Talk:The Over-Soul

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Literature / Religion / Eastern Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophical literature Philosophy of religion Eastern philosophy

Unless I'm missing some grammar here, up top, in "indivisible Soul, of which", is "of" refering to included? It sould be either "in", or "included" should be "part". --Hoverfish 18:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could "non-Abrahamic interpretation Emerson's use of the term" be "non-Abrahamic Emerson's interpretaion of the term" for simplicity? --Hoverfish 18:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My correction "identification" could also be "identifying itself". The last sentence of the paragraph has no clear subject, i.e. ",while reality experienced in the present, ..., perceives itself as the One indivisible totality". It is true that the Over-soul IS Reality, but in this portion of the sentence the equation is made in an indirect way. It also lives open "reality experienced in the present"-by whom? Could it be "while reality experienced by the individualized soul in the present, unemcombered by past impressions (the unconditioned or liberated mind), is perceived as the One indivisible totality." --Hoverfish 19:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC) --This could also be "while the Over-soul experiencing the present, unencombered by past impressions (...), perceives Itself as..." -- Hoverfish 20:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In stricktly Freudian terms, "collective unconscious" would not fit here. Yet Jung distanced himself from Freud in many metaphysical or spiritual matters. I do not know which book of Jung's you are refering (reference would be good, actually) and I currently don't have "The Four Archetypes", but I think in this book he went in big detail about this. Hoverfish 19:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Roberts' book - "The Education of Oversoul Seven" . The meaning within the context of this novel.

Spiritualism - Oversoul (and possibly "overlighting soul") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.113.94 (talk) 18:37, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]