James Hillman's Re-Visioning Psychology Is Reaction Paper

PAGES
6
WORDS
1565
Cite
Related Topics:

Explication Paper 6

Hillman might perhaps more accurately be called a philosopher than a psychologist; his views are incredibly expansive and rooted in what is ultimately a conjectured construct of human understanding and existence. This is made abundantly clear in these sections regarding character and the development of personhood and human individuals' sense of self. Again, language and its influence is very much at the heart of Hillman's explanation of how our understanding of character has developed and should develop, claiming that both consciousness and unconsciousness should always be characterized, thus making us fully aware and responsible for ourselves and our world rather than passive entities obedient to the laws of cause and effect and the...

...

On a direct, basic, and pragmatic level, which is perhaps the only level that Hillman wishes to converse on and for which he thinks language should be made more suitable (though this is not clear in and of itself), it seems that Hillman is suggesting that we have been taught that we cannot know ourselves and therefore cannot be fully responsible for ourselves, and I am in complete agreement with him that this is something that should be changed. He also applies the development and growth of character to the aging process, bringing a significantly different view to old age, but it is not entirely clear exactly what this view is.

Cite this Document:

"James Hillman's Re-Visioning Psychology Is" (2010, August 04) Retrieved April 26, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/james-hillman-re-visioning-psychology-is-9259

"James Hillman's Re-Visioning Psychology Is" 04 August 2010. Web.26 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/james-hillman-re-visioning-psychology-is-9259>

"James Hillman's Re-Visioning Psychology Is", 04 August 2010, Accessed.26 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/james-hillman-re-visioning-psychology-is-9259

Related Documents

To recognize something as beautiful can be deemed as dirty. If every life and every twist in life has its own beauty, why is there such judgment that comes with each of those lives or twists in lives? It has been believed that beauty has had to be neglected because it was regressive (i.e., considering the Oedipal model). To see something as beautiful can be viewed as base. Beauty has

By losing touch with the natural world, we live only within our own bodies, where the soul is stifled because it needs anima mundi to exist. There is a danger in not connecting to the environment around us. There is a danger in not allowing our hearts to have thoughts. We become closed off to the entire world and our entire existence by ignoring nature; we become shells of

Human Beings Make Sense of Things In the early-1900s, Edmund Husserl sought to provide psychology with a truly scientific basis, not by copying the physical sciences but through the description of conscious experiences. This would be a truly humanistic psychology, grounded in human life and experience rather than materialistic and mechanistic theories like functionalism and behaviorism. Karl Jaspers called for a psychology that would describe phenomena such as "hallucinations, delusions,

" Hence, images of children are often used to "reproach the rest of the adult world for its misdemeanours"; and in presenting that picture, children connote "both the future and a moral voice of the 'good self'..." Burman generalizes that the "universalization of Northern childhood thus mirrors the Northern colonial domination of the South." And interfaced with that dynamic, she continues, is the "Christian symbolism associated with colour ("white-child-angel, black child-devil")...