Two Jungs. Apropos a paper by Mark Saban

Jung's idea of the ‘personal equation’ amounts to the reflection that theoretical differences between the psychologies that people teach are rooted in their personalities, in other words, that they are due to the psychology each one ‘has’. This concept also applies to different interpretations of Jung's work. The serious difficulties that Mark Saban has with my psychology are a case in point. Recourse to the concept of the personal equation reveals that Saban has his Jung and I have mine. With his insistence on his Talmudic methodological principle of dream interpretation, that ‘the dream is its own interpretation’, according to Saban Jung means nothing but a rejection of Freudian free association. My Jung goes far beyond that. Jung understands this methodological principle above all in terms of what he calls ‘circumambulation’. The main part of this paper is devoted to an elucidation of what circumambulation involves as a mode of dream interpretation. The paper concludes with the distinction Jung himself introduced between two types of reading of his work, either as ‘paper’ and ‘dead nostrums’ or as ‘fire and wind’, and pleads for a reconstruction of Jung's psychology as a whole in terms of his most advanced, deepest insights, instead of a dogmatic reading mainly based on the early Jung, a reading for which his later revolutionary insights are at best negligible embellishments.     

The hermeneutic background of C. G. Jung

Hermeneutics has been central to the practice of Jung's psychology from the beginning, although he never fully and consistently developed a hermeneutic method of inquiry and the literature addressing this aspect of his psychology is not extensive. In this paper(1) we undertake a critical re-examination of Jung's relationship to hermeneutic thought, based on his explicit references to hermeneutics in the Collected Works and his theoretical development of the notion of archetypes. Although Jung did not consistently formulate a hermeneutic approach to inquiry, his theoretical development of archetypes is rich in hermeneutic implications. In particular, his notion of the archetype as such can be understood hermeneutically as a form of non-conceptual background understanding. Some implications of this construal of archetypes for Jungian hermeneutics as a form of inquiry are considered.     

Interpretation between determinism and hermeneutics. A new approach]

There are two traditional views of psychoanalytic interpretation. One takes its bearings from Freud and regards the present condition of the subject as determined by his/her real past. The objective is then to uncover the "real" history. The other may be termed hermeneutic/creative and has its origins in authors such as C.G. Jung and Paul Ricoeur. It looks upon interpretation as a process of conferring subsequent significance on a fragmentary past devoid of meaning. In an attempt to break away from this rigid dualism, the author describes interpretation in the analysis context as a method of deconstruction with the aim of creating scope for new constructions that are the work of the person undergoing analysis. In the light of this approach interpretation reveals itself as an expression of the unity of constraint (determinism) and freedom (hermeneutics).     

Secular and religious: the intrinsic doubleness of analytical psychology and the hegemony of naturalism in the social sciences

In recent years a number of prominent social theorists, including Jürgen Habermas and Charles Taylor, have voiced concern about the hegemony of naturalistic, secular assumptions in the social sciences, and in their different ways have sought to address this by establishing greater parity between secular and religious perspectives. This paper suggests that C.G. Jung's analytical psychology, which hitherto has been largely ignored by social theory, may have something to contribute on this issue as it can be understood coherently both empirically, without reference to transcendent reality, and metaphysically, with reference to transcendent reality. It is argued that, despite his denials of any metaphysical intent, Jung does in fact engage in metaphysics and that together the empirical and metaphysical vectors of his thought result in a rich and distinctive double perspective. This dual secular and religious perspective can be seen as part of Jung's own critique of the hegemony of naturalism and secularism, which for Jung has profound social as well as clinical relevance. The concern and approach that Habermas and Taylor share with Jung on this issue may provide some grounds for increased dialogue between analytical psychology and the social sciences.     

Learning from the patient: The East,synchronicity and transference in the history of an unknown case of C.G. Jung

This article presents the history of one until now unknown case of C.G. Jung: Maggy Reichstein. Born in Indonesia in 1894 in a very aristocratic family, she brought her sister to Zurich to be treated by Jung in 1919, and later she herself was in analysis with him. Jung used her case as example in his lecture in 1937 on the realities of practical psychotherapy, relating it to the process of transference and countertransference. Jung deepened his studies in Eastern psychology after a series of dreams she had, which culminated in the Yoga Kundalini Seminars. She was also the case presented in his article of 1951 on the concept of synchronicity. Jung wrote that her case, concerning synchronicity, remained unique in his experience. Jung also published some of her mandalas. He considered her able to understand his ideas in depth. Reichstein was for Jung an important case, which challenged and triggered his interests in different subjects.     

Beyond his story: from interpretation to impact of stories from different cultures

This paper deals with the history of psychoanalysis (Freud) and analytical psychology (Jung) in the light of recent developments and considers the release of new creativity in the field after its deconstruction. Cross-cultural contributions in the form of teaching stories are estimated to be of relevance, while the emphasis will be on what we, as analysts, can learn from these teachings, rather than interpreting them in the more traditional way in which such stories can be shown to fit analytical theory.
The most crucial debate in psychoanalysis of the recent era centres around stories and the deconstruction thereof. It is the debate between Lacan and Derrida on the interpretation of a crucial story (Poe's story, The Purloined Letter). The core of their views will be discussed in this paper in the light of the major differences between Freud and Jung. Whereas Freud's theoretical core-complex is closely related to Lacan's phallocentric Truth, it is Derrida who speaks of germination and dissemination as the way in which Truth manifests itself. Derrida's thought on text and words is very close to Jung's conceptions of the image and symbol, in which there is no monotheistic paradigm ruling theory     

A collective unconscious reconsidered: Jung's archetypal imagination in the light of contemporary psychology and social science

A needed rapprochement between Jung and the contemporary human sciences may rest less on the much debated relevance of a biologistic collective unconscious than on a re-inscribing of an archetypal imagination, as the phenomenological and empirical core of Jungian psychology. The most promising approaches in this regard in terms of theory and research in psychology come from combining the cognitive psychology of metaphor and synaesthesia, individual differences in imaginative absorption and openness to numinous experience and spirituality as a form of symbolic intelligence. On the socio-cultural side, this cognitive psychology of archetypal imagination is also congruent with Lévi-Strauss on the metaphoric roots of mythological thinking, and Durkheim on a sociology of collective consciousness. This conjoined perspective, while validating the cross cultural commonality of physical metaphor intuited by Jung and Hillman on alchemy, also shows Jung's Red Book, considered as the expressive source for his more formal psychology, to be far closer in spirit to a socio-cultural collective consciousness, based on metaphoric imagination, than to a phylogenetic or evolutionary unconscious. A mutual re-inscribing of Jung into congruent areas of contemporary psychology, anthropology, sociology, and vice versa, can help to further validate Jung's key observations and is fully consistent with Jung's own early efforts at synthesis within the human sciences.     

Is teaching Jung within university possible?: a response to David Tacey

Until recently, Jungian psychology has been suspicious of academia and remained almost exclusively connected with analytical practice. Attempts by analytical psychologists towards a rapprochement have, by and large, failed because they were based either on inappropriate efforts to fit Jung within an unsuitable paradigm of science or on omnipotent expectations that academics accept the Jungian 'wisdom' unquestionably. By distinguishing two different Jungian epistemologies (an open and closed one) it is argued that the emergence of the new paradigm in social and human sciences (based on constructivist and non-essentialist ideas) offers now a unique opportunity to connect the epistemologically open Jung with these new developments in the academy. Thus, Jungians should now face the challenge of open dialogue with academics which can result in mutual benefit.     

Theoretical foundations of analytical psychology: recent developments and controversies

This article gives an introductory overview of the papers in this volume originally given at the Joint Conference of the IAAP and the University of Basel, Basel, October 18‐20, 2018. The aim of the conference was to bring core concepts of analytical psychology together with theorizing and research from academic sciences, at the very place where Jung started his academic career, the University of Basel. The conference focussed on three fields: the relationship of consciousness and the unconscious and the theory of complexes; the theory of archetypes; and the status of analytical psychotherapy in contemporary psychotherapy research. The aim of the conference was to further the development of theory in analytical psychology in relation to results and insights in contiguous areas of knowledge. In the first area, contributors pointed to the solid evidence especially from the neurosciences for the psychodynamic conceptualizations of the unconscious, and also for the concept of complexes. In contrast to this, the concept of archetypes is controversial, with a majority of contributors questioning Jung’s biological conceptualizations of archetypes, and speaking instead for reformulations from the perspective of cultural theory, dynamic systems theory and other approaches. In the field of psychotherapy research, contributors pointed to the profound need for conducting more empirical studies on the outcome of Jungian psychotherapy, but also for a thorough reconsideration of standard research designs in the field.     

The five functions of psychological type

From the mid‐1930s to the end of his life, Jung complained that most readers misunderstood the main point of his book Psychological Types. He viewed being a type as one‐sided and problematic for a variety of reasons. His symbol‐based solution to the ‘type problem’ involved developing a transcendent function to become the new dominant function of consciousness. However, this function has not featured in the popular use of his typology and Isabel Briggs Myers believed that the one‐sidedness of Jung's eight types could be balanced by the auxiliary function. This has led to the transcendent function being widely ignored, and to a developmental philosophy that encourages a degree of one‐sidedness. This divergence of popular type theory and analytical psychology is the result of various factors, such as Jung describing typology as containing four functions, and a letter in 1950 where Jung apparently supported Myers’ version of type theory. This hinders the application of analytical psychology to normal psychology, and particularly individual and cultural development. If we refer to Jung's typology as containing five functions not four, this more accurately represents both the content of the book Psychological Types and the primary value Jung saw in typology.     

荣格心理学与中国文化

荣格及其分析心理学,对于我们国内的心理学和人文科学都曾产生了重要影响。但是,荣格心理学本身,却与我们的中国文化,有着内在的联系。或者说,在荣格正是在充分吸收了中国文化的基础上,才完善与发展民其分析心理学的体系。在本文中,作者通过对汉学字维尔海姆,以及通过《易经》和“道”,分析与论述了荣格分析心理学与中国传统 关系,阐述了中国文化心理学的意义 。     

The timeliness and timelessness of the 'archaic': analytical psychology, 'primordial' thought, synchronicity

In 1930 Jung gave a lecture entitled 'Archaic Man' to the Lesezirkel in Hottingen. Following recent work on this text by two commentators, this article uses their interpretations as a springboard for a complementary reading, which emphasizes the fundamental significance of this paper as bridging the earlier and later stages in the development of analytical psychology, and examines closely the opposition between 'archaic'-'modern' in Jung's paper; indeed, in his work as a whole. In contrast to Lévy-Bruhl, Jung rejects the label of 'mysticism' as applied to the 'primitive' point of view, and his anti-mystical stance can be explained in terms of his dialectical conception of the relationship between Self and World. On this account, the subject and the object--the psyche and the external world--are more closely (inter)related than conventional (modern) epistemology and ontology generally believe. This conception of the relation between the subjective and the objective foreshadows his later, and controversial, concept of synchronicity, which is, Jung insists, a way of apprehending the world in terms of its meaning. Concluding with a survey of the status of the 'primordial' in some other texts by Jung, this article aims to foster further debate on one of Jung's most complex and fascinating texts.     

Jung in the academy: devotions and resistances

Jung's position in the contemporary mainstream English-speaking university is problematical indeed. For various historical and ideological reasons, Jung is generally not included in the courses in academic psychology, and in the humanities and social sciences his reception is lukewarm to say the least. He has only a marginal place in religious studies. This notorious academic resistance to Jung is compensated, some would say overcompensated, by student interest and enthusiasm, which sometimes seeks to make a religious dogma out of Jung's psychology. In a sense, cynical resistance to Jung and fanatical devotion to Jung can be seen to generate each other in a sort of binary opposition. This situation is unfortunate because neither extreme presents a fair or balanced view of Jung's thought or of his contribution to intellectual history. These and other problems associated with the teaching of Jung in a university setting are briefly outlined in this paper.     

The riddle of Siegfried: exploring methods and psychological perspectives in analytical psychology

Jung's dream of the killing of Siegfried poses a riddle: why did the unconscious choose precisely Siegfried as the hero to be murdered? Jung himself declares that he does not know. This paper attempts to decipher this riddle using three distinct methodological approaches accepted by Jung, two of them in fact grounded in his theories of dream interpretation. Besides presenting some possible answers to the riddle of Siegfried, this interpretative reflection brings to light the discrepancy of the psychological perspectives created by the heterogeneity of methods within analytical psychology.     

Analytical psychology and its relation to psychoanalysis. A personal view

Jungian analysis is a process based on analytical psychology; it shows local variations giving emphasis to different aspects of Jung's work within the various societies which make up the IAAP. I describe the orientation of the Society of Analytical Psychology (SAP). I have emphasized the different origins of psychoanalysis and analytical psychology and described how, because we encounter the same clinical phenomena, our differences centre on technique and interpretation in the context of our theoretical differences (see Astor 1998, p. 697 & 2001). In the main the link to psychoanalysis has come from the connection forged by Fordham, who recognized that Jung and Klein shared a similar perception of the significance of unconscious phantasy. For Klein unconscious phantasy was the primary unconscious content, and this is different, as Spillius has recently pointed out, from Freud for whom, 'the prime mover, so to speak, is the unconscious wish.     

A narratological methodology for identifying archetypal story patterns in autobiographical narratives

Based on Jung's definition of archetype the concept 'archetypal story pattern' is developed as well as a research method drawing on narrative analysis and biographical research to identify these archetypal story patterns in life stories. Jung pointed out that personal myths, archetypal patterns found, e.g., in mythology, can govern the life course of individuals unconsciously. In the Theory of Narrative Identity comparable concepts have been mentioned but were never fully developed. In my research I try to combine Jung's concept of the archetype with the elaborated methodology of narrative analysis. Archetypes can manifest as narratives and the identity construction of a person via narrating the life story can be influenced or even totally structured by archetypal stories which give a specific form as well as a specific meaning to the person's identity. The method of extracting an underlying archetypal pattern from an autobiographical narrative is demonstrated. The results of the research on 20 autobiographical interviews and the inherent archetypal patterns are summarized. The major aim of this paper is to describe in detail the application of a well established method of the social sciences on a key concept of Jungian psychology to show that these concepts can be integrated into recent research frameworks of academic sciences. On the other hand it shows that Jungian concepts can be investigated through established and well defined research methods in empirical research settings.     

Jung and Gnosticism

Carl Jung interprets Gnosticism the way he interprets alchemy: as a hoary counterpart to his analytical psychology. As interpreted by Jung, Gnostic myths describe a seemingly outward, if also inward, process which is in fact an entirely inward, psychological one. The Gnostic progression from sheer bodily existence to the rediscovery of the immaterial spark trapped in the body and the reunion of that spark with the immaterial godhead symbolize the Jungian progression from sheer ego consciousness to the rediscovery of the unconscious within the mind and the integration of the ego with the unconscious to forge the self. For Jung, Gnostics are the ancient counterpart to present-day Jungian patients. Both constitute a psychological elite. Where most persons are satisfied with traditional means of connecting themselves to their unconscious, Gnostics and Jungians are sensi tive to the demise of those means and are seeking new ones. Where, alternatively, most other persons are oblivious to the existence of the unconscious altogether, Gnostics and Jungians are preoccupied with it. Gnostics project their unconscious onto the cosmos and are therefore striving to connect themselves to something external, not just, like Jungians, to something internal. Interpreting in Jungian terms the Gnostic myth Poimandres, I argue that Jungian psychology makes enormous sense of the myth, but not in the way that Jung envisions. Upon rediscovering his spark, the Gnostic seeks to reject his body altogether rather than to mesh the two. He does strive to reunite with the godhead, but the godhead is immateriality itself rather than, like the body, matter. Indeed, the godhead, taken psychologically, is only a projection of the unconscious onto the cosmos, so that the unconscious is thereby reuniting with itself. The Gnostic's uncompromising rejection of the body and, more, of the whole material world therefore symbolizes not, as Jung assumes, the Jungian ideal of wholeness but the Jungian nemesis of inflation or, worse, psychosis. I suggest that Jung misconstrues Gnosticism because he parallels it to alchemy, which does fit the Jungian ideal.     

Of texts and contexts: reflections upon the publication of The Jung-White Letters

In addition to his many other personae, Jung was a writer and an author, which means a creator, whose written works underlie and authorize a field of thought and clinical work, i.e., analytical psychology. Not widely recognized is that many of his authored texts were stimulated by important and intense personal relationships. Freud and Victor White loom large, the first standing behind major early analytical texts like Wandlungen und Symbole der Libido and Psychological Types, the second behind later texts on culture, religion, and Christian theology. The publication of The Jung-White Letters reveals the significance of his relationship with Victor White for the authoring of Answer to Job.     

Jung and Gnosticism

Carl Jung interprets Gnosticism the way he interprets alchemy: as a hoary counterpart to his analytical psychology. As interpreted by Jung, Gnostic myths describe a seemingly outward, if also inward, process which is in fact an entirely inward, psychological one. The Gnostic progression from sheer bodily existence to the rediscovery of the immaterial spark trapped in the body and the reunion of that spark with the immaterial godhead symbolize the Jungian progression from sheer ego consciousness to the rediscovery of the unconscious within the mind and the integration of the ego with the unconscious to forge the self. For Jung, Gnostics are the ancient counterpart to present-day Jungian patients. Both constitute a psychological elite. Where most persons are satisfied with traditional means of connecting themselves to their unconscious, Gnostics and Jungians are sensi tive to the demise of those means and are seeking new ones. Where, alternatively, most other persons are oblivious to the existence of the unconscious altogether, Gnostics and Jungians are preoccupied with it. Gnostics project their unconscious onto the cosmos and are therefore striving to connect themselves to something external, not just, like Jungians, to something internal. Interpreting in Jungian terms the Gnostic myth Poimandres, I argue that Jungian psychology makes enormous sense of the myth, but not in the way that Jung envisions. Upon rediscovering his spark, the Gnostic seeks to reject his body altogether rather than to mesh the two. He does strive to reunite with the godhead, but the godhead is immateriality itself rather than, like the body, matter. Indeed, the godhead, taken psychologically, is only a projection of the unconscious onto the cosmos, so that the unconscious is thereby reuniting with itself. The Gnostic's uncompromising rejection of the body and, more, of the whole material world therefore symbolizes not, as Jung assumes, the Jungian ideal of wholeness but the Jungian nemesis of inflation or, worse, psychosis. I suggest that Jung misconstrues Gnosticism because he parallels it to alchemy, which does fit the Jungian ideal.