Personal and collective unconscious
At first the concept of the unconscious was limited to denoting the state of repressed or forgotten contents. Even with Freud, who makes the unconscious - at
least metaphorically - take the stage as the acting subject, it is really nothing but the gathering place of forgotten and repressed contents, and has a functional significance thanks only to these. For Freud,
accordingly, the unconscious is of an exclusively personal nature, although he was aware of its archaic and mythological thought-forms.
A more or less superficial layer of the unconscious is
undoubtedly personal. I call it the personal unconscious. But this personal unconscious rests upon a deeper layer, which does not derive from personal experience and is not a personal acquisition but is inborn.
This deeper layer I call the collective unconscious. I have chosen the term "collective" because this part of the unconscious is not individual but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has
contents and modes of behaviour that are more or less the same everywhere and in all individuals. It is, in other words, identical in all men and thus constitutes a common psychic substrate of a suprapersonal nature
which is present in every one of us.
About the term "archetype"
The term "archetype" occurs as early as Philo Judaeus, with reference to the Imago Dei
(God-image) in man. It can also be found in Irenaeus, who says: "The creator of the world did not fashion these things directly from himself but copied them from archetypes outside himself." In the
Corpus Hermeticum, God is called … (archetypal light). The term occurs several times in Dionysius the Areopagite, as for instance in De caelesti hierarchia,
II, 4: "immaterial Archetypes," and in De divinis nominibus, I, 6: "Archetypal stone." The term "archetype" is not found in St. Augustine, but the idea of it is. Thus in
De diversis quaestionibus LXXXIII he speaks of "ideae principales, 'which are themselves not formed… but are contained in the divine understanding.'" "Archetype" is an explanatory paraphrase of the
Platonic eidos. For our purposes this term is apposite and helpful, because it tells us that so far as the collective unconscious contents are concerned we are dealing with archaic or- I would say- primordial
types, that is, with universal images that have existed since the remotest times. The term "representations collectives," used by Levy-Bruhl to denote the symbolic figures in the primitive view of the world,
could easily be applied to unconscious contents as well, since it means practically the same thing.
Another well-known expression of the archetypes is myth and fairytale. But here too we are dealing with
forms that have received a specific stamp and have been handed down through long periods of time. The term "archetype" thus applies only indirectly to the "representations collectives," since it
designates only those psychic contents which have not yet been submitted to conscious elaboration and are therefore an immediate datum of psychic experience. (From Archetypes of Collective Unconscious.)
About the transference (with references to Freud)
Practical analysis has shown that unconscious contents are invariably projected at first upon concrete persons and situations. Many projections can ultimately be
integrated back into the individual once
he has recognized their subjective origin; others resist integration, and although they may
be detached from their original objects, they thereupon transfer themselves to the doctor. Among these contents the relation
to the parent of opposite sex plays a particularly important part, i.e., the relation of son to mother,
daughter to father, and also that of brother to
sister. As a rule this complex cannot be
integrated completely, since the doctor is nearly
always put in the place of the father,
the brother, and even (though naturally
more rarely) the mother. Experience has shown that this projection
persists with all its original intensity (which Freud regarded as aetiological), thus creating a bond that corresponds in every respect to the initial infantile relationship, with a tendency to recapitulate all the experiences of
childhood on the doctor. In other
words, the neurotic maladjustment of the
patient is now transferred to him. Freud, who was the first
to recognize and describe this phenomenon, coined the term "transference neurosis."
This bond is often of such intensity that we could
almost speak of a "combination." When two chemical substances
combine, both are altered. This is precisely what happens in
the transference. Freud rightly recognized that this bond
is of the greatest therapeutic importance in that it gives rise to a mixtum compositum of the doctor's own mental health and the patient's maladjustment. In Freudian technique the doctor tries to ward off
the transference as much as possible - which is understandable enough from the human point of
view, though in certain cases it may considerably impair the therapeutic
effect. It is inevitable that the doctor should be influenced to a certain
extent and even that his nervous health should suffer.
He quite literally "takes over" the sufferings of his patient and shares them
with him. For this reason he runs a risk - and must run it in the nature of things. (From The Psychology of Transference).
More quotes will be there soon. Please register with our newsletter
to be in touch with our news.