Tabula Rasa and Jungian archetypes can be intertwined into a single idea.

--- "A concept if unknown is not a concept - being that an internally recognized definition is a requirement of its discussion. Collective unconscious for Jung was not the soul - in his spiritual argument it was a component discrete from the individual and part of the universe at large ". .. the sediment of all the experience of the universe of all time" (Jung 1922). " Who is to say this isn't what he believes to be the essence of our 'soul'? It could be our connected 'soul's that comprises the collective consciousness. ------------ "Genetic argument fails - one cannot "encode memory" into DNA. DNA produces proteins - not conceptual structures. Let alone recoding one's own genetic makeup as a process of basic life experience simply can't occur. In terms of brain structure a 'genetic heritage' has to do with such things as speed and quantity of myelination. A non physical entity has no capacity to store, record, contain, hold, and transmit a physical component of which an individual is. Simply saying it can is not an argument. " If the Collective Consciousness and memory is genetically, not spiritually, transfered ( though I don't see it as genetic), then how can you say that it can not transfer memories of past lives? DNA transfers physical and mental attributes like physical aptitude, intelligence (Biological Determinism), mental capacity etc. What's to say it [DNA] cannot withhold information from the previous ancestors? All a memory is, is the bonds of neurons, from a genetic perspective. It could very well be transfered from parent to child with all of the other attributes in our 46 (23 pairs) chromosomes. As to the latter quote. Again we are dealing with something that can only be speculated and observed from personal experience, analysis of dreams (i. e. Interpretation of Dreams ,Sigmund Freud) etc. ----------------- "Although this is very much a theory, it can be observed through many cases, in which individuals will experience a dream or 'flashback', in which an event not physically experienced, is relived. " "Contradiction. If it has never been experienced it cannot be relived. Non apparent familiarity with a dream image does not equal a past memory. Dreams are constructs of held concepts. " It's not a contradiction when you take into account my entire argument. ---------------- "(Jung experienced one himself, in which he traveled back through the ages of his past 'reincarnations'; the ages being represented by the different levels in his house, going from Roman times, to that of a 'primitive' culture, in a cave with broken pottery). " "Begging the question. " Persecution of fallacy is wrong. I was simply naming an example from Jung. . http://www.nizkor.org.... I did not assign Jung as the authority and final verdict on the argument. ----------------- "If one inherits a past one is not a blank slate. It's as basic as that. An inheritance of past, of preference, of recorded experience is not 'blank. ' A is A. If archetypes are present and dormant it is still not blank. " It is less of a 'blank slate', than more of a nature (Archetype, in this case) vs nurture (environmental effects) combination. Yes, this contradicts my exact wording in my resolution, but arguments evolve, and may deviate from the original theme in order to convey what is the importance. Nurturing (environmental effects), directly affects what archetype is prevalent and dominant in the individual. ---------------- "Basic common human experience accounts for archetypal imagery, across disparate populations. Take for example the 'old man' - associated with wisdom. In patriarchal societies men are the store houses of tribal history and myth. An old man then, is of venerable wisdom. That's not some universal archetype that makes him so. It is a basic facet of his existence - shared amongst those of his family and larger community. " This has some merit, when dealing with a patriarchal society. Though, how does one explain situations of heroines? In a patriarchal society, how does a female hero emerge? In this type of society, a myth should only include women as the temptress, or the one who pulls the hero from the other world, back into the normal world. ------------------- I have noticed, that my opponent is attempting to look at theoretical psychology, as something concrete,tangible, and among normal,physically logical subjects. This may sway a voter's opinion in Con's favor, but one cannot look at the collective consciousness/archetypes as something that you can physically see, it's something philosophical, which is only up to debate if one is to let go of their complete need for 'proof' in front of them. Of course Con will respond to this, with "He offers no concrete evidence, therefore his resolution should be thrown out", or something of the sort. And this wouldn't be totally wrong; the problem is, when dealing with Jung, a well known combiner of Philosophy, Theology, and Mythology into his Analytical Psychology, you have to be able to comprehend 'evidence', through personal testimonies, and far fetched leaps of 'faith' into the realm of the unknown.