如果說靈魂關乎人類對外在世界的感知，也涉及對內在世界的反省，那麼對比起1800年與1900年的歐洲，人類的靈魂，無論在個人或集體層次上，確實面臨極大的危機與挑戰。與其說，這種危機或挑戰是根源於人類本身的缺陷（或說”發現靈魂存在著許多裂縫”，又或者”發現靈魂裡存有陰暗之處”），不如說，發現所謂的靈魂其實不過是記憶的產物，而記憶的總和在漫長人生理路裡只不過占去極少的比例，才是上述危機與挑戰的根源。換言之，當近乎反射的心理操作、無意識，或是有意或無意的失憶，占去人類生活的大半部分，重新反省人類究竟為何，重新理解個體究竟包含何種特徵，甚至重新開啟文明起源的討論，似乎成了迫切但無可避免的知識追尋。或許，正是在追尋與質議的崎嶇過程之間，靈魂這個古老的概念最終顯得如此的不合時宜，甚至為某些知識人所棄置。相較起靈魂概念所歷經的變局，類似的轉變也可以在許多現象或概念上發現，諸如，性別、勞動、權威、美德、文化底蘊(literacy)…等概念。
迄今，將上述變革視為”現代性所帶來的巨變”是常見的說法，但是相關論斷常過於強調以下面向：首先，現代性所帶來的變革既是光明，也是進步的；其促成人們得以身處在直線進步的發展路徑上，最終獲得解放與自由。其次，現代性所立基的變革條件或動力來源大多屬於社會結構屬性的，例如，民主化、資本主義、現代民族國家、工業化歷程…等。最後，現代性所遭遇的最大敵人莫過於某種不理性或非理性。然而，上述這種說法或只觸及歷史或知識的表面結構，因而忽略了一個更加基本且值得商榷的問題，亦即當人性之中的善與惡僅論及人類處於清醒或理性的狀態，而這種清醒狀態不僅特定，也相對有限：一方面既孤處在偌大的無意識或失憶之中，另一方面又不時遭遇到無意識或失憶所發起的挑戰，無意識與失憶的東西總是想方設法回到清醒的世界。於是，在清醒與無意識之間，在理性與失憶之間，身處於現代的人類最終擺盪出超乎善與惡的軌跡，甚至撞擊出超乎所謂人性所可能包含的圖像。
參照於上述的簡單論斷，我們能發現，無論是Freud(1856-1939)或Jung(1875-1961)，甚至是兩位作者所相應的文化運動（指精神分析運動），某一程度上，都展現出另一種特殊但值得深究的現代性體驗與現代性觀察（從日常生活中，從瑣碎的事務裡，探索現代性對人性所造成的諸種正面或負面的效果，甚至嘗試尋獲人類解放與自我啟蒙的可能道路）。 於此，本課程嘗試藉由導讀Freud與Jung兩人的若干經典作品，重新估量現代性所帶來的諸多變革。當然，作品的導讀總是脫離不了以下三個問題：首先，這兩位作者如何在彼此交揉又相互分離的生命軌跡中，緩緩地道出他們各自窺探到的世界與其中的變革。其次，兩人如何借用精神分析的基本用語，並佐以來自於其他領域或學科的概念，描述、分析，同時診斷時代變化所引發的諸種現象。最後，如果說分析與診斷的確無法窮盡這兩人的思想歷程，那麼他們又各自提出何種療癒計畫，既能改變時代，也可治療因時代變革所誘發的病症。
關於本課程的預期目標，透過此課程的初步規劃，本課程嘗試達成的效果不外乎以下三個面向：
一是，修課學生可以理解兩位20世紀初期之重要作者及其作品，並藉此掌握相關的文化、歷史脈絡，進而理解不同作者與相應之文化思潮如何想像現代性。
其次，修課學生可藉由修課過程，初步掌握兩位作者及其相關之文化思潮的基本討論脈絡（尤其之於今日的專業研究）。
最後，修課學生也能通過上課與作業繳交，養成發問與質疑的思考習慣。
就實際課程安排而言，整個學期的課程將分成兩個部分，上半學期主要導讀Freud的著作，而後半學期則針對Jung的作品。重要且具有代表性的作品將分別安排於個別週次。不同週次的安排順序乃兼顧以下兩個原則：一是，依照時間序列的象度，同時考量兩人各自的學思歷程與生命發展軌跡。另一則是，將兩人的思想變革與特定作品安置回去更大的文化運動（指，精神分析運動），並且利用兩人實際的知識交鋒情況，凸顯出不同作品之間的同與異，以及相似與差異之外的文化/知識氛圍。
本課程除了導讀兩位作者的特定作品以外，還將於不同週次，陸續針對特定的現象與特定議題，提供簡略但相對輻輳的簡介，例如：19世紀以降歐洲社會所遭遇到的文化、社會變革；性解放與現代性學研究的發展；無意識或潛意識的漫長發現過程；集體無意識與集體潛意識的爭議；精神疾病的現代分類體系及其歷史演進；精神分析對於宗教、神話與文明概念的諸多論證。透過對於上述議題或現象的簡介，我們不僅可以掌握這兩位作者在特定作品中所呈現的知識態度，也能夠更清楚地理解到，精神分析運動作為現代性的主要思潮是如何觀察、分析並介入當時的社會生活。某個程度上，有了不同的切入角度與相應的背景知識，當我們重新閱讀這兩位作者的特定作品時，或許能夠窺見另一種關於現代性的爭議與想像。
If the soul is related to human beings' perception of the external world and also involves introspection of the inner world, then compared with Europe in 1800 and 1900, the human soul is indeed facing great crises and challenges, both at the individual and collective levels. Rather than saying that this kind of crisis or challenge is rooted in the shortcomings of human beings themselves (or "discovering that there are many cracks in the soul", or "discovering that there are dark places in the soul"), it is better to say that the so-called soul is actually nothing more than It is the product of memory, and the sum of memories only accounts for a very small proportion in the long journey of life, and is the source of the above-mentioned crises and challenges. In other words, when almost reflexive psychological operations, unconsciousness, or intentional or unintentional amnesia take up most of human life, we need to re-examine what human beings are, re-understand what characteristics an individual contains, and even reopen the discussion of the origin of civilization. It seems to be an urgent but inevitable pursuit of knowledge. Perhaps, it was during the rugged process of pursuit and questioning that the ancient concept of the soul finally seemed so out of date that it was even abandoned by some intellectuals. Compared with the changes that the concept of soul has gone through, similar changes can be found in many phenomena or concepts, such as gender, labor, authority, virtue, cultural heritage (literacy)... and other concepts.
So far, it is common to regard the above-mentioned changes as "the great changes brought about by modernity", but the relevant arguments often overemphasize the following aspects: first, the changes brought about by modernity are both bright and progressive; they enable people to Being on the development path of linear progress leads to liberation and freedom in the end. Secondly, most of the changing conditions or sources of motivation on which modernity is based belong to social structural attributes, such as democratization, capitalism, modern nation-states, industrialization processes, etc. Finally, the greatest enemy that modernity has ever encountered is a certain kind of irrationality or irrationality. However, the above statement may only touch on the superficial structure of history or knowledge, and thus ignores a more basic and debatable issue, that is, when the good and evil in human nature only talk about human beings in a awake or rational state, and This waking state is not only specific, but also relatively limited: on the one hand, it is alone in the vast unconsciousness or amnesia; on the other hand, it encounters challenges from the unconsciousness or amnesia from time to time. Unconscious and amnesic things always try to find ways to return to them. To the waking world. Therefore, between wakefulness and unconsciousness, between rationality and amnesia, modern human beings ultimately sway on a trajectory beyond good and evil, and even collide with images that are beyond what is possible in so-called human nature.
With reference to the above simple conclusion, we can find that whether it is Freud (1856-1939) or Jung (1875-1961), or even the corresponding cultural movement (referring to the psychoanalytic movement) of the two authors, to a certain extent, Showing another special but worthy of further study of modern experience and modern observation (from daily life, from trivial affairs, explore the various positive or negative effects of modernity on human nature, and even try to find human liberation and possible path to self-enlightenment). Here, this course attempts to re-evaluate the many changes brought about by modernity through the introduction of several classic works by Freud and Jung. Of course, the introduction of the work is always inseparable from the following three questions: First, how the two authors slowly revealed the world they each glimpsed and the changes in it in the life trajectories that were intertwined and separated from each other. Secondly, how the two borrowed the basic terms of psychoanalysis and supplemented them with concepts from other fields or disciplines to describe, analyze, and diagnose various phenomena caused by changes in the times. Finally, if analysis and diagnosis cannot exhaust the thought process of these two people, then what kind of healing plan they each proposed can not only change the times, but also treat the diseases caused by the changes in the times.
Regarding the expected goals of this course, through the preliminary planning of this course, the results that this course attempts to achieve are nothing more than the following three aspects:
First, students taking the course can understand two important authors and their works in the early 20th century, and thereby grasp the relevant cultural and historical context, and then understand how different authors and corresponding cultural trends of thought imagined modernity.
Secondly, through the course process, students can initially grasp the basic discussion context of the two authors and their related cultural trends of thought (especially in today's professional research).
Finally, students taking courses can also develop the thinking habit of asking and questioning through attending classes and submitting assignments.
As far as the actual course arrangement is concerned, the entire semester's course will be divided into two parts. The first half of the semester will focus on Freud's works, while the second half of the semester will focus on Jung's works. Important and representative works will be arranged in individual weeks. The arrangement order of different weeks takes into account the following two principles: First, according to the time sequence, the respective academic and ideological processes and life development trajectories of the two people are also considered. The other is to place the ideological changes and specific works of the two people back into the larger cultural movement (referring to the psychoanalytic movement), and use the actual intellectual confrontation between the two people to highlight the similarities and differences between the different works, and Cultural/intellectual climate beyond similarities and differences.
In addition to introducing the specific works of the two authors, this course will also provide a brief but relatively intensive introduction to specific phenomena and specific issues in different weeks, such as: the cultural, social and cultural changes that European society has encountered since the 19th century. Change; sexual liberation and the development of modern sexology research; the long process of discovery of the unconscious or subconscious mind; the controversy between the collective unconscious and the collective subconscious; the modern classification system of mental illness and its historical evolution; the many contributions of psychoanalysis to the concepts of religion, mythology and civilization Argument. Through the introduction to the above issues or phenomena, we can not only grasp the intellectual attitudes presented by these two authors in specific works, but also more clearly understand how the psychoanalytic movement, as the main trend of thought in modernity, observes, analyzes and Involved in the social life of the time. To a certain extent, with different perspectives and corresponding background knowledge, when we re-read the specific works of these two authors, we may be able to glimpse another kind of controversy and imagination about modernity.
Freud, Sigmund. (2004). 弗洛依德文集，八卷。長春：長春出版社。
Jung, C. G. (2011). 榮格文集，九卷。北京：國際文化出版公司。
Freud, Sigmund. (2004). Collected Works of Freud, eight volumes. Changchun: Changchun Publishing House.
Jung, C. G. (2011). Collected Works of Jung, nine volumes. Beijing: International Culture Publishing Company.
| 評分項目 Grading Method | 配分比例 Grading percentage | 說明 Description |
|---|---|---|
| 課程參與課程參與 course participation |
20 | 出席與上課之討論情況，將視為評分之指標。 |
| 小組報告小組報告 group report |
20 | 針對課程指定讀本，以討論小組為單位，進行文本導讀，原則上，報告時間為20分鐘左右。每組原則上由四位至五位課程參與者組成，於第一次上課時，進行分組。 |
| 個人書面報告個人書面報告 personal written report |
60 | 修課之學生至少繳交四次的critical memo，每份critical memo以2500字為限，分數占比為學期總成績的15%，此項評分以個人為單位。 |
