Tag Archives: psychic reality

A 21st Century Look at Jung’s Concept of Individuation

For those not appreciative of the subtler forms of satire, I thought hard about re-doing this post in a more serious tone — however, I failed utterly. Because I think it’s an accurate description of Jung’s psychology of mid-life, and because satire can be a meaningful way of approaching unfamiliar ideas, I let it stand with one caveat: my projections onto the conventional perception of Jung’s ideas are my own small biases against the extraverted interpretation of the psychological facts he established through his work.

Jung arrived at his concept of individuation by comparing his own inner experiences to historical ideas; their connections to themes in myth and literature, and similar ideas in his patients: a scientific attempt to provide a broad compendium of associations to the central images forming the structure of the unconscious mind. The process of coming to terms with the unconscious meant discerning one’s unique personality from the cultural demands dominating the first half of life. That may appeal to those with a morbid susceptibility to inner compulsion, but let’s consider this idea from a more realistic social standpoint.

His speculations of a ‘psychological’ change accompanying menopause startled me. The changes in physiology initiated by hormonal diminution were actually seen by Jung as also effecting an emotional development designed to accentuate contrasexual ‘spiritual’ functions. How physical processes and spirituality are linked to homosexual fantasies, I couldn’t discern.

Far-fetched though it seems, this idea revolved around a bizarre model in which mind and body appeared as reciprocal factors designed for ‘purposes’ beyond physical need, social adjustment, or even consciousness. Though today we know the conscious mind is relatively self-sustaining and merely endures the body as the crude vehicle of an out-grown animal heritage (viz., eating, having sex and going to the bathroom), Jung yet conceived it as the basis of deeper aims which couldn’t be seen or touched (!).

He believed that natural processes don’t necessarily adhere to rational scientific ideas. Stages of development appeared to him as fluid and relative, interpenetrating to such a complex degree that nothing could really be certain (where’s the science in that?). Beyond the instinctual maintenance of the body, Jung theorized ‘subjective’ psychic processes which could be inferred (fantasized?) through personal emotional experience. ‘Unconscious’ drives were discernible through indirect reflections in behavior and were thought to develop according to natural laws. 

FYI: an interesting, though equally irrational, supplement to Jung’s model was the idea of  ‘centroversion’ introduced by Erich Neumann, a long-time member of his cult. It was intended as a complement to Jung’s concepts of introversion and extraversion, the psychic mechanisms adapting us to inner and outer ‘worlds’. These spontaneous movements of ‘psychic energy’ were seen as alternating of their own accord (what?!) as demands change with development and the effects of the environment. Bear with me.

It was Neumann’s further contention that centroversion is the organizing and directing function which coordinates the other two mechanisms in the gradual unfolding of consciousness, much like Jung’s outlier concept of the Self. Though it smacks of a philosophical chimera in an atheistic age, it was meant as a description of an ‘innate’ force behind the evolution of the individual as well as the species (what happened to God?)!

Anyway, it doesn’t begin to emerge until conscious development reaches a certain stage of separation from the ‘unconscious’. Many begin to feel disoriented, with vague and unidentifiable ‘yearnings’ (?) and a sense that something is missing in their lives. Such disturbances may correspond to the isolated experiences of a few rejected members of society, but it can’t in any way be indicative of healthy participation in the social norm.

Though Jung postulated this stage as reaching its peak at mid-life, he speculated that transitional periods could be so relative to personal experience, even early dreams and memories could portend it; that ‘symbols’ actually referred to functions which guide the unfolding of our natures — even preceding the menopausal stage. He saw them as compensatory attempts by an ‘inner self’ to maintain connection to it during critical stages in its shifts toward individual differentiation. What this might mean for society wasn’t elaborated.

Despite the fact that logic dictates our modern collective direction, Jung presumed this to be an illusion; that we’re driven by an over-valued intellect fueled by egotistical hubris. Though we know that science is our only defense against an inferior and hostile Nature, he suggested they were actually self-aggrandized aversions to an unconscious history fashioned largely by an innate animal-like earthly reality (never mind cause and effect). He and Neumann even suggested an inherent spiritual function in it centered around inner awareness and not just biological and social needs!

For a reflecting consciousness, they maintained, ‘instincts’ appear as religious symbols intended to compensate our primitive natures and not just crude misinterpretations of cause and effect. How such  irrational fantasies could possibly signify objective processes is untenable in the light of modern science.

Since we’re largely unaware of this transition, we don’t know what’s happening when it insinuates itself; it’s too opposed to consciousness (I wonder why!). Jung insisted that we ‘project’ inner events onto the screen of outer circumstances. The changes in our personalities are reflected back to us through relationships: divorce, career change, new love-interests, a profound sense of inferiority, or the sudden onset of depression and/or compulsive behavior. The marvels of modern medications were yet unknown in Jung’s day.

The real purpose of these conflicts is to re-focus an exterior orientation to the ‘internal’ authority which precipitates the changes. What is this superstitious, quasi-religious obsession with some ‘thing’ greater than ourselves? Neumann further added that the effects of centroversion were always the motive force behind development, the reason the symbols seemed to conform from stage to stage. Focus on the outer world in the first half of life prompts us to see their effects as originating in the environment.

That this is only partially so, slowly dawns on the mind that can discern its own psychic activity ‘within’. They perceived this as a sort of religious/philosophical fantasy, though because we’re unconscious of its symbols as the organizers of psychic life, it’s traditionally projected onto dogmatic figures — references to the occult mindset of centuries ago. Put on your waders, they went further:

If, with psychological knowledge, the conscious mind confronts its own ‘background’ and is able to withdraw its projections from these invisible figures through conscious re-interpretation and emotional experience, it may discover the hidden language of ‘analogy’ in them — thus magically entering into a new stage of awareness! The inward attention is supposed gradually to connect us with a ‘psychic reality’ behind the changes. It begins to appear as a dual process in which outer and inner events reflect parallel paths of development. What this actually refers to, I couldn’t determine. How many realities do you see?

That opposing forces merge energies toward a purposeful end is not a new idea. The positive and negative poles which combine to produce electricity are familiar to everyone. But, Jung conceived this material truth (fasten your seat-belts) to apply to the mind as well! He implied that the analogy could acquaint us with the contrasts and contradictions between different ways of viewing life in the ‘transition’ from an external orientation to an ‘internal’ one. The collision of the two perspectives intended to inform the new direction creates the mental confusion designed to push us into it! Who’s confused?

Though many have observed that the individual relives the biological stages of humanity which precede its modern state; and though history portrays the intellect as gradually emerging from a rude emotional matrix, Jung actually saw this process as being driven by religious imperatives deeply embedded in the psyche and not by social and cultural exchange. The absurdity of this premise is apparent today.

Comments Off on A 21st Century Look at Jung’s Concept of Individuation

Filed under Psychology

Personal Conflicts and Cultural Ideals

Our notions of mental health are as much cultural as medical. Not even doctors are immune from the spirit of the time, and unconscious assumptions grounded in material philosophy, statistics, and causality artificially conceive the idea of disorder apart from any concept of development. Jung showed empirically that they’re inseparable.

Life’s transitions are the conflicts of individual development. Though steadily gaining momentum into mid-life, Erich Neumann demonstrated that what we see as the stages of life are the ‘fits and starts’ of a continual process which is present from the beginning and becomes conscious only at certain critical points.

Whatever you’ve been taught by those who benefit from your lack of knowledge (and theirs, too), transitional problems aren’t ‘diseases’. You may feel like they are as a result of having had no instruction about their underlying purposes; though, as Jung suggested, their design is to compel inner attention. The tension between individual and culture is a basic psychological conflict which aim is development. How else can we perceive an objective inner nature through a collective lens which sees the unconscious, if it sees it all, as regressive?

Confronting unconscious demands is a difficult task for anyone, but doubly so for the extraverted mindset today. We’re conditioned to see material and social needs as foremost. Psychic conflicts outside that ideal are symptomatic, partly because inner development is strange and confusing to it. Who hasn’t asked themselves: ‘what’s wrong with me?’

But they appear this way also because we’re causally oriented. Causes are plenty for those who look for them — but, without a concept of unconscious purpose, there is only a backward picture of the most defining aspect of psychic energy.

Though the unconscious guides most through life’s transitions with relatively little friction, if one can’t repress the conflicts and they become consuming, one is “in the soup”, as Jung referred to it. If not channeled into social ideals, it’s a ‘disorder’. The fact is, though, fewer and fewer are able to repress them today — a sign that our unconscious natures are coming into increasing opposition to cultural direction.

The biblical statement puts unconscious ideas into perspective: “Thou hearest the sound thereof but canst not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth; so is every man who is born of the Spirit.” Beneath the persona, we’re not just prisoners in dark and lonely cells of existential angst, but profoundly individual beings with psychological needs intended to relate us to ourselves, too. Our most intimate problems are our relation to the inner spirit. Nature has set a high premium on this function in the only real carrier of life: the individual.

The spiritual function is not rational. Some concept of the psyche’s irrationality is needed to understand the purposes of symbolic ideas. It’s no coincidence that unconscious intuitions of humanity’s future from a developmental perspective, ‘life after death’, are major factors in religious philosophy. Without such guiding ideas, ego exists only for itself in present-time.

Despite conscious illusions, the most basic statements about how the psyche works reveal that we don’t know who we are: it’s a process of becoming, and the more preconceived, the more elusive is self-knowledge. Undeveloped aspects of the personality revolve around complexes of ideas. If we can’t relate to them, they remain split off and acquire an energy which leads to problems we don’t understand and can’t control. Dissociation is a natural condition not confined to pathology.

Jung showed that the conflicts created by split-off complexes are attempts at healing which work through the least developed function. It’s the bridge to the unconscious, and it has a spiritual, philosophical character. That these conflicts are considered diseases is a revealing statement about the atrophy of the religious function today. That it’s conceived this way by a psychology which sees itself as science is further testament to its misunderstanding. The religious function may now be obscured by the scientific perspective, but it in no way implies that we’ve outgrown the historical enigma of what it means to be human.

Jung stressed its psychic reality, and consciousness is not its arbiter. To pretend otherwise is fantasy. It’s the source of evolution and the cornerstone of religion, and it’s everywhere but in the intellect. How do we evaluate an objective psyche so far beyond our comprehension that all humanity before us conceived it as a god? We would do well to reconsider our contemporary notions of spirit and compare them with those historical intuitions which were much closer to psychic truth than our present rationalism.

The concepts to do that are here now. We can no longer conceive the old fantasies literally. The mind of the past lived a different world than we know today. Though the fantasy-symbols were carefully manipulated to maintain power, on earth where it really counted, all were in some way devoted to a higher power and a distant future however fantastically conceived

Science has filled the black hole of projection which once created the gods, the ancient image of potential which so long ago intuited conscious development. It has extracted from that image only the intellectual part which would make grand an uncertain earthly creature so afraid of its own unconscious nature, it views its own development as a disease.

Read more about symbolic ideas and development, or visit Amazon.

Comments Off on Personal Conflicts and Cultural Ideals

Filed under Psychology

Science and Technology: The New Dogma of Repression

“Whether primitive or not, mankind always stands on the brink of actions it performs itself but does not control. The whole world wants peace and the whole world prepares for war…” — Carl Jung

It’s been a century since Jung introduced his theory of psychic energy. It seems little more acknowledged today than then. His psychological adaptation of the laws of physical energy appears as arbitrary to scientific thought as do religious figures or the philosophical paradoxes that occupied minds long ago.

In terms of psychic energy, however, the objective study of things presupposes a subjective fascination which is inseparable from human use and intent. The purposes and direction of a nuclear technology now charge a young psychology with guiding us out of the religious and philosophical cul-de-sac a dissociated intellect proffers in a new atomic age.

What scientists saw as Jung’s mysticism was a new philosophy of science and religion; a comparative history of consciousness with a conceptual view of psychic functioning that stretched the limits of causal thought. His intuitions of humanity’s dark side drew him beyond rational method’s surface applications; for, the “method enjoys greater intellectual recognition than its subject.”

A new dogma of objectivity replaces the old religious one; its images dissolved into a dark, fathomless universe of impersonal and unspeakably violent cosmic forces. Where did the emotional energy we invested in the projections go?

“The matter now seems turned about; the Devil’s in the house and can’t get out.” As Goethe’s Faust echoed two centuries ago, a stark new heavenly mirror stares back at us from a timeless eternity. But, it was Jung who brought a metaphysical religious philosophy down to an earthly psychic reality:  

“… the psyche is so infinitely diverse in its manifestations, so indefinite and unbounded, that the definitions of it are difficult if not impossible to interpret, whereas the definitions based on the mode of observation and on the method derived from it are — or at least should be — known quantities. Psychological research proceeds from these empirically or arbitrarily defined factors and observes the psyche in terms of their alterations. The psyche therefore appears as the disturbance of a probable mode of behavior postulated by one or the other of these methods.”

He stated that “everything depends on the method and its presuppositions and that they largely determine the results.” The method itself is “disturbed by the autonomous behavior of the psyche…” The partial nature of thought can never anticipate instinctive processes; they’re “really unconscious” and will always defy conscious description. 

Allowing the material he observed over decades to form its own picture, Jung postulated his theory of types: sixteen fundamental “realities” in which each can be considered as valid as the others. He emphasized that it was only one of many possible (or “probable”) modes of observation — and again, Goethe’s words echoed in the background: “It’s been a fact of ancient date that men make little worlds within the great.”

He stressed that in practice no classification appears in ideal or abstract form. All things psychic are protean, shifting. They disappear and reappear according to their own laws; one of the reasons psychology is, in the final analysis, more philosophical than scientific. But, such a fluid view allows a timeless psyche to express itself. To relate to this reality on its own terms is to enter a dark world of uncertainty:

“Fear and resistance are the signposts that stand beside the via regia to the unconscious, and it is obvious that what they primarily signify is a preconceived opinion of the thing they are pointing at. It is only natural that from the feeling of fear one should infer something dangerous and from the feeling of resistance something repellent. The patient does so, the public does so, and in the end the analyst does so too… this view naturally conceives the unconscious as consisting of incompatible tendencies which are repressed on account of their immorality.”

But, unconscious compensations presuppose objective functions. Hidden in the religious guilt and the philosophical reflection which would bind together two opposed realities are the images designed to supplement our preconceptions: the dark side of the mental inheritance which makes consciousness relative to a greater mystery. Thanks to an inherited morality and the threat of extinction behind the new technology, we now procreate exponentially faster than we kill each other; though the compulsions for both have not been appreciably altered by either.

The facts of unconscious compensation are a fundamental discovery that lies at the heart of human conflict: the role of consciousness, will, choice, emotion, perception, the Deity; all the ways we relate to ourselves and the world. The depth of human functioning so transcends conscious morality that no statistics, studies, or standardized methods will reveal its unconscious influences on our behavior. 

Psychologically, the incompatible tendencies which disturb our ideals are the most objective appraisals we have, just not quite yet in serviceable form. The new “objective” dogma still sees them in moralistic terms, however: disease, disorder, defect, pathological, and sick are the new good and evil of today’s self-estrangement — and the labels only stick further into the open wound of our religious history…

For an example of how Jung’s energic theory can be applied to the mid-life search for meaning, read more or visit Amazon.

Comments Off on Science and Technology: The New Dogma of Repression

Filed under Psychology