Bibliographic record
Abstract
In support of conscious efforts to combat racism and embrace diversity, this essay identifies how white privilege expresses itself in contemporary Jungian dream literature, challenges our habitual identification of dark-skinned dream figures, and calls for an end to an unspoken convention that defaults to whiteness as the norm.This essay is addressed to white readers with gratitude for people of color who join the conversation.At a recent conference hosted by the Jungian Society for Scholarly Studies (JSSS), a draft diversity statement was circulated among the membership, stating in part:We acknowledge that Jungian psychology has roots in a white, colonial, patriarchal worldview that . . .produces areas of cultural blindness.While this history does not negate the value of Jungian psychology, it does require conscientious efforts by Jungians to understand . . .and to confront the damaging practice of other-ing.(JSSS, 2022) Because toxic patriarchy is embedded and integrated within psyche, those conscientious efforts must begin within our own selves-a task that is not always easy. A Challenging ProcessDespite having presented some of the following ideas at the JSSS conference, I encountered considerable inner resistance to writing this essay.It's one thing to speak in person, making eye contact, reading the room; it's another thing entirely to send controversial ideas about race and privilege into today's politically-charged atmosphere.Inner exploration revealed a feeling deep in my body that could best be described as terror-a fear of attack.The unconscious terror that kept me from writing is an expression of my own white fragility, defined by Robin DiAngelo (2016) as:A state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves . . .such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation [emphasis added].These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial comfort and status quo.(pp.355-356).I moved past my fear by recognizing that a similar kind of embodied terror probably lives in many if not most Black people every day.My whiteness shields me from having to live with such fear.People of color have no such shield.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".