Essence and Existence V

23rd October, 1999 

Freud and Jung

SCENE:   Philosophy Seminar

(A week later. A packed classroom. Many student visitors. After a short i
introductory lecture by Prof. Coseino, the floor is open for discussion.)

Karl: Prof. Coseino, I know that impatiently you want to illustrate your Philosophy to us today. However, some of our colleagues are of the opinion that some aspects of traditional Philosophy and Psychology must still be dealt with before we proceed. To be more precise, certainly, we need to underline the essential elements of the psychology of Carl Gustav Jung and Roberto Assagioli, which surely would serve as enrichment toward our New Philosophy.

Jeanette: Also Oriental Philosophy, in particular, and Extra-European Philosophy, in general, deserve brief attention.

Coseino: Okay, Jeanette. We will cure that ailment. If everybody agrees with Karl, then we can proceed.

(A small check-out results. It seems that everybody is in agreement.)

William: Seeing that I introduced the topic, I am especially interested in the issues pertaining to a new psychology, with reference to Jung and Assagioli, but related to our Essence  a n d  Existence discussion. Our colleagues also voiced their keen interest.

Coseino: You mean the aspect of the study of the mind, of Existence?

William: Yes, but also of social behaviour.

Coseino: Agreed. As you all could have noticed, in our seminar, the professor is a student, and the students themselves are professors. Hence, we as educators, we ourselves, urgently need education. I am not an expert on the psychological contributions which Roberto Assagioli made to modern Social Science. For sure, Karl, -- our excellent investigative reporter and science writer, and as you all know, who has a wide variety of interests in the arts, sciences and humanities, -- as time passes by, will progressively inform us about these innovative aspects. However, to put Carl Jung into focus, into perspective, within the context of our Essence  a n d  Existence debate, I would just like to remark the following:

Jung was a Swiss psychologist and psychiatrist who is known as the father of analytic psychology. As a response to Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis, Jung developed the concepts of the "extroverted" and "introverted" personality, archetypes, and the collective unconscious. Over the decades, his work has been influential in psychiatry and in the study of religion, literature, arts and humanities. He certainly has impressed and has exercised an influence on our Karl.

Karl: There is no doubt about that!

Coseino: He collaborated with Freud, and his researches verified many  ideas of the latter. However, later Jung differed with Freud concerning the latter's insistence on the sexual bases of neurosis. By 1914, the psychological theories of Freud and Jung were not compatible anymore.

According to his new theory, Jung differentiated two classes of people according to attitude types: extroverted (outward-looking) and introverted (inward-looking); also, four functions of the mind -- thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition -- one or more of which predominate in any given person. (Psychologische Typen (1921; Psychological Types, 1923).

Within this context, he developed his theory of "archetypes" and the "collective unconscious". But let Karl introduce us to these complex avenues. Later I will comment what relevance the mind and social behaviour  have for our specific debate.

 Karl: Study of the mind and behaviour using psychoanalysis and other methods can be a powerful tool for a new emancipating philosophy if it is used by the individual to be his/her own therapist and self-developer, not for control by outside sources. By new emancipating philosophy, I am referring to the continuous process of developing philosophic ideas that have emancipating value.

Certainly, we do not reject previous ideas that have this value. The ideas of some practitioners of the behavioural arts have more emancipating value than others, and for this, I cite Assagioli and Jung. Since space and time do not permit complete description of their ideas in today's session, I will focus on the ones that I think are most valuable. Dr. Roberto Assagioli, who died in 1974, developed the concept of psychosynthesis to understand how the human mind is used to develop the total person, including creativity and will, joy, wisdom, impulses and drives - to help us live better, more fully according to the best that is within each of us.

Coseino: What is psychosynthesis?

Patricia: Also, please tell us, if this concept has any relation to the psychological ideas of Freud and Jung.

Karl: I think the best way to understand psychosynthesis  is to describe how it works. Assagioli incorporated some ideas of Jung and Freud on the existence of the unconscious. Accordingly, there are three levels of the unconscious - the lower, which represents the past, the middle, which represents the present, and the upper or higher self, which represents the future. If we are seduced by the past, we get nowhere. If we are concerned only with immediate comfort, live in the present and remain stuck in our egos, we limit our achievements. If we connect to our higher self and live in the future, we can be more than we can be, and possibly have transpersonal experiences such as telepathy and temporarily exist outside of our bodies. These experiences may be perceived as far-fetched but are worth examining. Psychosynthesis involves effective integration of all three levels of the unconscious.

Martina: Referring to our discussion last week, concerning existentialism, about "living in the future", Jung seemed to have had similar views. But Karl, how do we connect to this "higher self"? I would love to do it during my written exams.

Karl: Assagioli emphasized the development and use of a strong "will" to connect to the higher self. This involves, among many things, intense concentration and perseverance. For more information, I suggest that you visit the psychosynthesis sites using the key words "Assagioli" and "psychosynthesis" on your internet search engine.

Coseino: What additional idea of Jung do you think will help in developing an emancipation philosophy?

Karl: Based on an idea of Carl Jung, people can be classified as analytical drivers and expressives. The drivers are primarily motivated to achieve results, and the expressives to get attention. In the current post-industrial world, most leaders in government and industry are drivers. They utilize the creative talents of the expressives, but generally don't understand them and perceive them to be necessary evils.

A new renaissance will require an alliance of drivers and expressives. This is required for any Renaissance per se, and was the situation in the era of the famous Florentine painters, sculptors, architects, Michelangelo and  Leonardo Da Vinci. In a modern, new renaissance, for example, a driver could not arbitrarily prevent financing a monumental, creative fine arts endeavour in favour of a military weapons system. We've just touched the tip of the iceberg here, and hopefully, we will continue on this subject in future debates.

Albert: Concerning this, with reference to Jung's "archetypes" and the "collective unconscious", I would just like to remark the following: If my memory is not playing tricks, I recollect that, as a boy, Jung had strange  dreams and powerful fantasies, which over the years had developed with unusual intensity. When he broke with Freud, he deliberately allowed this "PSI dimension" of himself to function again. As far as I am concerned, he gave the "irrational side" of his philosophy or ideology free expression.

However, what concerns us, related to Quidditas, to Science, he studied it scientifically by keeping detailed notes of his paranormal experiences. Significant for us, is that later he developed the theory that these strange "experiences" came from a sphere of the mind that he called the "collective unconscious". He held that the latter was shared by everyone. Of course, I have not yet interpenetrated my "collective unconscious"; and I am not really interested in this either. Nonetheless, from "bad to worse", this conception was related with his theory of archetypes, which Jung gave top priority in any new psychology. Of course, he also noted that it could serve ideological and religious purposes. In his own logical mode, archetypes are instinctive patterns, they have a universal character, they are expressed in behaviour and in images.

Whether Jung's scientific, cosmic "Quidditas" is related to his "Quodditas", to his "collective unconscious", I cannot explain. Furthermore, I do not know where to place his universal instinctive archetypes, in Nature, in Society, in Science, in Philosophy? In German Nazi Ideology, in the speeches of Goebbels and Goering, there I can surely identify them, and they are central for the propaganda of Anti-Semitism, McCarthyism, Apartheid  and Racism, and the terror and horror which necessarily results from such "strange" behaviour patterns, and such an irresponsible philosophy. Utilizing these ideas for personal, individual emancipation, certainly will not neutralize their inherent toxic nature. However, it is an ill wind which blows nobody good. I know, that many of you will disagree with me; Karl, certainly would, but what I stated is my honest opinion. Perhaps later Karl will clarify my preoccupations. Alas! If only I could be wrong! It would be better for Jung, for Karl, for all of us, and for this world in which we live, not forgetting a better existentialist, emancipating and psychological Future!

Coseino: Karl, could you please clarify the issue?

Karl: Albert, I welcome and agree with your comments on Jung. I didn't refer his dreams & fantasies, collective unconscious concept and archetypal symbols because I think that these do not have any value in understanding social behaviour or developing emancipative philosophic ideas. I'm sure that most people have had dreams and fantasies of great intensity; consequently, these are not paranormal, and if we try to impose these on others, they will be swiftly repelled. I think that our unconscious is as individualized as our arms and legs.

Albert: But, did the Nazis not use basic archetypes or symbols, of the Jung genre, for their ideology and propaganda? And were they not successful in bamboozling the German masses, mainly for this very reason? Jung himself was not a direct radical opponent of Nazism or Fascism!

Karl: I question whether symbols used by totalitarian leaders in the 1930’s were archetypal. An archetype, such as the sun (warmth, health) should have universal meaning, and the hammer & sickle and swastika do not. The swastika, for example, had a different meaning in Ancient India than in Nazi Germany.

I think that the totalitarian leaders primarily used these as symbols of personal power to frighten the people into coercion, and to divert attention from their responsibility in committing destructive deeds.

Patricia: It sounds very logical, but, Karl, what exactly is Jung's major contribution to historic emancipation?

Karl: I think that one of Jung's main contributions to development of emancipative philosophic ideas is his positioning of the unconscious as a region of the mind that we can tap without the control of an outside agent. This was revolutionary compared to Freud who believed that a psychiatrist is necessary. Assagioli and others explored and expanded on this, and developed practical applications that work. For example, I relieve my own minor pain such as headache, by tapping into my unconscious. Consequently, for dealing with your unconscious, I suggest that you examine the ideas of Assagioli, etc. ..., who advocated that we ourselves are our best therapists.

We can resist mind control by connecting to our unconscious, and I will gladly address that in a future debate.

Adam: By the way, using a theological analogy, the positions of Freud and Jung remind me of the famous schism, when Luther in a "revolutionary" way opposed orthodox Catholicism, claiming that the "direct link" between a Christian and God needs no intermediary, no priest; whereas for Roman Catholicism the priest, like Freud's psychoanalyst, is indispensable for the well-being and "cure" of the person.

Jeffrey: Adam, very interesting. Changing the topic, "Mind Control" particularly is of my interest. But, in a future debate, I will voice my opinions. Karl, could you elaborate more about the "drivers" and "expressives"?

Karl: In addition, I think that Jung's influence on the development of the analytical driver/expressive personality classification can also be used in developing emancipative philosophic ideas. For example, a new renaissance, which optimally utilizes the creative talents of expressives and organization skills of drivers, will require an alliance of these personality types; this alliance is necessary not only for optimum creative output for the benefit of humankind, but also to resist the divide and conquer methods of the controllers.

Albert: Now the issue is clear; I begin to understand what you exactly meant by the emancipating application of central ideas of Jung and Assagioli.

(The bell sounds. Another heated discussion has come to pass. Everybody wants to continue, but social behaviour patterns do not permit this. A new class awaits in front of the door of the aula magna. The Alma Mater must continue, la lutta continua!)

Coseino: We will return to these topics again in future. Next time we will discuss the relevance of Ancient Oriental Philosophy for our New Philosophy. Unfortunately, in the heat of the fight, we forgot this aspect. Concerning the inclusion of Extra-European philosophy, Jeanette, Martina, Jeffrey, Patricia and Mahatma already protested; last Saturday, we had a cordial private discussion on the Soto Rosa Marketplace. They can give you a general report of the debate, which will be included in future seminars. Until next time!

(CONTINUE)