Mandalas, Nixies, Goddesses, and Succubi A Transpersonal Anthropologist Looks at the Anima
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Men past their midlives may become involved in a dialogue with their own unconscious.This dialogue often takes the form of female and female-related imagery and feelings that represent hidden mental processes in the self.C. G. Jung called the producer of these images and feelings the anima (or the animus in women), the harbinger of the contrasexual aspects of our being.We often come to know the anima by becoming aware of the qualities we project upon our contrasexual Other.The author, a transpersonal anthropologist, explores his own forty years of encounters with his anima, beginning with spontaneous and ecstatic "mandala experiences," and proceeding through decades of meditation and study in the traditions of Tibetan Tantric Buddhism, the Western mysteries, and Navajo religion.He argues that engagement with the anima is a hermeneutic process, and that traditional societies often have an intact, mystical cycle of meaning within which such experiences make sense.Euroamerican contemplatives, however, are frequently in the position of having to create their own cycle of meaning, because their enculturation does not inform their personal anima expetiences.The role of culture in mediating anima/us related interpretations is discussed, and a model is presented that may help guide practitioners to a better understanding of how their psyches work, relative to both their consciousunconscious and their personal and cultural conditioning.The author concludes with an argument in favor of a closer integration of transpersonal psychology and transpersonal anthropology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".