Oublie,
Yeah I read your other post. Jungian psychology is still practiced today it has not been discredited just type in Jungian analyst with your zip code and you will find it is still use in psychoanalysis.
Thanks for the link I don't see anything in the link that would even suggest that his form of analytical psychology has been out dated.
For those that are interested I provide this link about archetypes:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/jun/20/jung-archetypes-structuring-principles
Jung took the inner life seriously. He believed that dreams are not just a random jumble of associations or repressed wish fulfilments. They can contain truths for the individual concerned. They need interpreting, but when understood aright, they offer a kind of commentary on life that often acts as a form of compensation to what the individual consciously takes to be the case. A dream Jung had in 1909 provides a case in point.
He was in a beautifully furnished house. It struck him that this fine abode was his own and he remarked, "Not bad!" Oddly, though, he had not explored the lower floor and so he descended the staircase to see. As he went down, the house got older and darker, becoming medieval on the ground floor. Checking the stone slabs beneath his feet, he found a metal ring, and pulled. More stairs led to a cave cut into the bedrock. Pots and bones lay scattered in the dirt. And then he saw two ancient human skulls, and awoke.
Jung interpreted the dream as affirming his emerging model of the psyche. The upper floor represents the conscious personality, the ground floor is the personal unconscious, and the deeper level is the collective unconscious – the primitive, shared aspect of psychic life. It contains what he came to call archetypes, the feature we shall turn to now. They are fundamental to Jung's psychology.
Archetypes can be thought of simply as structuring principles. For example, falling in love is archetypal for human beings. Everyone does it, at least once, and although the pattern is common, each time it feels new and inimitable.
Hence, Cleopatra was the lover of both Julius Caesar and Marc Antony, though Caesar fell in love with her when she appeared from the folds of a carpet, whereas what worked for Antony was her appearing resplendent in great state on a barge. "When an archetype is constellated, our whole body is engaged and its emotional arousal focuses and motivates us with a force that is very difficult to resist," writes John Ryan Haule.
A related feature of archetypes is that, while they shape our perceptions and behaviour, we only become conscious of them indirectly, as they are manifest in particular instances. It is rather like Schopenhauer and Kant's notion of the inaccessibility of the "thing-in-itself", upon which Jung drew: you can't experience archetypes directly but only when they are incarnated. This would explain why, for example, Buddhists tend not to have visions of Jesus, and Christians tend not to have visions of Siddhartha Gautama. Instead, religious believers relate to the archetype of the wise man via the images available to them in their culture (given, for the sake of argument, that wisdom is what Jesus or the Buddha represent).
The theory of archetypes is controversial, and Jung did not help himself in this respect. For one thing, he is not very consistent in his definition of archetypes – though he can perhaps be forgiven as he explicitly called himself a "borrower" of models and insights from other fields of knowledge, in his attempts to grapple with his own. Archetypes have also variously been accused of being Lamarckian and superfluous, on the grounds that cultural transmission provides an adequate explanation for the phenomena that Jung would put down to psychic universals.
