Creativity is posited in the cultural-level relational.
When assuming the role in a relational, creativity is seen simply due to the infinite permutations of circumstance - that is, creativity is only an appearance but it is a real appearance. The actor and agent is thus the relational itself and not any other.
This creativity is sought to be captured and reduced in "personality": the relational is deemed and damned as stereotypy; while the precipitated non-relational selfs (precipitated by contrast to the postulated Principle either in reaction or in "embodiment of") are repositories of will and, after secularization, of personality.
Jung's trangression was most severe in that he tried to enshrine (via affect of reconciliation) a diametrical opposition of the romantic to the rational within "Gnostic" wholeness. These were never 'wholesome" dichotomies in the heathen where the transformation from potential to actuation was always the "true dichotomy". The relational is not a dichotomy.
When assuming the role in a relational, creativity is seen simply due to the infinite permutations of circumstance - that is, creativity is only an appearance but it is a real appearance. The actor and agent is thus the relational itself and not any other.
This creativity is sought to be captured and reduced in "personality": the relational is deemed and damned as stereotypy; while the precipitated non-relational selfs (precipitated by contrast to the postulated Principle either in reaction or in "embodiment of") are repositories of will and, after secularization, of personality.
Jung's trangression was most severe in that he tried to enshrine (via affect of reconciliation) a diametrical opposition of the romantic to the rational within "Gnostic" wholeness. These were never 'wholesome" dichotomies in the heathen where the transformation from potential to actuation was always the "true dichotomy". The relational is not a dichotomy.