Hi Arthur, it has nothing to do with politics. I am neither liberal nor conservative, and I have read his books and watched numerous of his lectures, my favorite being his interactions with Iain McGilchrist.

Like Jordan, I'm a licensed clinical psychologist. I've worked in many areas of psychology for approximately 33 years, and I began studying Jung a little over 50 years ago.

I don't care about the politics. Did you just react to my first line or did you actually read what I wrote?

It's not prejudice or hate or irrational judgment to state a simple fact - I'm not aware of any psychologist among the dozens I've spoken to about his ideas who thinks he has more than a limited grasp of mainstream psychology, especially personality psychology, but even Jung's basic ideas.

Now, I'm not presenting a scientific study of the news of all psychologists - I simple stated an undeniable fact - I'm not PERSONALLY aware of any psychologist (among dozens, not thousands) who believe he's competent in the areas about which he speaks.

I was especially intrigued (not angered or upset, just intrigued and somewhat amused though not surprised) at how thoroughly he misunderstood what McGilchrist was talking about.

So it seems that you've somehow heard other people's critiques and assumed because I said something regarding his competence that therefore I'm somehow completely blindly swayed by "left wing critiques" (McGilchrist, by the way, is quite a conservative person, at least temperamentally).

I'd love to have a follow up conversation about this. Do you have any training in psychology, by the way? You don't need to, I'll hasten to add, to understand or critique him - I just added that because it would be fun to have an in-depth discussion about his competence as a psychologist. But otherwise, it would still be interesting for me to learn more positive things about him, so I can have a broader view of his ideas and presentations.