Interviews on Freud and Jung on Freud and Jung with Henry A. Murray in 1965

Henry Murray became one of the legendary figures in the history of American psychology. Not only was he a leading pioneer in the field of personality theory, but he created (with Christiana Morgan) the Thematic Apperception test. He also took a leading role in making psychological profiles for the American government's Office of Strategic Services during World War II. For years Murray headed the Harvard Psychological Clinic, and also worked on the writings of Herman Melville for almost half of his long life. Murray took a wholly independent path from Freudian and Jungian organizations, yet his memories of contact with Freud and Jung are worth recording. These interviews with Murray were conducted in 1965. To take only one example, the circumstances of Jung's getting his honorary degree from Harvard in 1936 are elucidated, as well as Freud's inquiry to Murray about why he himself had missed out on that occasion. A postcript to the interview, illustrating Murray's capacities as a writer, concerns his spirited response to the Princeton philosopher Walter Kaufmann's inquiry about Roazen's account of the 1936 honorary degree in his 1975 Freud and His Followers.     

Family matters The descendants of Freud and Jung

A brief history of what it has meant to be a Jungian analyst and/or analytical psychologist in the United States and England is portrayed. At first the differences between psychoanalysis and analytical psychology were very great, and there was great animosity between the two schools. The conflict was much stronger in the United States than in England where Jungians developed a much better rapport with psychoanalysis. Recent theoretical developments within psychoanalysis, such as the development of self theory and intersubjectivity, as well as speaking about religious issues in a new way, have brought psychoanalysis closer to analytical psychology. On the other hand, analytical psychology has been enriched by an increased awareness of the importance of developmental issues and transference and countertransference. The implications for both psychoanalysis and analytical psychology are explored.     

Freud and Jung: an incomplete encounter

The author discusses the bases of the close, personal and professional relationship between Freud and Jung, and conjectures that the eventual schism between them was the result of the different profound psychological needs that each had for the other. Because of his identification with the psychoanalytic enquiry, particularly as it was based in large measure on his own self analysis, Freud looked to Jung as a collaborator who would not deviate from the principles at the basis of psychoanalysis, seeking psychoanalysis' acceptance within the established scientific community. From Jung's point of view, Freud fulfilled the role of a respected father figure who, Jung hoped, would grant him the autonomy and freedom to pursue his own scientific enquiry, based on Freud's ideas, but which he would revise according to his own researches. These led Jung to certain revisions and additions, such as the nature and function of the libido, the broadening of the idea of the complex (as in the Oedipus complex) to include a number of universal, archetypal themes, and the elaboration of the concept of the self. During the years of their relationship, they shared a mutual psychological support which was deeply important to each, based on reciprocal love and respect but also on a fantasy that each would be able to supply to the other a key capacity that the other lacked. Jung was able to offer important scientific verifications of a number of psychoanalytic notions via the Word Association Test, such as the concept of repression, of the complex, including the Oedipus complex, and the proof of the existence of the unconscious. However, neither could supply to the other what each looked for in the other at the psychological level. The final breakdown and rupture in their relationship was caused by their theoretical differences and by the fact that they became bitter competitors in a race to publish treatises on the nature and origins of spirituality and religion. It has left in its wake the implicit traces of discord and misapprehension which have characterized much of subsequent professional relationships between the two traditions.     

Jung's twin brother. Otto Gross and Carl Gustav Jung

This paper is a preliminary communication of several years of research into the life and work of the Austrian psychoanalyst and anarchist Otto Gross (1877–1920). Although he played a pivotal role in the birth of modernity, acting as a significant influence upon psychiatry, psychoanalysis, ethics, sociology and literature, he has remained virtually unknown to this day. Following a biographical sketch and an overview of his main theoretical contributions, the impact of Gross' life and work on the development of analytical theory and practice is described. His relationship with some of the key figures in psychoanalysis is presented, with particular emphasis on his connections to Jung. The paper concludes with an account of relevant contemporary interest in his work: the founding of the International Otto Gross Society, the first edition of The Collected Works of Otto Gross on the Internet, and the 1st and 2nd International Otto Gross Congresses which took place in Berlin in 1999 and at the Burghölzli Clinic, Zürich, in October 2000.     

Understanding Jung: recent biographies and scholarship

The tendency to associate Jung with Freud has undergone a change and both are increasingly perceived as founders of depth psychological schools whose exact relationship is unclear. The separation of the two was largely due to Jung's rejection by the psychoanalytic community because of his perceived spiritual inclinations. Recent scholarship has emphasized these spiritual inclinations in both a positive and negative way and brought to light Jung's non-Freudian sources, while other Jungian practitioners are seeking a closer association with psychoanalysis. This conflicting development is related to tendencies in Jung himself that are evident in his own life and in research conducted into the writing and publication of Memories, Dreams, Reflections. Though the status of the latter as Jung's autobiography has been called into question there remains the necessity to explain the myth of Jung's life enshrined there and the impact this has had on a public looking for meaning in a time of considerable change.     

Misunderstanding Jung: the afterlife of legends

F. X. Charet's article, 'Understanding Jung: recent biographies and scholarship', is full of errors and legends. In this article, I demonstrate the tendentiousness of his criticisms of the historical work of Eugene Taylor and myself concerning Jung's linkages with the subliminal psychology of Théodore Flournoy, William James, and F. W. H. Myers, and the fallaciousness of his criticism of my claim that Memories, Dreams, Reflections was not Jung's autobiography.     

Jung before Freud, not Freud before Jung: the reception of Jung's work in American psychoanalytic circles between 1904 and 1909

A review is first presented of the new Jung scholarship – that Jung is to be properly understood, not as a disciple of Freud, but as the twentieth century exponent of the symbolic hypothesis in the tradition of the late nineteenth century psychologies of transcendence. This is followed by an outline of the so-called French-Swiss-English and American psychotherapeutic alliance, of which Jung was a part, and the cross-cultural mediumistic psychology of the subconscious it promoted, chiefly through the works of William James, F. W. H. Myers, and Théodore Flournoy. Focusing on the experimental work of the Swiss-American pathologist Adolph Meyer and the American neurologist Frederick Peterson, evidence is then produced to show that Jung, before Freud, was more important in American psychotherapeutic circles. His experimental researches into the association method and the psychogalvanic reflex, his study of mediums and connection to Swiss psychiatry had numerous unique alliances with the American scene, particularly because of their similar historical relation between psychology and religion. Therefore, to understand Jung, one must consider the archetypal significance which America held for Jung's own individuation process, as well as the Americanization of Jungian ideas that followed.     

Freud,Jung and The Great Chain of Being

For some time, it has been clear that psychoanalytic theories are built upon the kind of master narratives Roy Schafer, a New York psychoanalyst, described in 1980. As such, psychoanalytic theories may today have lost some of their initial scientific credibility in that they can no longer be seen as summarizing findings from data collected in a research environment. As aids in participating in their patients’ process of healing, however, narratives continue to be used by practitioners and reflect allegiance to core beliefs and propositions with roots in long‐standing Western thought. In this article, the metaphors in master narratives of Freud and Jung are compared with a conceptual system identified by cognitive linguists as ‘The Great Chain of Being’. Based on this analysis, the article proposes that theoretical formulations have mainly a secondary role to play in achieving good outcomes. The most critical element is the therapist's capacity to access a specific narrative for what transpires throughout each treatment.     

From Geneva to Zürich: Jung and French Switzerland

An account is given of the constitution of several components of the Freudocentric reading of Jung and the genesis of analytical psychology, which, it is argued, has led to their mislocation in the intellectual history of the twentieth century.     

The story of an ambivalent relationship: Sigmund Freud and Eugen Bleuler

This paper examines the short-lived flirtation between psychoanalysis and academia and psychiatry in Europe and the reasons for, and consequences of, the fact that their paths diverged. It is argued that Bleuler's break with the psychoanalytic movement is a crucial and, until now, largely underestimated turning point. Bleuler's separation from the psychoanalytic movement was probably more important for the course it has since taken than those of Adler, Stekel, or even Jung. Bleuler's analysis by correspondence by Freud, and its failure, was of paramount importance for the future relationship between Freud and Bleuler, and for Bleuler's assessment of psychoanalysis.     

Idiodynamics and Applied Psychoanalysis

This communication explores the implications of Rosenzweig's idiodynamic method for applied psychoanalytic studies. After reviewing the methodological problems intrinsic to applied psychoanalysis, the author summarizes the idiodynamic method. Rosenzweig's idiodynamic studies of loss and creativity in Freud's life (and the lives of creative individuals) are briefly reviewed. With Rosenzweig's insights in mind, Freud's methodological problem in Totem and Taboo is identified and explored in terms of its psychological meaning. Freud's split with Jung was an important factor in the composition of Totem and Taboo. The Freud–Jung split also influenced the insular nature of organized psychoanalysis and contributed to the relative neglect of empirical methods within psychoanalysis in the twentieth century. The idiodynamic method is intended to foster empirical rigor. For applied psychoanalytic studies, the idiodynamic method would place actual known events, with consequent patterns and meanings emerging over time, above any theoretical scheme. Although his method does not resolve all of the methodological problems of applied psychoanalysis, Rosenzweig offers a disciplined method for creative psychological inquiry.     

Freud and the Hammerschlag family: a formative relationship

From his obituary of Samuel Hammerschlag, we know of Freud's great veneration for his teacher of Jewish religion. However, not only Hammerschlag himself but his whole family had a formative influence on young Freud, who was deeply impressed by their humanity. This paper describes Freud's relationships with all the family members. In particular, it shows how warmly he felt towards the only daughter, Anna Hammerschlag, who was his patient for a while and whom he chose as a godmother for his youngest daughter Anna. By virtue of the crucial role she played in Freud's 'specimen dream' of July 1895 ('Irma's injection'), she also became as it were the godmother of Freud's magnum opus, The Interpretation of Dreams. All the known extant letters from Freud to members of the Hammerschlag family are published here for the first time in English translation.     

Adjective check list descriptions of Freud and Jung

Summary: Personality characteristics of Freud and Jung were assessed by 17 members of a psychology class familiar with biographical and autobiographical material of these subjects by means of Gough's Adjective Check List, Terms used in describing the men and ACL profiles scored on composite lists were consistent with expectation, Blind interpretation of profiles by the test author accorded with knowledge of the subjects. On special scales for "intellectence" and "origence" the subjects fell high on both dimensions which is typical of creative persons.     

Jung and Lévy-Bruhl

Abstract: For his knowledge of ‘primitive’ peoples, C. G. Jung relied on the work of Lucien Lévy‐Bruhl (1857–1939), a French philosopher who in mid‐career became an armchair anthropologist. In a series of books from 1910 on, Lévy‐Bruhl asserted that ‘primitive’ peoples had been misunderstood by modern Westerners. Rather than thinking like moderns, just less rigorously, ‘primitives’ harbour a mentality of their own. ‘Primitive’ thinking is both ‘mystical’ and ‘prelogical’. By ‘mystical’, Lévy‐Bruhl meant that ‘primitive’ peoples experience the world as identical with themselves. Their relationship to the world, including to fellow human beings, is that of participation mystique. By ‘prelogical’, Lévy‐Bruhl meant that ‘primitive’ thinking is indifferent to contradictions. ‘Primitive’ peoples deem all things identical with one another yet somehow still distinct. A human is at once a tree and still a human being. Jung accepted unquestioningly Lévy‐Bruhl's depiction of the ‘primitive’ mind, even when Jung, unlike Lévy‐Bruhl, journeyed to the field to see ‘primitive’ peoples firsthand. But Jung altered Lévy‐Bruhl's conception of ‘primitive’ mentality in three key ways. First, he psychologized it. Whereas for Lévy‐Bruhl ‘primitive’ thinking is to be explained sociologically, for Jung it is to be explained psychologically: ‘primitive’ peoples think as they do because they live in a state of unconsciousness. Second, Jung universalized ‘primitive’ mentality. Whereas for Lévy‐Bruhl ‘primitive’ thinking is ever more being replaced by modern thinking, for Jung ‘primitive’ thinking is the initial psychological state of all human beings. Third, Jung appreciated ‘primitive’ thinking. Whereas for Lévy‐Bruhl ‘primitive’ thinking is false, for Jung it is true—once it is recognized as an expression not of how the world but of how the unconscious works. I consider, along with the criticisms of Lévy‐Bruhl's conception of ‘primitive’ thinking by his fellow anthropologists and philosophers, whether Jung in fact grasped all that Lévy‐Bruhl meant by ‘primitive’ thinking.