I teach the Body Language Behind Body Language.
I used to be immersed in Jungian approximations until I wised up and realized Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) knew much more about psychology than Carl Jung (1875-1961).
At least Jung was smarter than “Jungian renegade” James Hillman (1926-2011) and his Hillmanians.
John E. Sarno, M.D., wrote …
“In view of the widespread Freud bashing of recent years I may be courting disapproval to state that my concepts descend from Freud’s clinical observations and theories. But I know this only in retrospect, for I did not set out to prove Freud right. My developing ideas were the consequence of clinical observations; they were not based on preconceived notions about the mindbody connection.”
Dr. Sarno is a Professor of Clinical Rehabilitation Medicine at the New York University School of Medicine and the author of …
(1) Mind Over Back Pain (1982)
(2) Healing Back Pain: The Mind-Body Connection (1991)
(3) The Mindbody Prescription: Healing the Body, Healing the Pain (1998)
(4) The Divided Mind: The Epidemic of Mindbody Disorders (2006)
My only beef with Dr. Sarno is that he doesn’t believe that ALL diseases – including cancer and broken bones – are psychosomatic.
99 percent of every human being’s Body Language projects a Living to Die attitude.
Attitudes come in pairs, so, ironically, adopting a conscious Living to Live attitude ensures the fostering of a Living to Die attitude.
If Jung was more profound than Freud, why did the Fathers of Propaganda adopt Freud’s version of the unconscious mind to manipulate the masses? 
Who were these Fathers of Propaganda, euphemistically called Public Relations?
Many of them regarded Freud and William James as “too mystical.” Can you imagine what they thought of Jung?  
Here are the names of just a few of these Fathers (and a Mother or two) …
(1) Herbert Spencer (1820-1903)
(2) Francis Galton (1822-1911)
(3) William Wundt (1832-1920)
(4) Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914)
(5) Gustave Le Bon (1841-1931)
(6) G. Stanley Hall (1844-1924)
(7) Harrington Emerson (1848-1931)
(8) Frederick Taylor (1856-1915)
(9) Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929)
(10) Edward M. House (1858-1938)
(11) Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) 
(12) John Dewey (1859-1952)
(13) Carl Georg Barth (1860-1939)
(14) James Cattell (1860-1944)
(15) James Mark Baldwin (1861-1934)
(16) Henry Gantt (1861-1919)
(17) Hugo Munsterberg (1863-1916)
(18) Frank Bunker Gilbreth Sr. (1868-1924)
(19) Herbert Croly (1869-1930)
(20) Morris Cooke (1872-1960)
(21) Wilfred Trotter (1872-1939)
(22) Walter Weyl (1873-1919)
(23) Edward Thorndike (1874-1949)
(24) George Creel (1876-1953)
(25) Ivy Lee (1877-1934)
(26) John B. Watson (1878-1958)
(27) Lillian Gilbreth (1878-1972)
(28) Carl R. Byoir (1886-1997)
(29) Walter Lippman (1889-1974)
(30) Edward Bernays (1891-1995)
(31) Harry Bruno (1893-1978)
(32) Jean Piaget (1896-1980)
(33) Paul Lazarsfeld (1901-1976)
(34) Louis Cheskin (1907-1981)
(35) Ernest Dichter (1909-1991)
Etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
Note that these Fathers of Propaganda were heavily influenced by EUGENICS and Charles Darwin (1809-1882). 
The more you know about these brilliant manipulators, the more you will grok the extent of your brainwashing.
I’ve been in recovery – and still have a long way to go – since I met Adano Ley (Swami Nitty-Gritty).
The writings of George Ivanovich Gurdjieff – and two Gurdjieff groups – helped too.
The greatest obstacle to consciousness is believing one is already conscious, and not just an unconscious projection of one’s own BODY LANGUAGE.
We get subsumed by our own projected geometry.
 The foundations of “Freudian psychology” were laid prior to Freud, e.g., by Jean-Martin Charcot (1825-1893), Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850-1909), Pierre Janet (1859-1947), and so on. So-called “Freudian dream analysis” was originated by Wilhelm Stekel (1868-1940). Most people know zilch about Freud’s method of dream analysis. Robert K. Merton noted, “Anticipatory plagiarism occurs when someone steals your original idea and publishes it a hundred years before you were born.”
 The Fathers of Propaganda used some of Jung’s practical ideas. For example, study the Camel Guy ads of R.J. Reynolds, aimed at FUBYA (First Usual Brand Younger Adult Smoker) consumers, and targeting their unconscious desires to impregnate a woman to “prove” their manhood.
 Philip Wylie (1902-1971) was the only man who really understood Jung, and he wasn’t shy about displaying Jung’s letter of validation.
 Theodore Roosevelt was an expert in herd behavior and crowd psychology, besides being an ecologist’s nightmare. Edmund Morris (Colonel Roosevelt, 2010) wrote, “In the spring of 1909, Theodore Roosevelt was out of public office but not out of the public eye. He still had ‘his own image to worry about,’ as Morris observes. He wanted to be known as ‘Colonel Roosevelt,’ to remind everyone of his war record and his readiness to fight again. The press complied. Still there was the public-relations problem of the African safari itself. The conservation president, Morris notes, could ‘ill afford to be seen again, as he was in youth, as an indiscriminate killer of big game.’ Morris does his best to provide T.R. cover, constantly alluding to his efforts to stay under the limit, to hunt animals only to acquire food or specimens for natural history museums. But he cannot conceal the man’s visceral delight in killing. Marching northwest through ‘elephant country’ toward Lake Albert, T.R. “cannot resist downing another [big bull] – his eighth – and guzzling the “excellent soup” made from its trunk.’ Besides those eight elephants, T.R. killed ‘9 lions … 6 buffalo, 13 rhino, 7 giraffes, 7 hippos, 2 ostriches, 3 pythons, 1 crocodile, 5 wildebeest, 20 zebras, 177 antelopes of various species, from eland to dik-dik, 6 monkeys, and 32 other animals and birds: 296 “items” in all.’ His son Kermit added 216. In Roosevelt’s account of the safari, African Game Trails (1910), he insisted that ‘we did not kill a tenth, nor a hundredth part of that we might have killed had we been willing.’ The numbers were evidence of their restraint, not of their excess.”
 John Taylor Gatto (The Underground History of American Education, 2001) wrote, “In Darwin’s second important book, The Descent of Man, the fate in store for those liberal societies which allow mongrelization of the racial stock was made clear. They would fall prey to the ruthlessly evenhanded workings of evolution and devolve through reversion. The lesson of Descent was not lost on Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, or San Francisco. In one brief instant the rationale for a caste system was born and accepted. No merit system ever after could seriously breach the hereditarian barrier any more than it could budge the “scientific” bell-curve barrier. A biological basis for morality had been established.”