Of all the archetypes and complexes that Jung and Jungian congregants entertain and uphold, throughout his system and work he routinely misses the most significant one…

The modern complex.

In fact, I could say that this lacuna forms the basis why the Jungian approach often misses the mark:

His is but one manner among many. And thus has little significance in this mistaking.

In recognizing the influence of the modern complex, then does Jungian forms become more salient.

Ironically, the modern complex arises with systems of individuation.

*

Jungian psychology can be understood in the context of modern philosophy that considers all things through totality.

Jung’s system is based in an assumption of all, and thereby presents a very Hegelian psychology, of sorts. Never quite noticing that this all is the assumption of a privileged view upon the world, both the philosophy and psychology work to perpetuate the consolidation of ideological power.

We call this kind of motion, religious.

What actually arises, though, still Quite Jungian though, is never the consolidation but rather always the view of progress and perfection. Hence, the missed component of much of Jungian ideals is that individuation never occurs but is always merely the teleology of the motion.

The modern complex operates through the belief that such consolidation/individuation will actually occur and will arise at some point.