this change in Jung’s thinking (as I’ve discussed elsewhere). It is not generally understood
that the trickster-Hermes figure also influenced Jung via Quantum theory. Jung was not alone
among Europe’s intelligentsia in being forced to respond
to the strange new pictures of boththe micro (or sub-atomic) and macro (or cosmological) realms surfacing among physicists.Many disciplines besides psychology started to drift, inevitably, into postmodernism due tothe ontological and epistemological uncertainties unleashed by the New Physics.
To understand the way ‘Quantum Hermes’ helped undermine some of the ontological and
epistemological foundations of modernity we need to explore the difference between versions
of reality as theorised by ‘classical
physics’ and versions proposed by Quantum theory. Given
this has primarily been a series of talks about creativity we will eventually focus on the possibilities these developments open up for the formulation of a post-
postmodern ‘poetics’.
NEWTONIAN MIGRAINES IN YEAR 12 PHYSICS
When I studied Physics at Rangitoto College on Auckland’s North Shore back in the early
80s we were taught practical, which is to say Newtonian, models of the physical world. It
was ‘materialist’ physics perfectly suited to the school’s goal which was to turn out young
men and women intent on serving the Gods of industry and commerce. The endless physicsequations, however, gave me migraines and the subject matter bored me to tears. I knew
intuitively that such a version of ‘science’ had no ability to explain life’s deepest mysteries
to me. Luckily for me, the college also gave me a thorough grounding in History andLiterature!When I returned to university at La Trobe in the early 90s the Humanities lecturers typicallycritiqued much of modern science as a Promethean-Materialist phenomenon. I suspectedCartesian-Newtonian science also gave them migraines and we were united in our view of
the cure: i.e. literature, philosophy and a sacralised perspective on life. There wasn’t a grea
tdeal to argue about! As I studied and eventually taught literature, history, the creative arts,etc. I came to have less and less to do with modern science. I felt that though it certainly hadits uses, especially in the worlds of medicine, engineering, etc. it reduced to a philosophy of disenchantment and alienation whenever it sought to monopolize descriptions of: 1) human
consciousness, psyche and soul (though it didn’t even acknowledge soul!) and 2) our
relationships with each other, nature and the cosmos generally.
Until recently this remained, more or less, my position on ‘modern science’.
FROM PROMETHEUS and NEWTON to EINSTEIN and HEISENBERG
In truth, however, science got very weird in the 20
th
century. Indeed it could be argued thatit began a slow and painful transition away from the Newtonian (let us say Promethean) paradigm toward something new, strange and wonderful. Also
—
and this is important for the discussion of the trickster archetype that will follow
—it became as ‘mind
-
expanding’,‘unpredictable’, at times even as ‘chaotic’ as any psychoactive drug or traditional spiritual
regime. Although it is not generally acknowledged by many mainstream scientists, it
became, if anything, stranger, more bizarre, more ‘other
-
worldly’ than almost any
of thespiritual systems and wisdom traditions known to human history.In this article I want to argue that the schism between science and the humanities described
by C. P. Snow back in the early 60s, and labeled at the time ‘The Two Cultures Debate’,