Contemporary discussions about identity formation often focus on the interaction between individuals and media systems. The recent discussion in the Beyond Gender podcast, with Soren Aldaco, provides a useful example. In the context of Detrans Awareness Day, the conversation examines how social media algorithms, online communities, and narrative feedback loops influence the way adolescents interpret personal experiences and construct identity frameworks. From a sociological perspective, this analysis aligns closely with symbolic interactionism. Identity is understood as emerging through the interpretation of shared symbols, language, and social feedback.
In such a model, meaning is negotiated through interaction. Individuals encounter symbols, interpret them, test them within social groups, and gradually stabilise a sense of self. In earlier generations, these processes occurred primarily through embodied social life. Today they occur within mediated symbolic environments. Algorithms sort and amplify particular narratives, peer communities validate them, and individuals internalise them as interpretive frameworks through which personal experience is understood.
This description is persuasive, but it remains incomplete if it assumes that the symbolic environment consists only of social discourse and technological mediation. A deeper psychological perspective suggests that these processes operate within a broader psychic ecology in which individual, social, and archetypal dimensions interact simultaneously.
Carl Jung consistently questioned the assumption that human sensemaking is purely individual. In his model of the psyche, the conscious ego is only one component within a layered structure that includes the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious. The latter is not simply a storehouse of inherited memories but a dynamic field of archetypal patterns that shape perception, imagination, and symbolic life. These archetypal structures organise experience before it is interpreted by conscious reasoning.
From this perspective, identity narratives circulating through media systems do not simply persuade individuals through social influence. They resonate with deeper symbolic structures already present within the psyche. What appears to be a social contagion may instead be the activation of archetypal motifs that move through a culture when historical conditions make them psychologically available.
Jung occasionally described such processes in terms that approach what might be called psychoid events. These are occurrences that blur the boundary between psychological and biological phenomena. One historical example frequently discussed in depth psychology circles is the epidemic of encephalitis lethargica in the early twentieth century.
Encephalitis lethargica was a neurological epidemic that appeared globally between about 1916 and the late 1920s, characterised by inflammation of the brain and a striking syndrome of profound sleepiness, movement disorders, and psychiatric disturbance. Patients often developed extreme lethargy, sometimes sleeping for long periods or entering states resembling coma, while others experienced agitation, hallucinations, or behavioural change.
Many survivors were left with severe long-term neurological damage, most commonly a form of post-encephalitic Parkinsonism marked by rigid muscles, slowed movement, and diminished facial expression. The cause of the outbreak has never been conclusively identified, though viral or autoimmune mechanisms have been proposed. The condition became historically notable not only because of its mysterious origin and global spread, but also because of the large number of individuals who lived for decades in a frozen neurological state after the acute illness had passed.
Jung considered such events as possible expressions of disturbances within the broader psychic field that connects human consciousness with collective symbolic patterns.
Jung’s reflections on Germany in the 1920s and 1930s provide another example. Jung argued that the rise of National Socialism could not be understood solely in political or economic terms. In his essay on Wotan, Jung suggested that the German population had become possessed by an archetypal force associated with the old Germanic god of storm and frenzy. This was not meant literally, in a theological sense. Rather, Jung was describing a cultural situation in which a mythic structure within the collective unconscious had become activated, expressing itself through mass psychology and political behaviour.
Such ideas are controversial, yet they raise an important question. If archetypal structures can influence collective behaviour under certain conditions, then changes in media environments may function as triggers that amplify or channel these deeper psychic patterns. Media systems would not create archetypal energies, but they might organise the symbolic channels through which those energies become expressed.
A related idea appears in Rupert Sheldrake’s concept of morphic resonance. Sheldrake proposes that patterns of behaviour in biological and social systems may be influenced by fields of memory created by previous occurrences of the same pattern. In this view, similarities in human behaviour across populations are not explained solely by imitation or contagion. They may arise because certain patterns resonate within a shared field of influence.
Whether one accepts Sheldrake’s hypothesis or not, the concept offers a useful metaphor for understanding how symbolic patterns circulate in human societies. Behavioural similarities may reflect resonance within a collective symbolic field, rather than simple diffusion through communication networks.
This perspective suggests that media environments should be understood as part of a wider ecology of sensemaking. Social platforms, cultural narratives, archetypal imagery, and unconscious psychological structures interact continuously. Algorithms may accelerate the circulation of particular symbolic motifs, but those motifs acquire power only when they resonate with deeper psychic structures already present in the collective imagination.
The Beyond Gender discussion touches on many elements of this ecology. It examines social feedback loops, linguistic framing, and the psychological dynamics of identity formation. Yet, it largely avoids direct engagement with the mythic and symbolic layers of the psyche that Jung considered central to understanding collective psychological movements.
A Jungian approach would not replace sociological or technological explanations. Instead, it would complement them by recognising that cultural narratives often carry archetypal significance. The transformation stories, authenticity myths, and identity journeys that circulate online are not merely social constructs. They frequently echo ancient symbolic motifs associated with rebirth, initiation, and the search for belonging.
When media environments change, the symbolic pathways through which these motifs circulate also change. A digital platform may become a new theatre for archetypal expression, organising large numbers of individuals around shared symbolic narratives. In such circumstances, shifts in media structure may correspond with shifts in collective psychic disposition.
The Hermetic and alchemical maxim frequently cited by Jung offers a concise way of describing this relationship. “As above, so below; as within, so without.” The symbolic structures of the psyche are reflected in cultural forms, and cultural forms in turn shape the psychic environment in which individuals interpret their experience.
Similar to the concept of spacetime, we must begin to contend with the working of socialmeaning. As one vector changes or alters, there is a corresponding or relational change in associated vectors. If we change the external media and sensemaking systems, they have an effect on the internal sense making systems. If the internal sensemaking systems change, then there is an external manifestation.
Jung did not discuss identity per se, instead he focussed on symbolic forms of identification, the archetypes and the differences between the Self, persona and character. Understanding identity formation, as a contemporary preoccupation, therefore requires more than an analysis of algorithms or social influence. It requires an awareness of the dynamic ecology linking technological systems, social interaction, symbolic narratives, and the deeper mythic structures of the human psyche.
Only by examining these deep-rooted symbolic layers together can we begin to understand why particular patterns of meaning arise within particular historical moments.
The contemporary media environment may therefore be seen not simply as a communication system but as a symbolic ecosystem. Within that ecosystem, personal identities, collective narratives, and archetypal motifs continually intersect. When conditions align, these intersections can produce powerful shifts in how individuals and societies understand themselves.
Seen in this way, the question is not only how media influence identity. The deeper question concerns how media environments interact with the symbolic structures of the collective psyche, shaping the forms through which archetypal energies find expression in the modern world.
Leave a Reply