Hope that you enjoy, or at least find it interesting, whether or not you agree. This was a pleasure to work on with great co-authors, very fun and deeply thought provoking.

This is part of a slightly broader effort I am interested in of discussing depth psychology from the perspective of modern neuroscience. I've shared a few snippets, but I probably can't fully do it justice or explain the motivations for all the arguments made without reading the full paper!

As such, archetypes continue not because they are eternal, but because brains keep recursively reinstantiating the same broad motifs in local context. This is one example which describes this type of mechanism of how archetypal stories may emerge.

We also suggest a reconceptualisation of the notion of the “collective unconscious.” From our view, it can be understood as shared statistical structure, in that patterns brains learn and transmit similar kinds of information across generations through language, culture, and story.

REBUS effects from psychedelics, in loosening classical constraints imposed from the default mode network, permits the type of archetypal imagery often reported under psychedelics to enter conscious awareness.

....subcortical affective systems, low level sensory imagery, and higher level narrative cognition. It is the interplay between these systems that given rise to (in order) archetypes as such, archetypal imagery, and archetypal stories.

We attempt to lend construct validity to Jungian archetypes in the language of modern neuroscience, of course borrowing from the framework of predictive processing. We propose a model of archetypes as a 'trilogical interplay' between....

This was the first study to break down this analysis in this particular way, and points to the importance of set and setting in psychedelic experiences, but also how each of these factors interact with each other. Enjoy

After the experience, many reported lasting changes in behavior and attitudes, with personal growth and new perspectives. Multiple posts often described the experience and eudaemonic.

During the experience, sensory shifts and mindset solicit and inform insights, and the environment provides crucial support.

Before the experience, knowledge, intention, and preparation play a big role in shaping the experience.

We performed thematic analyses separately in each of the phases of psychedelic experience (before, during, after).

TLDR; Aussie policy on psychedelic therapy is ahead of clinician knowledge and (to a lesser extent) willingness. There is a desire tor structured formal training from clinicians, particularly psychologists.

Clinicians who'd personally taken psychedelics were much more likely to support psychedelic therapy, and more willing to offer integration supports to people who had taken them independently.

Interestingly, we found a gap between desired and actual knowledge clinicians had - whilst 17% had formal training in psychedelic therapy, 80% desire evidence-based education. Many respondents relied on things like Reddit or podcasts for information about psychedelics, and most want formal training.

Most clinicians surveyed support psychedelic therapy (at least in theory). However, psychiatrists are most likely to question research quality, safety and ethics of it (even when under medical supervision). Psychologists are much more supportive.

I'm very much with you that ideation is a non-trivial issue (speaking from personal experience as well). Definitely much more needs doing on developing risk-management and clinical frameworks - which has been badly overlooked so far.