On Mills' 'Jung's Metaphysics'

Robert A. Segal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)


Despite his patient attempt to reconstruct Jung's metaphysics, Jon Mills fails to show that Jung was a metaphysician or even a philosopher of science and perhaps even a scientist. Mills seems to equate metaphysics with the postulation of immaterial entities - notably, archetypes. But on the one hand metaphysics can be materialist as well as dualist. On the other hand it is a speculative enterprise. A metaphysician would not simply announce the existence of immateriality but would seek to prove that immateriality fits the nature of reality as already known. Jung's metaphysics, which for him means sheer pronouncements, constitutes neither psychologism nor idealism, as Mills seems to agree. But Jung is not a Kantian, either. Jung should be treated as a great psychologist, but not as a thinker.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)217-226
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Jungian Studies
Issue number3
Early online date10 Jun 2014
Publication statusPublished - 2014


  • dualism
  • epistemology
  • idealism
  • materialism
  • metaphysics
  • ontology


Dive into the research topics of 'On Mills' 'Jung's Metaphysics''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this