Dear Professor Pauli,
Best thanks for kindly sending me Jordan’s paper.
I think this paper should be published, as it is concerned with the
Actual changeover of the physicist’s mode of observation tothe psychological field.
This paper was inevitable.
Having come to the conclusion that the observed is also a disturbance by the observer, the consistent investigator of the unknown interior of the atom could not help seeing that the nature of the observing process becomes perceptible in the disturbance caused by the observation.
To put it more simply, if you look long enough into a dark hole you perceive what is looking in.
This is also the principle of cognition in yoga, which derives all cognition from the absolute emptiness of consciousness. ~Carl Jung, Letters Vol. 1, Pages 174-175.
Dear Professor Jung,
The epistemological situation with regard to the concepts “conscious” and “unconscious” seems to offer a pretty close analogy to the “complementarity” situation in physics.
Every “observation of the unconscious,” i.e., every conscious realization of unconscious contents, has an uncontrollable reactive effect on these same contents. . . . It is undeniable that the development of “microphysics” has brought the way in which nature is described in this science very much closer to that of the new psychology. ~Wolfgang Pauli, Last Years, Page 166.
Dear Professor Nelson:
The comparison of modern psychology to modern physics is no idle talk. Both disciplines have, for all their diametrical opposition, one most important point in common, namely the fact that they both approach the hitherto “transcendental” region of the Invisible and Intangible, the world of merely analogous thought. ~Carl Jung, Letters Vol. II, Page 308.