AS MY Jungian analyst friends have pointed out - and yes indeed, I do have a few - the statement in my article on Jung contains what may be an incorrect statement. In the published text the claim is made that "most" Jungian analysts have "no formal medical, psychological, or scientific training". The correct statement would be that "many" have "little or no" formal training in the areas cited. My apologies to Jungian analysts of all stripes and especially my friends.
RICHARD NOLL Clinical psychologist and historian of science, Harvard University.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册?
- 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅?
Please or to read this article.