Comments on: What I Learned at the 2012 IASD Conference https://bulkeley.org/learned-2012-iasd-conference/ Dream Research & Education Wed, 04 Jul 2012 15:52:53 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 By: Kelly Bulkeley https://bulkeley.org/learned-2012-iasd-conference/#comment-381 Wed, 04 Jul 2012 15:52:53 +0000 http://bulkeley.org/?p=2187#comment-381 In reply to Cynthia.

Yes, that’s a good way of putting it. To be clear, I get Beebe’s theoretical point. I just felt a kind of Sesame Street defensiveness on behalf of poor number 4, being maligned in public like that….

]]> By: Cynthia https://bulkeley.org/learned-2012-iasd-conference/#comment-380 Tue, 03 Jul 2012 15:22:08 +0000 http://bulkeley.org/?p=2187#comment-380 I am not a dream specialist but a junguian analyst….from that perspective I believe the context for Beebe’s statement is an overvaluation of the number 4 as a representative of potential wholeness that is already becoming manifest.

]]> By: Kelly Bulkeley https://bulkeley.org/learned-2012-iasd-conference/#comment-379 Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:05:55 +0000 http://bulkeley.org/?p=2187#comment-379 In reply to john nicholas.

Beebe was giving a talk on his work with Jung’s personality typology, and he seemed to feel that if we only look at the number 4, we miss the broader wholeness represented by the numbers 8 and 16, which Beebe fills out with primary, secondary, and tertiary functions. It gets very complex, though fascinating. I was just struck by the harsh words against the number 4, which I can only figure is a problem for Beebe because he wants us to expand our sense of the psyche’s potentiality?

]]> By: john nicholas https://bulkeley.org/learned-2012-iasd-conference/#comment-378 Sun, 01 Jul 2012 16:08:46 +0000 http://bulkeley.org/?p=2187#comment-378 What the source and content and context of Beebe’s quote:
Jung’s focus on the number 4 is “dangerous” and promises a “seductive wholeness.” (John Beebe)

]]>