Thanks, Mimsey. Hugs!
Studying Jung is different than studying many other philosophical concepts. Jung's archetypes have nothing to do with engrams, though. Archetypes are not bad, there is no conflict, incident or engram that causes them. They aren't even similar to engrams. They are not implants, not even an individual or group experience. Archetypes just ARE. What Jung proposes is an entirely different line of thought, but if someone just casually reads it who believes in past lives, engrams, etc. they often try to understand it through those preconceived ideas and misunderstand the whole thing. You're not the first to do this. Jung just can't be studied casually.
You have to clear your mind first, and that's true for many philosophical concepts. Philosophy as a subject is a mind-blower, because there are so many different ways to look at things and think about things. There are completely different lines of thought than Hubbard and past lives to be explored.
Jung is one of those different lines of thought. So clear your mind.
The briefest explanation I can give you is that archetypes are basic character patterns that make it possible for us to assume roles in our lives, There are basic conflicts and other interactions between those roles/archetypes that are part of living. One understands things through archetypes or defines self or others through archetypes; one does not get rid of an archetype. They are not a bad thing, that's your preconceived Scientology idea. Archetypes just ARE.
Carl Jung's archetypes preceded Hubbard writings about implants, past lives, OT3, etc. If Hubbard copied Jung, as you seem to believe, then Hubbard didn't understand Jung's work and only used it superficially to forward his cult agenda and sell his implant hocus-pocus. What Hubbard writes has little to nothing to do with Jung, but you wouldn't know that unless you really studied Jung with a clear mind and no preconceived ideas.
Jung's work is theory, but it is fascinating and has been a springboard for thousands of things, from Sociology to computer games.