Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sepulchrave II" data-source="post: 5457156" data-attributes="member: 4303">I apologize. My post was crude and insensitive. But given the number of edition-related threads you've got on the front page right now, it makes me wonder whether your inquiry is disingenuous. Your <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/300947-enantiodromia.html" target="_blank">Enantiodromia</a> thread (referencing Jung and 4E again) for one; <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/300674-reason-why-d-d-4th-edition-not-popular-could-have-been.html" target="_blank">A reason why 4E is not as popular as it could have been</a> being another.But I don't think some kind of catharsis followed by a grand reconciliation amongst the warring factions is likely at this stage. My advice is to let it go. Divorce can be amicable if accepted by all parties. Time passes; we learn to behave with civility to one another.It was 101. 20 years ago. I remember nothing of it, except that it didn't involve Jung - which disappointed me, because I'd rather hoped it might. When I got to here, I thought, "Ah, Jung's archetypes."And then I thought, "Ah, Jung's archetypes.""Hinduism" has no such clear-cut ontology, but this is not the place for that discussion.Jung's understanding of Advaita Vedanta might approximate what you are communicating.I wish you success in your journey..</blockquote>