Old Creek Rites

Jung, C.G., The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious: The Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 9, Part 1. Second Edition. Routledge: London, 1968 (Page 7).

Me:

Psychology has been known and studied not empirically but as an art in literature, as religion, as mythology, as conflict, and as an overall extension of humanity for millennia. For example, shamanism has navigated the unconscious and liminal states, defining what is below, between, and amongst our consciousness. 

But as an empirical, or hard, science, psychology has only come into existence in the last 150 years. There are many practical reasons for the delay, or for a shift in psychology from a religious or spiritual domain to the secular and scientific. However, instead of looking at the challenges of the discipline, instead we must observe the shifts within the collective psyche. 

Emerging at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the growth of psychology is parralled by shifts from compartmentalized to global perceptions of identity: World wars, space races, PTSD disorders that impacted entire generations of people, overarching threats such as the atomic bomb and terrorism, etc. Throughout the century and a half, technology also expanded the ability to share both positive and negative experiences without bounds. 

The challenges of objectifying the notoriously subjective experience of human-ness are well documented. And, most interestingly, we may be able to witness this debate become enacted, mirrored, or perhaps embodied by advances in artificial intellegence. However, in this particular quote, Jung introduces the topic of archetypes as a method for strategically (if not empirically) studying the collective unconscious. 

Archetypes are symbolic patterns that recur historically throughout cultures and represent universal concepts, such as those Jung argued for: the Anima/o, the Shadow, the Persona, and the Self. And, beyond such as the hero, the Caregiver, the sage, the Rebel, the Innocent. Critically, we have a concept of these ideas within our own personal consciousness, but they also exist in a universal, collective unconscious, which is not shaped by personal experience. 

So, to answer the question, why is psychology the youngest of the empirical sciences, I would respond that the archetype of Psychology is old and exists within our collective unconscious. However, it is only recently that we have begun to understand Psychology as a science in empirical terms. 

Just so, it is just as crucial that we remember that archetypes exist as constellations. To fully conceptualize the potential of psychology, it cannot just be reduced to its empirical nature; it must also be experienced as art, religion, philosophy, mythology, ritual, exercise, and as a sense of being in the world that has been mediated throughout its history. 

Chat GPT:

Short answer: because it’s really hard to study minds with the same rigor as rocks, cells, or planets.

Longer, clearer answer 👇

Psychology is considered the youngest empirical science mainly because of three big obstacles that took a long time to overcome:

1. The subject matter is invisible and complex

Physics studies matter and energy. Biology studies living organisms.
Psychology studies mental processes—thoughts, emotions, memories, motivations.

Those things:

• Can’t be directly observed
• Change from moment to moment
• Are influenced by culture, language, and personal history

It took centuries before scientists figured out how to measure the mind indirectly (reaction times, errors, brain activity, behavior patterns).

2. Measurement tools came very late

Empirical science depends on precise measurement. Psychology had to wait for:

• Accurate clocks (to measure reaction time)
• Statistical methods
• Experimental designs
• Later, neuroscience tools (EEG, fMRI, etc.)

Before these, psychology stayed mostly philosophical. Think Plato, Aristotle, Descartes—brilliant thinkers, but not running controlled experiments.

3. The mind was claimed by philosophy and religion first

For most of history, questions like:

• What is consciousness?
• Do we have free will?
• Why do we feel emotions?

were handled by philosophy and theology, not science.
Only in the late 19th century did people start saying: “Let’s test these ideas experimentally.”

That’s why 1879 (Wilhelm Wundt’s first psychology lab) is often marked as psychology’s “birth” as a science.

4. Humans studying themselves creates bias

Psychology has a built-in problem:
The observer and the observed are the same species—sometimes the same person.

This makes:

• Objectivity harder
• Bias more likely
• Replication more difficult

It took time to develop safeguards against these issues.

In one sentence:

Psychology is the youngest empirical science because the mind is abstract, hard to measure, historically philosophical, and methodologically tricky—so it took longer for it to become scientifically testable.

If you want, I can also compare psychology’s timeline directly with physics, biology, or chemistry to make it even clearer.