However, it meant noting that there had once been an experimental psychology to which we owe many descriptions that are still valuable. Today, I have only to mention dr.: u steams, Karnas Z ran from Provost. All romantic descriptions in psychology were anathema to the new developments in scientific method. The exaggerated expectations of this experimental laboratory science were reflected in Fechner’s psychophysics, and its results today take the form of psychological tests and the general shifting of the scientific standpoint in favor of phenomenology.
Nevertheless, it cannot be maintained that the phenomenological point of view has made much headway. Theory still plays far too great a role instead of being included in phenomenology, as it should even Freud, whose empirical attitude is beyond doubt coupled his theory as a scenic wane, on an indispensable and essential action with his method, as if psychic phenomena had to be viewed. In a certain light, in order to mean something all the same, it was Freud who cleared the ground for the investigation of complex phenomena, at least in the field of neurosis, but the ground he cleared extended only so far as certain basic physiological concepts permitted, so that It looked almost as if psychology were an offshoot of the physiology of the instincts.
This limitation of psychology was a very welcomed to the materialistic outlook of that time. Nearly fifty years ago, and despite our altered view of the world, it still is in large measure. Today. It gives us not only the advantage of a delimited field of work, but also an excellent excuse not to bother with what goes on in a wider world. Thus, it was overlooked by the whole of medical psychology that a physiology of neurosis such as Freud’s, is left hanging in mid-air if it lacks knowledge of a general phenomenology.
It was also overlooked that, in the field of the neurosis, Pierre Janet, even before, Freud had begun to build up a descriptive metadata G without loading it with too many theoretical and philosophical assumptions. Biographical descriptions of psychic phenomena going beyond the strictly medical field were represented chiefly by the work of the philosopher, Theodor Flournoy of Geneva, in his account of the psychology of an unusual personality.
This was followed by the first attempts at synthesis, William James’s varieties of religious experience. In 1902, I owe it mainly to these two investigators that I learned to understand the nature of psychic disturbances within the setting of the human psyche as a whole. I myself did experimental work for several years, but through my intensive studies of the neuroses and psychoses, I had to admit that, however desirable quantitative definitions may be, it is impossible to do without qualitatively descriptive methods.
Medical psychology has recognized that the salient facts are extraordinarily complex and can be grasped only through descriptions based on case material, but this method presupposes freedom from theoretical prejudice. Every science is descriptive at the point where it can no longer proceed experimentally without on that account ceasing to be scientific, but an experimental science makes itself impossible when it de limits its field of work in accordance with theoretical concepts.
The psyche does not come to an end where some physiological assumption or other stops, in other words in each individual case, that we observe scientifically. We have to consider the manifestations of the psyche in their totality. These reflections are essential when discussing an empirical concept like that of the anima, as against the constantly reiterated prejudice that this is a theoretical invention or, worse still, sheer mythology.
I must emphasize that the concept of the anima is a purely empirical concept, whose sole purpose is to give a name to a group of related or analogous psychic phenomena. The concept does no more and means no more than shall we say, the concept arthropods, which includes all animals with articulated body and limbs and so gives a name to this phenomenological group. The prejudice I have mentioned stems, regrettably, though this is from ignorance.
My critics are not acquainted with the phenomena in question, for these lie mostly outside the pale of merely medical knowledge in a realm of universal human experience, but the psyche which the medical man has to do with does not worry about the limitations of his knowledge. It manifests a life of its own and reacts to influences coming from every field of human experience. Its nature shows itself not merely in the personal sphere or in the instinctual or social, but in phenomena of worldwide distribution.
So if we want to understand the psyche, we have to include the whole world for practical reasons. We can, indeed must delimit our fields of work, but this should be done only with the conscious recognition of limitation, the more complex the phenomena which we have to do with impractical treatment. The wider must be our frame of reference and the greater the corresponding knowledge. Anyone, therefore, who does not know the universal distribution and significance of the syzygy motive in the psychology of primitives, in mythology, in comparative religion and in the history of literature, can hardly claim to say anything about the concept of the anima footnote two primitives, I’m thinking especially Of shamanism, with its idea of the celestial wife, his knowledge of the psychology of the neuroses may give him some idea of it.
But it is only a knowledge of its general phenomenology that could open his eyes to the realm, a meaning of what he encounters in individual cases, often in pathologically distorted form. Although common prejudice still believes that the sole essential basis of our knowledge is given exclusively from outside and that Neil asked in intellect to quod non antara through Ariat incense ooh, it nevertheless remains true that the thoroughly respectable atomic theory of Lucilla’s and Democritus was not based On any observation of atomic fission, but on a mythological conception of smaller particles, which, as the smallest animated parts, the sole atoms are known even to distill paleolithic, inhibit ins of Central Australia.
Footnote Jung really loves his Latin. That line means nothing is in the intellect that was not first in the senses. How much soul is projected into the unknown in the world of external appearances is, of course familiar to anyone acquainted with the natural science and natural philosophy of the Ancients. It is in fact so much that we are absolutely incapable of saying how the world is constituted in itself and always shall be, since we are obliged to convert physical events into psychic processes as soon as we want to say anything about knowledge.
But who can guarantee that this conversion produces anything like an adequate objective picture of the world? That could only be if the physical event were also a psychic one, but a great distance still seems to separate us from such an assertion till then we must for better or for worse content ourselves with the assumption that the psyche supplies those images and forms which Alone make knowledge of objects possible.
These forms are generally supposed to be transmitted by tradition so that we speak of atoms today, because we have heard directly or indirectly of the atomic theory of Democritus, but where did Democritus or whoever first spoke of minimal constitutive elements here of atoms. This notion had its origin in archetypal ideas, that is in primordial images which were never reflections of physical events, but are spontaneous products of the psychic factor.
Despite the materialistic tendency to understand the psyche as a mayor, reflection or imprint of physical and chemical processes, there is not a single proof of this hypothesis. Quite the contrary. Innumerable facts prove that the psyche translates physical processes into sequences of images which have hardly any recognizable connection with the objective process. The materialistic hypothesis is much too bold and flies in the face of experience with almost metaphysical presumption.
The only thing that can be established with certainty in the present state of our knowledge is our ignorant of the nature of the psyche. There is thus no ground at all for regarding the psyche as something secondary or as an epiphenomenon. On the contrary, there is every reason to regard it at least hypothetically as a factor sui generis and to go on doing so until it has been sufficiently proved that psychic processes can be fabricated in a retort, footnote sui generis means unique or of its own kind.
We have laughed at the claims of the alchemists to be able to manufacture a philosopher’s stone consisting of body. Soul and spirit is impossible. Hence we should stop dragging along with us the logical consequence of this medieval assumption, namely the materialistic prejudice regarding the psyche, as though it were a proven fact, it will not be so easy to reduce complex psychic facts to a chemical formula.
Hence the psychic factor must, according to hypothesis, be regarded for the present as an autonomous reality of an agnostic character, primarily because, judging from all, we know, it appears to be essentially different from physico-chemical processes, even if we do not ultimately know what its substantiality is. This is equally true of physical objects and of matter in general, so if we regarded the psyche as an independent factor, we must logically conclude that there is a psychic life which is not subject to the caprices of our will.
If then, those qualities of elusiveness, superficiality, shadowing us and indeed of utility attached to anything psychic, this is primarily true of the subjective, psychic ie, the contents of consciousness, but not of the objective psychic the unconscious, which is an a priori conditioning factor of consciousness and its Contents from the unconscious there emanate determining influences which, independently of tradition, guarantee in every single individual, a similarity and even a sameness of experience, and also of the way it is represented.
Imaginatively. One of the main proof of this is the almost universal parallelism between mythological motives, which, on account of their quality as primordial images. I have called archetypes one of these archetypes, which is of paramount practical importance for the psychotherapists I have named the anima. This Latin expression is meant to connote, something that should not be confused with any dogmatic Christian idea of the soul or with any of the previous philosophical conceptions of it.
If one wishes to form anything like a concrete conception of what this term covers, one would do better to go back to a classical author, like Macrobius or to classical Chinese philosophy where the anima is regarded as the feminine and cathodic part of the soul. A parallel of this kind always runs the risk of metaphysical, concrete ISM, which I do my best to avoid, though any attempt at graphic description is bound to succumb to it up to a point, for we are dealing here not with an abstract concept, but with an Empirical one and the form in which it appears necessarily clings to it so that it cannot be described at all, except in terms of its specific phenomenology unperturbed by the philosophical pros and cons of the age.
A scientific psychology must regard those transcendental intuitions. That sprang from the human mind in all ages as projections that is as psychic contents that were extrapolated in metaphysical space and high pasta, tais footnote this standpoint derives from Kant’s theory of knowledge and has nothing to do with materialism. We encounter the anima historically, above all in the divine sissy G’s, the male/female pairs of deities.
These reach down on the one side into the obscurities of primitive mythology and up on the other side, into the philosophical speculations of agnosticism and of classical Chinese philosophy. Where the cosmogonic pairs of concepts are designated yang, the masculine Andean, the feminine – we can safely assert that these cities are as universal as the existence of man and woman. From this fact, we may reasonably conclude that man’s imagination is bound by this motive so that he was largely compelled to project it again and again, at all times and in all places.
Hermetic alchemical philosophy from the fourteenth to the 17th centuries provides a wealth of instructive examples. Now, as we know from psychotherapeutic experience, projection is an unconscious automatic process whereby a Content that is unconscious to the subject transfers itself to an object so that it seems to belong to that object. The projection ceases the moment it becomes conscious, that is to say when it is seen as belonging to the subject.
There are, of course, cases where, in spite of the patient’s, seemingly sufficient insight, the reactive effect of the projection does not cease, and the expected liberation does not take place. I have often observed that, in such cases, a meaningful but unconscious contents are still bound up with the projection carrier. It is these contents that keep up with the effect of the projection, although it has apparently been seen through.
Thus, the polytheistic heaven of the Ancients, owes its deep potentiation, not least to the view first propounded by you him eros, who maintained that the gods were nothing but reflections of human character. Indeed, easy to show that the divine pair is simply an idealization of the parents or of some other human couple which, for some reason, appeared in heaven. This assumption would be simple enough if projection were not an unconscious process, but were a conscious intention.
It would generally be supposed that one’s own parents are the best known of all individuals, the ones of which the subject is most conscious. But precisely for this reason they could not be projected because projection always contains something of which the subject is not conscious and which seems not to belong to him. The image of the parents is the very one that could be projected least because it is too conscious.
In reality, however, it is just apparent Allah Margot’s that seem to be projected most frequently a fact so obvious that one could almost draw the conclusion that it is precisely the conscious contents which are projected. This can be seen most plainly in cases of transference where it is perfectly clear to the patient that the father, imago or even the mother imago is projected on to the analyst and he even sees through the incest fantasies bound up with them without, however, being freed From the reactive affect of his projection, ie from the transference, in other words, he behaves exactly as if he had not seen through his projection.
At all, experience shows that projection is never conscious. Projections are always there first and are recognized afterwards. We must therefore assume that, over and above the incest fantasy, highly emotional contents are still bound up with the parent. Elimi goes and need to be made conscious. They are obviously more difficult to make conscious than the incest fantasies which are supposed to have been repressed through violent resistance and to be unconscious.
For that reason, supposing this view is correct? We are driven to the conclusion that, besides the incest fantasy, there must be contents which are repressed through a still greater resistance, since it is difficult to imagine anything more repellent than incest. We find ourselves rather at a loss to answer this question. If we let practical experience speak, it tells us that, apart from the incest, fantasy, religious ideas are associated with the parent of a Margot’s.
I do not need to cite historical proofs of this as they are known to all, but what about the alleged objectionable, nosov, religious associations? Someone once observed that an ordinary society. It is more embarrassing to talk about God at the table than to tell a risque story. Indeed, for many people, it is more bearable to admit their sexual fantasies than to be forced to confess that their analyst is a savior for the former are biologically legitimate, whereas the latter instance is definitely pathological, and this is something we greatly fear.
It seems to me, however, that we make too much of resistance. The phenomena in question can be explained just as easily by lack of imagination and reflectiveness, which makes the act of conscious realization so difficult for the patient. He may perhaps have no particular resistance to religious ideas. Only the thought has never occurred to him that he could seriously regard his analyst as a God or Savior.
Mere reason alone is sufficient to protect him from such illusions, but he is less slow to assume that his analysist thinks himself 1. When one is dogmatic oneself, it is notoriously easy to take other people for profits and founders of religions. Now religious ideas as history shows are charged with an extremely suggestive emotional power among them. I naturally reckon all representations collectives anything that we learn from the history of religion and anything that has an ism attached to it.
The latter is only a modern variant of the denominational religions. A man may be convinced in all good faith that he has no religious ideas, but no one can fall so far away from humanity that he no longer has any dominating representations. Collective, his very materialism, atheism, communism, socialism, liberalism, intellectualism, existentialism or whatnot testifies against his innocence somewhere or other overtly or covertly he is possessed by a superordinate idea.
The psychologist knows how much religious ideas have to do with the parental in Margo’s. History has preserved overwhelming evidence of this, quite apart from modern medical findings which have even led a certain people to suppose that the relationship to the parents is the real origin of religious ideas. This hypothesis is based on the very poor knowledge of the facts in the first place, one should not simply translate the family psychology of modern man into a context of primitive conditions where things are so very different.
Secondly, one should beware of ill-considered tribal father and primal horde fantasies. Thirdly, and most importantly, one should have the most accurate knowledge of the phenomenology of religious experience, which is a subject in itself. Psychological investigations in this field have so far not fulfilled any of these three conditions. The only thing we know positively from psychological experience is that theistic ideas are associated with the parent Allah Margot’s and that our patients are mostly unconscious of them.
If the corresponding projections cannot be withdrawn through insight, then we have every reason to suspect the presence of emotional contents of a religious nature, regardless of the rationalistic resistance of the patient. So far as we have any information about man, we know that he has always and everywhere being under the influence of dominating ideas. Anyone who alleges that he is not can immediately be suspected of having exchanged a known form of the leaf for a variant which is less known both to himself and to others.
Instead of theism, he is a devotee of atheism. Instead of Dionysus, he favors the more modern Mithras and instead of heaven he seeks paradise on earth. A man without a dominating representation. Collective would be a thoroughly abnormal phenomenon, but such a person exists only in the fantasies of isolated individuals who are deluded about themselves. They are mistaken not only about the existence of religious ideas, but also, and more especially, about their intensity.
The archetype behind a religious idea has like every instinct, it’s specific energy which it does not lose, even if the conscious mind ignores it, just as it can be assumed, with the greatest probability that every man possesses all the average human functions and qualities. So we may expect the presence of normal religious factors, the archetypes, and this expectation does not prove fallacious. Anyone who succeeds in putting off the mantle of faith can do so only because another lies close to hand.
No one can escape the prejudice of being human. The representations collectives have a dominating power, so it is not surprising that they are repressed with the most intense resistance when repressed. They do not hide behind any trifling thing, but behind ideas and figures that have already become problematical for other reasons and intensify and complicate their dubious nature. For instance, everything that we could like in infantile fashion, to attribute to our parents or blame them for is blown up to fantastic proportions from the secret sauce, and for this reason it remains an open question.
How much of the ill reputed incest fantasy is to be taken seriously behind a parent, the pair or pair of lovers, like contents of extreme tension, which are not a perceived in consciousness and can therefore become perceptible only through projection? That projections of this kind do actually occur and are not just traditional opinions is attested by historical documents. These show that cities were projected which were in complete contradiction to the traditional beliefs and that they were often experienced in the form of a vision footnote.
This is not to overlook the fact that there is probably a far greater number of visions which agree with the dogma. Nevertheless, they are not spontaneous and autonomous projections in the strict sense, but our visualizations of conscious contents evoked through prayer or to suggestion and hetero suggestion. Most Spiritual Exercises have this effect, and so do the prescribed meditation practices of the East in any thorough investigation of such visions.
It would have to be ascertained, among other things, what the actual vision was and how far dogmatic elaboration contributed to its form. One of the most instructive examples in this respect is the vision of the recently canonized Nicholas of fluo, a Swiss mystic of the 15th century, of whose visions we possess reports by his contemporaries in the visions that marked his initiation into the state of adoption by God.
God appeared in dual form once as a majestic father and once as a majestic mother. This representation could not be more unorthodox since the church had eliminated the feminine element from the Trinity. A thousand years earlier, as heretical brother Klaus, was a simple unlettered peasant who doubtless had received none, but the approved church teaching and was certainly not acquainted with the gnostic interpretation of the holy ghost as the feminine and motherly Sophia.
His so-called trinity vision is, at the same time a perfect example of the intensity of projected contents. Brother classes. Psychological situation was eminently suited to a projection of this kind, for his conscious idea of God was so little in accord with the unconscious content that the latter had to appear in the form of an alien and a shattering experience. We must conclude from this that it was not the traditional idea of God, but, on the contrary, a heretical image that realized itself in visionary form an archetypal interpretation which came to life again spontaneously, independently of tradition.
It was the archetype of the divine pear the syzygy. There is a very similar case in the visions of Jolanda G Louisville, which are described in the pillory Najd Alam. He saw God in the highest heaven as the king on the shining round throne and beside him sat the Queen of Heaven on a throne of brown crystal for a monk of the Cistercian order which, as we know, is distinguished for its severity. That this vision is exceedingly heretical, so here again the condition for projection is fulfilled.
Another impressive account of the syzygy vision can be found in the work of Edward Maitland, who wrote the biography of Anna Kingsford there. He describes in detail his own experience of God, which, like that of brother Klaus, consisted in a vision of light. He says this was God, as the Lord, proving by his duality that godess substance as well as force love as well as will feminine as well as masculine mother as well as father.
These few examples may suffice to characterize the experience of projection and those features of it, which are independent of tradition. We can hardly get around to the hypothesis that an emotionally-charged content is lying already in the unconscious and springs into projection at a certain moment. This content is the sitter G motive and it expresses the fact that a masculine element is always paired with a feminine one.
The wide distribution and extraordinary emotionality of this motive prove that it is a fundamental psychic factor of great practical importance, no matter whether the individual, psycho, therapist or psychologist, understands where and in what way. Din fluence — is his special field of work. Microbes, as we know, played their dangerous role long before they were discovered. As I have said, it is natural to suspect the parental pair in all cities of the feminine part.
The mother corresponds to the anima, but since for the reasons discussed above consciousness of the object prevents its projection, there is nothing for it, but to assume that parents are also the least known of all human beings and consequently, that an unconscious reflection of the parent pair Exists which is as unlike them as utterly alien and in commensurable as a man compared with a God, it would be conceivable and as as we know, being asserted that the unconscious reflection is none other than the image of father and mother.
That was acquired in early childhood overvalued and later repressed, on account of the incest fantasy associated with it. This hypothesis presupposes that the image was once conscious, otherwise it could not have been repressed. It also presupposes that the act of moral repression has itself become unconscious, for otherwise the act would remain preserved in consciousness, together with the memory of the repressive moral reaction from which the nature of the thing repressed could easily be recognized.
I do not want to enlarge on these misgivings, but would merely like to emphasize that there is general agreement on one point, namely that the parental imago comes into existence, not in a pre-pubertal period or at a time when consciousness is more or less developed. But in the initial stages, between the first and fourth year, when consciousness does not show any real continuity and is characterized by a kind of island like discontinuity, the ego relationship that is required for continuity of consciousness is present only in part.
So there’s a large proportion of psychic life at this stage runs on in a state which can only be described as relatively unconscious. At all events, it is a state which would give the impression of a somnambulist, ik dream or twilight state. If observed in an adult. These states, as we know from the observation of small children, are always characterized by an a perception of reality filled with fantasies.
The fantasy images outweigh the influence of sensory stimuli and mold them into conformity with a pre-existing psychic image. It is, in my view, a great mistake to suppose that the psyche of a newborn a child is a tabula rasa, in the sense that there is absolutely nothing in it insofar as the child is born with a differentiated brain that is predetermined by heredity and therefore Individualized, it meets sensory stimuli coming from outside, not with any aptitudes but with specific ones, and this necessarily results in a particular individual choice and pattern of a perception.
These aptitudes can be shown to be inherited instincts and preformed patterns, the latter being the a priori and formal conditions of a perception that are based on instinct. Their presence gives the world of the child and a dreamer its anthropomorphic stamp. They are the archetypes which direct all fantasy activity into its appointed paths and, in this way, produce in the fantasy images of children’s dreams, as well as in the delusions of schizophrenia.
Astonishing mythological parallels such as can also be found, though, in lesser degree, into dreams of normal persons and neurotics. It is not, therefore, a question of inherited ideas, but have inherited possibilities of ideas, nor are they individual acquisitions, but in the main common to all, as can be seen from the universal occurrence of the archetypes, just as the archetypes occur on the ethnological level as myths.
So also they are found in every individual and their effect is always strongest, that is their anthropomorphize reality most where consciousness is weakest and most restricted and where fantasy can overrun the facts of the outer world. This condition is undoubtedly present in the child during the first years of its life. It therefore seems to me more probable that the archetypal form of the divine syzygy first covers up and assimilates the image of the real parents until with increasing consciousness.
The real figures of the parents are perceived often to the child’s disappointment. Nobody knows better than the psychotherapist that the mythologizing of the parents is often pursued far and to adulthood and is given up only with the greatest resistance. I remember a case that was presented to me as the victim of a high grade mother and castration complex, which had still not been overcome in spite of psychoanalysis without any hint from me, the man had made some drawings which showed the mother first, as a superhuman Being and then, as a figure of woe with the bloody mutilations, I was especially struck by the fact that a castration had obviously been performed on the mother for in front of her gory genitals lay the cut of male sexual organs.
The drawings clearly represented a diminishing climax. First, the mother was a divine hermaphrodite who then threw the sons disappointing. Experience of reality was robbed of its androgynous platonic perfection and changed into the woeful figure of an ordinary old woman. Thus, from the very beginning from the son’s earliest childhood, the mother was assimilated to the archetypal idea of the CCG or conjunction of male and female, and for this reason, appeared perfect and superhuman.
The latter quality invariably attaches to the archetype and explains why the archetype appears strange and as if not belonging to consciousness, and also why, if the subject identifies with it, it often causes a devastating change of personality generally in the form of megalomania or its opposite sons. Disappointment affected a castration of her hermaphroditic mother. This was the patient’s so-called castration complex.
He had tumbled down from his childhood Olympus and was no longer the son hero of a divine mother. His so-called fear of castration was fear of real life, which refused to come up to his erstwhile childish expectations and everywhere lacked that mythological, meaning which he still dimly remembered from his earliest youth. His life was in the truest sense of the word godless and that for him, though, he did not realize it meant a dire loss of hope and energy.
He thought of himself as castrated, which is a very plausible, neurotic misunderstanding, so plausible that it could even be turned into a theory of neurosis, because people have always feared that the connection with the instinctive archetypal stage of consciousness might get lost in the course of life. The custom has long since been adopted of giving the newborn child, in addition to his bodily parents, to godparents a godfather and a godmother who are supposed to be responsible for the spiritual welfare of their godchild.
They represent the pair of gods who appear at its birth. Thus, illustrating the dual birth motive, the anima image, which lends the mother such superhuman glamour in the eyes of the son, gradually becomes tarnished by commonplace reality and sinks back into the unconscious, but without in any way losing its original tension and instinctive’ti. It is ready to spring out and project itself at the first opportunity.
The moment a woman makes an impression that is out of the ordinary. We then have Bertha’s experience with FRA Fantine and it’s repercussions in the figures of mignon and Gretchen all over again. In the case of Gretchen, you ëthis also showed us the whole underlying metaphysic. The love life of a man reveals the psychology of this archetype and a form either of bunglers fascination, overvaluation and infatuation, or of misogyny in all its gradations and variants, none of which can be explained by the real nature of the object in question.
But only by a transference of the mother complex, the complex, however, was caused in the first place by the assimilation of the mother in itself a normal and ubiquitous phenomenon to the pre-existent feminine side of an archetypal male-female pair of opposites and secondly, by an abnormal delay. In detaching from the primordial image of the mother, actually nobody can stand the total loss of the archetype.
When that happens, it gives rise to that frightful discontent in our culture, where nobody feels at home because of father and mother are missing. Everyone knows the provisions that religion has always made in this respect. Unfortunately, there are very many people who thoughtlessly go on asking whether these provisions are true when it is really a question of a psychological need. Nothing is achieved by explaining them away rationalistic li when projected the anima always has a feminine form with definite characteristics.
This empirical finding does not mean that the archetype is constituted, like that in itself. The male/female syzygy is only one among the possible pairs of opposites. Evade the most important one in practice and the most common, it has numerous connections with other pairs which do not display any sex differences at all and can therefore be put into the sexual category only by main force. These connections with their manifold shades of meaning are found more particularly in Kundalini Yoga, in a Gnosticism and, above all, in alchemical philosophy.
Quite apart from the spontaneous fantasy products and neurotic and psychotic case material, when one carefully considers this accumulation of data, it begins to seem probable that an archetype in its quiescent unprojected state has no exact determinable form, but is in itself an indefinite structure which can assume Definite forms only in projection. This seems to contradict the concept of a type.
If I am not mistaken, it not only seems, but actually is a contradiction. Empirically speaking, we are dealing all the time with types definite forms that can be named and distinguished, but as soon as you divest these types of the phenomenology presented by the case material and try to examine them in relation to other archetypal forms. They branch out into such far-reaching ramifications in the history of symbols that one comes to the conclusion that the basic psychic elements are infinitely varied and ever-changing, so was utterly to defy our powers of imagination.
The empiricist must therefore content himself with a theoretical, as if, in this respect, he’s no worse off than the atomic physicist, even though his method is not based on quantitative measurement, but is a morphologically descriptive one. The anima is a factor of the utmost importance in the psychology of a man wherever emotions and effects are at work. She intensifies exaggerates falsifies and mythologize.
— is all emotional relations with his work and with other people of both sexes. The resultant fantasies and entanglements are all her doing when the anima as strongly constellated. She softens the man’s character and makes him touchy irritable moody jealous vain and unadjusted. He is then in a state of discontent and spreads discontent all around him. Sometimes the man’s relationship to the woman who has caught his anima accounts for the existence over this syndrome.
The anima, as I have remarked in the first paper in this volume, has not escaped the attentions of the poets. There are excellent descriptions of her which, at the same time, tell us about the symbolic context in which the archetype is usually embedded. I give first place to rider Haggard’s novels. She, the return of she and wisdoms daughter and Benoit’s Rutland tied Benoit, was accused of plagiarizing rider Haggard, because the two accounts are disconcertingly alike, but it seems he was able to acquit himself of this charge.
Spitler z, — prometheus, contains some very subtle observations too, and his novel imago gives in a deniable description of projection therapy is a problem that cannot be disposed of. In a few words, it was not my intention to deal with it here, but I would like to outline my point of view. Younger people who have not yet reached the middle of life around the age of 35 can bear even the total loss of the anima.
Without injury, the important thing at the stages for a man to be a man, the growing youth must be able to free himself from the anima fascination of his mother. There are exceptions, notably artists, where the problem often takes a different turn. Also, homosexuality, which is usually characterized by identity with the anima in view of the recognized frequency of this phenomenon, its interpretation as of pathological perversion, is very dubious.
The psychological findings show that it is rather a matter of incomplete detachment from the hammer phreatic archetype, coupled with distinct resistance to identify with the role of a one sided sexual being. Such a disposition should not be a judged negative in all circumstances, insofar as it preserves the archetype of the original man, which a one sided sexual being has up to a point lost footnote conforming to the bisexual original man in Plato symposium and to the hem Aphrodite Primal beings in general, after the middle of life, however, permanent loss of the anima means a diminution of vitality, of flexibility and of human kindness.
The result as a rule is premature of rigidity. Crustiness stereotypy fanatical one-sidedness, obstinacy, pedantry or else resignation, weariness, sloppiness, a responsibility and, finally, a childish formalism all with a tendency to alcohol after middle life. Therefore, the connection with the archetypal sphere of existence should, if possible, be re-established, and that concludes the reading of chapter 1.
Hope you enjoyed it and you liked it feel free to provide feedback or express your opinions below also have a nice day.