Mathew Barrett Gross

The authors frequently cite Campbell, Jung, Eliade and Edinger, but consistently demonstrate only a partial understanding of their theories. Author argues against innateness of apocalyptic thinking (p44) despite archetypes (like the apocalypse) being innate structures of the human psyche as evidenced by them being found in many versions of myth throughout the anthropological record (for example end-of-the-world flood myths are widespread). Innate psychic structures held collectively by humans is the core of Jung and Edinger's work and embraced by Campbell as well so to argue against this while quoting their work is pretty laughable. The author manages this convoluted reasoning be defining "apocalypse" in the very narrow Judeo-Christian understanding of it, which allows him to dismiss apocalyptic motifs in older myths as not truly apocalyptic. Someone not intimately familiar with archetypal psychology or myth from many cultures will find this book well written and researched, but a deeper understanding shows it sorely lacking with huge gaps in both reasoning, evidence and understanding. Author also fails to place the same level of scrutiny towards his own apocalyptic climate doomsday thinking as he does to other apocalyptic narratives throughout history. There are some high points regarding advice on how to get over apocalyptic fretting however.… (plus d'informations)