the sexes in Genesis chapter 2 shows us that there was a definite design from God in making men and women like this. Their roles were cleanly defined in the beginning. And the purpose of God in making men with the potentials that they have even the potentials that we might consider somewhat more feminine, like the potential to be caring, or the potential to form relationships with one another, that even those, when they're being used properly, when they're being used according to their right design, are not feminine tendencies. They are masculine. They are just tendencies. which are being expressed in a masculine way. And we all know this ourselves. Christians are some of the most developed kinds of men in the aspect of caring, and yet we express that caring in masculine ways. We express that in cleanly masculine ways according to the purpose of God. God made men and women with a specific design, with a specific set of capacities and tendencies and instincts, and it's how those are expressed that make them masculine or feminine. If they're misused, it's another story, but we'll move forward. Now we'll talk about one more thing before we break and that is the autonomy of the archetypes and we've kind of seen this already. Both the Syzygy and the Shadow really highlight this as we've seen. The psychology of Jung affirms that there has to be an existence of opposites that are expressed in the mind. And we see that in the syzygy. Both the masculine and the feminine tendencies have to be expressed. If the masculine ones are being expressed at the expense of the feminine ones, then the feminine ones will surreptitiously begin to be expressed in some disguised way. And the same with the shadow. if we express ourselves as being moral, if we try to be good people according to the morality of our day, then the shadow will begin to express itself in disguised ways. For Jung, there is a necessity of these being expressed. And so, even if we consciously, for Jung, try to suppress these archetypes and try not to act them out, they nonetheless will against what we've decided, against what we want to be done. And so there's a kind of autonomy or a kind of freedom, an apparent freedom to these images. It's almost like we have a will that is not our own in our head for Carl Jung again. And don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for any of this at all, but he would say that we have these and that they are autonomous in us. In his work, Relations Between Ego and Unconscious, he writes, dreams contain images and thought associations which we do not create with conscious intent. They arise spontaneously without our assistance and are representatives of a psychic activity withdrawn from our arbitrary will. Therefore the dream is, properly speaking, a highly objective natural product of the psyche from which we might expect indications, or at least hints, about certain basic trends in the psychic process." So he says that they are not our dreams, Just like our dreams are not our conscious intent, we don't decide to have a specific kind of dream or for this or that to happen in our dream. In the same way, every expression of the unconscious is not our conscious will. It expresses itself regardless of what we want it to do. And so he believes that dreams and the study of symbols and the study of unconscious actions and such can give us information about the unconscious that the conscious person may not even be aware of. He also writes in Ion chapter 2, closer examination of the dark characteristics, that is the inferiorities constituting the shadow, revealed that they have an emotional nature, a kind of autonomy, and accordingly an obsessive or better possessive quality. They have an autonomy and they have a possessive quality, just like a demonic possession. And that's actually what Jung thought demonic possession was. It was these instincts which are forcing themselves to be expressed in the lives of people even though the individual doesn't want to express them. And so this is his theory about how mental illness comes about, and it will move into how he views we should fix the problem.