Archive for February, 2016

Ado about Archetypes

February 29, 2016

The underlying concept of the term “archetype,” as intuited most notably by Dr. Carl Jung, has been misunderstood long enough to have collected definitions leading to false or flawed conclusions in application. The truth is that archetypes are creational aspects of the foundational formula used by Source Energy Awareness (SEA) in fabricating the apparent Reality that is seemingly extant in movie-house Omniverse. An archetype is more than a prototype, more than an established standard for perceiving, more than a canonical element of good storytelling, and more than a recurrent pattern of thought observed in human consciousness. Noetitek™ informed us long ago that “archetype” has meaning correspondent to “archangel” and to the multidimensional superstructure of the All and Everything of Omniverse (even the Nothing). Archetypes, like the earlier conceptualized archangels, represent meta-level states and forces at work in the world.

Archetypes are SEA’s computer-language-like building blocks for all manifestation in Omniverse. What are commonly referred to as archetypes are really sub-archetypes akin to human languages, extensions of the primal foundational archetype vibrations correspondent to the Omniversal dimensions. Sub-archetypes are perceivable as (1) states of being; (2) forces; (3) characters personifying energy configurations; (4) feelings and ideas; (4) situations/conditions; (5) actions, “journeys,” and developments; and (6) symbols/physical objects. For example, sub-archetypes related to human personality type, according to the Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator are: Innocent, Orphan, Warrior, Caregiver, Seeker, Lover, Destroyer, Creator, Ruler, Magician, Sage, and Jester. This schema appears to work as a language of sub-archetypes although Creator and Destroyer are two aspects of the same root archetype. Countless gradations and variations of sub-archetypes and configurations of hierarchical interaction are the limitless elements of endless dramas across never-ending parallel universes.

As discussed in earlier posts such as “Speaking of Dimensions—Part I” (June, 2015), Omniverse is composed of nine dimensions of Space-Time-Mind, and All and Nothing (as expressed perfectly by the Yin-Yang symbol) are also understandable as “dimensions,” making a total of eleven. No fewer and no more dimensions are possible, or necessary. Similarly, there are eleven archangels, despite that various religious traditions hold to the belief that there are three, or six, or ten, or twelve—or more. Some psychologists think that further archetypes remain to be discovered, or that new archetypes can be invented to serve agendas for healing or controlling minds. However, any purportedly new archetype can only be a contrived re-imagining and re-articulation of an eternal archetype (i.e., can only be a sub-archetype), or, as widely in evidence: merely stereotypes that serve to manipulate attitudes and behavior, usually to make people more amenable to governance and receptive to commercial agendas.

The stereotypes of social psychology—whether positive, negative, or neutral with respect to intent—are neither archetypes nor sub-archetypes, although they trace to such, which is why stereotypes such as racial and religious stereotypes—“profiling” in general—carry so much power in the uncritical mind of the average pile of mimetically programmed protoplasm (see also “Formulaic Thinking,” January, 2011). Are stereotypes sometimes accurate? Yes, and so is a watch with a dead battery, twice a day. It is interesting to see the extent to which profiling is promoted as highly efficacious—almost magically so at times—via popular crime-buster television shows and movies. Meanwhile practitioners of other approaches are treated on-screen as employing outdated left-brain methods or wacky right-brain ones. Talk about mind control.

Some theories about archetypes (as well as beliefs about archangels) are partly correct but none describe and grasp the deep significance of archetypes/archangels and their extensive correspondences, not individually and not as a set. Having surveyed—over more than fifty years—the spectrum of books published by numerous authors on this overall matter, none has been found to be truly authoritative when placed under the Noetitek™ microscope, although we have enjoyed and found practical value in many, particularly books by and derived from the writings of psychiatrist Carl Jung and those of mythologist Joseph Campbell. But we are especially impressed by the fundamentals of Kabbalah as articulated and expounded on by certain Jewish rabbis, ancient and modern-day.

Omniverse is an infinitely-processing complex multidimensional structure arising from out of a simple set of spectral vibrations that generate the archetypes/archangels and resultant meta-patterns as depicted by visual renditions of the Mandlebrot set of never-ending fractal shapes, discovered by mathematician Benoit Mandlebrot. It is no longer questionable that there is order hidden in apparent omnipresent chaos, something Einstein inferred with certainty. This order has patterns that reveal purpose and prove the presence of an intelligent creative force behind it all. And a profound bit of cosmic humor is expressed through a synchronicity: that the name Mandlebrot finds resonance with the word mandala, as (reportedly) first noticed by Arthur C. Clarke. Mandalas and patterns of fractal shapes are cousins; both symbolize the sacred source and structure of Omniverse. To Clarke’s synchronicity we add our own synchronicity-driven observation: that the Hebrew word for angel is Malach.