THE UNCONSCIOUS: AN OVERVIEW
The bulk of this text is taken from the book by O. V. Lavrova “The
Topological Depth Psychotherapy: Ideas Concerning Transformation.
Introduction into Philosophical Psychology.” The series “New Ideas in
Psychology.” St. Petersburg: DNK Publishers, 2001.1
The epistemology of the unconscious: its genesis and
connection with the conscious
The psychic, as methodologists of psychology and philosophy hold, is epiphenomenal
and noumenal. G. Tarde believed that epiphenomena are “unreal” phenomena that
exist only in the process of self-revealing. L. Wittgenstein defined the phenomenon, in
contrast to the epiphenomenon, as that which shows itself irrelative of its self-revealing.
The noumenon is the essence perceived intellectually – that is, some specific secret
semantic phenomenon immanent to consciousness and thinking; in other words, the
psychic, being an epiphenomenon and noumenon, acquires its ontological status only
due to the subject’s reflection and introspection within the framework of his
consciousness where the subject can disclose only that which is currently in
consciousness and has meaning for him. The presence of a subject is a prerequisite to
the existence of ‘the psychic’ that is ready to slide away as a patch of sunlight.
The category of the ideal
Philosophy has formed various categorial systems allowing to describe a phenomenon
by the word (phenomenological semantics) and denote essence by the word
(ontological semantics). In psychological discourse, ontology makes only first steps, and
ontological aspect of the psychic needs to be thoroughly analyzed because the
ontological descriptive system operates with meanings which differ from those
describing a word by the word (epistemological semantics). However, the ontology of
psychic phenomena denoting the essence of a subject’s being is nearer to the
language of practical psychology and comes into conflict with classical language of
psychology which describes and explains primarily abstract categories that are
believed to compose the subject’s being.
О. В. Лаврова. Глубинная топологическая психотерапия: идеи о трансформации. Введение в
философскую психологию. (Серия «Новые идеи в психологии») – СПб.: Изд-во «ДНК», 2001, 424 с.
1
2
The category of the psyche, being a psychological sibling of the philosophical
category of the ideal, in fact contains in its semantic field
essentially the same
antinomies as does any psychological category because these antinomies stem from
attempts to conform the meaning of the category to materialistic monistic
methodology.
Semantics of the category of the psyche
THE PSYCHE
Epistemological definitions
Ontological definitions
The form of a subject’s active reflection of

A continuous formative process
objective reality that emerges in the process of
running in each case in an individual way but
interaction of higher living beings with external
according to universal laws.
world and plays a regulative role in their

A mode of the subject’s being.
behaviour.

Soul (Anima)

A soul as a source of feeling

A subjective image of objective
reality.
opposed to intellect.

The totality of the conscious and
the unconscious.

The transcending manifestation
of the Spirit (Hegel)
Subjective reality having

objective characteristics.


The “invisible” part of the world
supporting the visible world.
The product of and prerquisite

Universal
unifying
basis
to a signal intercourse between a living
immanent both in living beings and inanimate
being and the environment.
nature.

A function of highly organized
matter (of the brain) based on the irritability
of the nervous tissue.

A higher form of interconnection
allowing
them
to
realize
their
The law of order manifested on
the mental level.

between living beings and the world of
objects

The real aspect of being and its
reflection; unity of the real and the ideal.

A multitude of conscious and
unconscious mental experiences.
intentions and act basing on the information
they have about the world.
The principal contradictions that may be found in the definitive framework of the
basic category of the psyche are as follows:
 ambiguity of the ontological status of the psychic;
 ambiguity of defining the essence of the psychic;
3
 discrepancies between the aspects of the psychic related to the
senses, the mind and the will;
 coexistence of contradictory materialistic, idealistiic and
dialectical concepts of the psychic.
Explorers of human psychology have attacked the category of consciensness at
all times, and scientists of the 20th century were particularly active in this regard. The
most profound and clear views on this category were stated by M. Heidegger, E.
Husserl, H.-G. Gadamer, L. Wittgenstein and other philosophers of that century who tried
to give a new interpretation of the conscious as related to being. In the most general
sense, they revived the notion of two hypostases of consciousness: conscious
experience involved into being and abstract reflection.
Many conclusions concerning consciousness reached by philosophical thought
in the second half of the 20th century were beyond the scope of classical psychology.
The idea that consciousness, like the psyche in general, is a function of the brain is still
being implanted into students’ minds at
psychological departments of universities.
From dialectical point of view, however, it would be proper to say that both the
conscious and the unconscious are psychic phenomena related in an orderly fashion
to bodily being but not generated by it. The discovery of the antinomy “the conscious –
the unconscious” made by Z. Freud and C. Jung was a breakthrough that allowed
them to integrate these antinomies into a single third, a subject’s psyche. This was a
scientific achievement based on dialectical methodology with its principle “neither this
nor that but a third”.
Semantics of the category of consciousness
CONSCIOUSNESS
Epistemological definitions

to
Ontological definitions
The particular mode of relating
objective
reality
as
represented
in
universal forms of social activity in the
historical development of the mankind.

Sensual and mental imagery

Reason (Ratio).

Intellectual manifestation of the

A oneneness of
Spirit.
processes taking an
active part in the
characterized by one’s certainty of the fact
subject’s
that it is he who is experiencing these images
reality and his own existence.

and himself.

A
higher
form
of
reflecting
organized
psychological
conceptualization
of
objective
A higher level of the subject’s
psychic
activity
and
his
self-
4
objective reality.

regulation that ensures the wholeness of his
A subjective image of objective
existence.
Being-there

reality.

A mode of reflecting reality as
mediated
by
sign
systems,
A
function
of
human
the
brain
responsible for speech.

Self-reproductive entity.

A location of relatedness and
differentiation, a supersensory interval (M. K.
A mode of relating to the world
A conscious being, the oneness

of the subjective and the objective (L. S.
The highest level of activity of a
Rubinstein).
A subject’s ability to recognize

subject as a social being.


Mamardashvili).
and to oneself.

(M.
Heidegger).
communication and activities.

(Dasein)
himself as self-sufficient entity.
A sign system performing the
secondary reflection of perceived material.
A

screen

The function of testing reality.
psyche

A psychic process
Mamardashvily).
characterized by intentionality (that is, a
from

the
separating
external
world
man’s
(M.
K.
A text coming into existence in
subject’s focusing on an object), activity,
the act of its reading, denoting itself and
reflectivity, meaningfulness, purpose-
referring to itself (M. K. Mamardashvili).
pursuing, a sensitive attitude both to the

Absolute
trans-phenomenal
world and to oneself, a definite position in
dimension of a subject in being that has no
time and space, signification, and
content and asserts a transcendent object
discreteness.
which is mastered by the subject due to the

A
psychological
state
of
a
person who: a) possesses the faculties of
sensing and perceiving; b) reacts to stimuli;
fact that his consciousness transforms itself (J.P. Sartre).

A space where some
c) is able to have feelings and emotions; d) is
supplements to our innate abilities are at work
able to have thoughts and ideas, draw plans
(M. K. Mamardashvili).
and form images; e) is aware of his state.
Dialectical and ontological view of consciousness as an aspect of a subject’s
being associated with being-in-the-world implies that the process of conscious
perception is related to principal psychic manifestations of the subject’s existence
(such as meaning-making, feelings, will, intuition, actions and others), each of them
being partly (and sometimes almost completely) unconscious.
The category of the unconscious
5
The latest Dictionary of Philosophy compiled by V. I. Ovcharenko gives the following
most common meanings of the unconscious: 1) the totality of man’s active
psychological phenomena, states, processes, mechanisms, operations and actions that
cannot be brought to consciousness without the employment of some specific
methods; 2) the broadest and the most meaningful part (system, sphere, field, section
etc.) of man’s psyche; 3) a form of psychic reflection whose content, development
and functioning are not the subject of special extra-scientific consideration; 4) a state
of a person characterized by the absence of conscious comprehension. In European
rational tradition, the idea of the unconscious psyche dates back to the beginnings of
western philosophy (to Socrates’ and Plato’s doctrine of anamnesis as gaining
knowledge by recollection, and to other concepts). Philosophy and psychology have
considered the issue of the unconscious in its various forms and meanings over the
whole course of their development. Significant contribution to the study of the
unconscious was made by the following scholars:
B. Spinoza (unconscious causal determination of desires), G. Leibniz (unconscious
as a lower form of psychic activity), D. Hartley (relation between the unconscious and
the functioning of the nervous system), I. Kant (relation between the unconscious and
intuitive or sensuous knowledge), A. Schopenhauer (inner unconscious stimuli), C. Carus
(his thesis that the key to consciousness lies in the subconscious), E. Hartmann
(philosophy of the unconscious), G. Fechner (his view of a soul as an iceberg), W.
Wundt (unconscious thinking, unconscious perception, unconscious logic), H. Helmholtz
(unconscious deduction), I. Pavlov (unconscious psychic life), H. Liebeau and H.
Bernheim (hypnotic suggestion and post-hypnotic behaviour), J. Charcot (invisible
psychological trauma one is not aware of), G. Le Bon (unconscious human behaviour,
the unconscious as a dominant of mob psychology controlling its “collective soul”), P.
Janet (psychological automatisms and unconscious factors in neuroses).
In the 20th century, the concept of the unconscious has been most fully and
systematically worked out in the context of psycho-analytical theory. Of fundamental
importance were results obtained by S. Freud who gave a psychological definition of
the unconscious and proposed
the doctrine of the unconscious, by C. Jung who
developed the ideas of the psychoid as well as of personal and collective unconscious,
by J. Moreno who elaborated the concept of common unconscious and by E. Fromm
who studied the problem of social unconscious. According to J. Moreno, common
unconscious serves as the cornerstone
and the mechanism of social interaction, it
emerges during long contacts between people and aids in resolving interpersonal role
6
conflicts. E. Fromm argues that a significant role in organizing human activities is played
by social unconscious that is represented by repressed spheres common to the majority
of society members and containing that material which, by the norms of a given
society, cannot be allowed into their consciousness. Individual, collective and social
unconscious takes part directly or indirectly in a wide range of psychic acts, from
elementary ones to creative work, and affects every aspect of human life, be that
norm or pathology.
Modern
psychology
recognizes
several
kinds
of
manifestation
of
the
unconscious: 1) unconscious stimuli to action (motives and attitudes); 2) unconscious
mechanisms and regulators of activity giving it an automated character (operational
attitudes
and
automated
behaviour
stereotypes);
3)
unconscious
subsensory
(subliminal) processes and mechanisms (of perception, etc.); 4) unconscious social
programs (values, attitudes, norms, etc.)
The ontological status of the unconscious in psychology was derogated from the
very beginning because the unconscious by definition is something that consciousness
has no knowledge of, therefore that consciousness cannot believe in the existence of
something unknown.
Freud held that unconscious exists in the gaps, or intermediate spaces, where
all-sufficient sequence of conscious processes is disrupted. He was the first to
investigate and objectify the unconscious, disclosing to the whole world its lowest and
darkest content. Freud considered unconcious processes to be primary, noncontradictory, timeless, inclined to replace the external reality with internal one; they
exhibit the mobility of the cathexis (“electrical charge” of libido) and are governed by
the pleasure principle.
Freud subdivided primary unconscious processes into descriptive, or latent
unconscious (the preconscious) and repressed unconscious (contained in recollections
and fantasies).
Secondary conscious processes governed by the reality principle (intellect,
discretion, morality) are characterized by logic that reconciles contradictions, by
precise structuring in space and time as well as by bound cathexis. Psychoanalysis
regards the word as a container of consciousness that takes up the energy of the
cathexis from the unconscious.
7
The main function of secondary processes, according to Freud, consists in testing
reality for reconciling one’s wishes with it. The scientist believed that the unconscious is
primarily “powered” by instinctive forces of libido (life instinct) and mortido (death
instinct). Freud conceived the unconscious to be something wild, archaic, instinctive
and pre-logical. His idea that the language of the unconscious is akin to myth-making
gave a strong impetus to research in various trends of modern psychotherapy and was
developed in the works of C. Jung, E. Neumann, D. Campbell, O. Rank and C. Naranjo.
Basing on the ideas that consciousness is always something represented (M.
Heidegger), an intention, or awareness of some concrete object that has become
“visible” (E. Husserl), M. Henry states that being is routinely and almost fully excluded
from the scope of actual representation and hence from consciousness. That which is
represented outside consciousness preserves the form of conjectured being. Being in
that “protoworld” that retains the form of the actual world was called by Henry the
unconscious having ontological status.
Heidegger postulated that transcendental consciousness is unconscious
because everything that presents itself (that is, changes from incomprehensible to
apprehensible) achieves the state of an object, and consciousness regards it as a
phenomenon. According to Heidegger, any possible presence is registered as the
presence of an object. A subject does not know the process he possesses – in other
words, consciousness has no idea of the product it receives, which means that an
unconscious process is taking place along with the conscious one.
A. Schopenhauer who put forward the idea of “will to live” taken up later on by
F. Nietzsche and M. Mamardashvili considered unconscious as inconceivable
(undirected desire) and thus supplemented “ideological” dimension of consciousness
with affective aspiration which is necessarily associated with conscious representation.
Semantics of the category of the unconscious
UNCONSCIOUS
Epistemological definitions

A
totality
of
Ontological definitions
psychological

A phenomenon that belongs to
processes and mechanisms the functioning
the macrocosm.
and the effect of which are not known to a

content
of
being
disappearing from the sphere of actual
subject.

The
Psychological
activity
of
a
representation.
8
subject that proceeds without participation
of consciousness.

consciousness – conjectured being, or being
Psychological content outside
in protoworld preserving the form of the world.
the realm of consciousness.

The primary process
on
in
going
the
That which is imagined beyond

gaps
of
all-sufficient

Transcendent consciousness.

An unknown presence of a
probable object which a subject possesses.
sequence of secondary conscious processes.

The unrepresentable.
A form of psychic reflection

Part of the psyche not

where the image of reality and the attitude
perceived by a subject but observable from
of a subject towards reality are not an object
outside and manifested in idiopathic
of a particular reflection but comprise an
emotions which are spontaneous and
indiscrete unity.
irrational in nature.

Super-consciousness.

A psychological process which
is symbolic, irrational and continuous and
consciousness but supporting the existence of
visible objects.
does not belong to any subject.

A
specific
functional
of collective origin converted actually into an
individual formative process.
activity
whose
subject.
the
Other
(J.
Being proper that includes Non-

being.
A functional component of the
psyche that exerts a constant influence on
the subject’s consciousness.

of
Lacan).
motives and aims are not known to the

Discourse

consciousness.
Psychological
Concentrated psychic energy

component of the psyche homologous to

Part of the world invisible to


Depository of all higher and
lower forms of Spirit.

The bulk of the dream content.
Repressed traumatic personal
experience and the content contradictory to
subject’s concepts.
The metacategory of the psyche includes a generic concept of the unconscious
that is known not to be a generic concept of consciousness. Episemologically, the
unconscious is a true antithesis of consciousness just as the ideal is an antithesis of the
material, while ontologically it may be deduced from ideas alien to consciousness and
not subject to conscious control. Then, as compared to consciousness, the unconscious
must possess an alternative set of homologous qualities. It is believed that the latter are
factors unconsciously controlling human behaviour, stimuli of various operating modes
(motives, attitudes, automatsms) and such phenomena as subthreshold perception
and repressed contradictory content of conscious Ego. Archetypal and superconscious
9
phenomena possess mostly the qualities polar to those of consciousness. However,
qualities of both the former and the latter are immanent to any unconscious
phenomena, and on these grounds modern psychotherapy takes a dialectical
approach to them. According to C. Jung, a distinguishing feature of the unconscious
that does not depend on consciousness is its ability to produce order, to serve as the
source of order which is disturbed from time to time by chaotic and spontaneous
unconscious processes. Jung believed that human psyche is governed not only by its
natural archaic traits but also by higher spiritual powers; the ability to integrate them
develops in the course of the individuation process.
It may be argued that ontologically the unconscious is that part of the psyche
which is beyond a subject’s control but, though it escapes recognition and lacks
subjectivity, it manifests itself wholly and objectively in groundless emotions,
spontaneous and irrational in nature, semantically fuzzy but structured and accessible
to external observation. In other words, the unconscious is a subjectless presence of
psychic material inaccessible to conscious self-observation but accessible to an
external observer.
Phenomenology and onthology of the unconscious
A historical background
A general idea of the unconscious was advanced by Plato in his thesis about gaining
knowledge by recollection (anamnesis) and then taken up by many philosophers,
those of our times including. The first to give a well-defined formulation of the concept
of the unconscious was G. Leibniz. In his work The Monadology (1714) he treated the
unconscious as a lower form of psychic activity confined to the sphere over the
threshold of conscious notions that rise like small islands above the ocean of dark
perceptions.
A different viewpoint was held by R. Descartes who raised the problem of
consciousness. His idea that all psychic activity is conscious suggested that the only
activity of the brain beyond consciousness is physiological one.
Poets and theoreticians of the romantic movement again laid stress on the
unconscious. In opposition to the rationalism of the Enlightenment, they made a sort of
cult of the unconscious as a deep spring of all creative work.
Many scholars of the 19th century (physician C. G. Carus in 1864, philosopher E.
von Hartmann in 1869, physiscists and physiologists H. Helmholtz and W. Wundt at about
10
the same time) came to a quite unexpected conclusion that possibilities of
consciousness had been for a long time overestimated while actually its potential is
rather limited. In 1824, J. Herbart introduced a dynamic characteristic of the
unconscious postulating that incompatible ideas may come into conflict with one
another and less seminal ideas are displaced from consciousness but continue to
influence it preserving their dynamics.
German idealism dealt chiefly with epistemological aspect of the unconscious. I.
Kant considered the unconscious in the context of intuition and sensuous cognition (a
priori unconscious synthesis).
A. Schopenhauer put forward the irrational theory of the unconscious developed
further by E. Hartmann who raised the unconscious to the rank of universal principle, the
foundation of being and the cause of the world’s existence.
The study of the unconscious within the framework of psychology itself originated
in the 19th century in Germany (J. Herbart, G. Fechner, W. Wundt, T. Lipps). An impetus to
this study was provided by investigations in the field of psychopathology where
therapists started applying special methods of influencing the unconscious, hypnosis
being the first of them. The researches, especially those of the French school of
psychiatry (J. Charcot and others), discovered a pathogenic psychic activity which
differed from the conscious one and which patients were not aware of.
The first attempt to give a strictly materialistic interpretation of the unconscious
was made by English physician D. Hartley who studied the unconscious in relation to the
functioning of the nervous sysytem.
Americam psychologist Timothy Wilson believes that the unconscious is an
indispensable and efficient aide of people because it governs their everyday life
initiating automatic actions. As another American scientist Christopher Koch writes, “it is
as if the unconscious sets free a host of zombies residing in our head and preprogrammed to perform a single relatively simple operation”. This automatism unloads
the mind allowing it to work creatively at more complex tasks in those rare instances
when something unusual happens which does not coincide with stereotypes and our
brain is unable to choose a required scheme automatically. In that case, consciousness
steps in.
In 1957, a market researcher James Vicary published sensational results of the
experiment he had carried out in an American movie house. While a film was on,
11
moviegoers were repeatedly shown 0.03 second advertisements commanding 0.03seconds messages “Eat Popcorn!” “Drink Coca-Cola!” The time was too short to
percieve the message consciously.
However, sales of these products grew
exceptionally quickly. This phenomenon named “the effect of the 25th shot” initiated
investigations of the so-called subliminal perception.
Modern depth psychology and psychotherapy, contrary to Freud and his school,
do not regard the unconscious any more as something repressed by consciousness but
as some specific essence, the primary psychic reality and the main source of
archetypal forms generating universal human motives and emotional experiences.
According to Jung, the unconsious is not an inciter of drives but a formative force
as well as a source of creative imagination of the spirit and of the sense of values that
are not controlled by reason.
Considered in terms of the body, the unconscious belongs to phenomena not
recognized by the mind, they are physical and psychological functions or processes not
subordinated to consciousness. Thus, many functions of autonomic nervous system are
unconscious. So the unconscious is not merely a philosophical concept denoting
psychological processes which are not controlled by the subject and are not
represented in his consciousness but embraces everything that is not an object of a
person’s purposeful attempts to bring them to consciousness.
Manifestations of unconscious behaviour and unconscious perception may be
divided into several groups:
1. Unconscious motives whose true meaning is not recognized because they are
at variance with social norms or other motives.
2. Automatic and stereotyped behaviour that need not be apperceived due to
the familiarity of the situation.
3. Subliminal perception that takes place when consciousness cannot assimilate
a great body of information.
In the Soviet psychology, one of the main lines of research into the problem of
the unconsious was associated with D. N. Uznadze’s doctrine of the attitude.
I. M. Sechenov and I. P. Pavlov, interested in psychophysiological aspects of the
unconscious, studied the functioning of brain-cortex and subcortical structures as
12
observed in hypnotic states and during sleep as well as automatic behaviour at work,
during sports activity, etc.
P. V. Simonov divides unconscious phenomena into subconscious and
superconscious ones. Experiencing important events that evoke strong feelings and
cause personal crises is sometimes classed with superconscious processes. From this
standpoint, Jung’s collective unconscious may be also regarded as the superconscious
but, on the other hand, it may be referred to unconscious attitudes. Myths, beliefs and
superstitions do not reflect reality but nevertheless help straighten out ideas about the
outworld.
The superconscious is associated with creative work. In this sphere, it produces
sudden insights (that are prepared, though, by previous concentration on a given
subject) and works of art. Being subject to probability by its nature, the superconscious
nevertheless does not present some accidental assortment of combinations but is
conditioned by:
1) previous experience, that of preceding generations including;
2) objectives set to the superconscious by consciousness trying to solve some
problem;
3) a dominating necessity.
According to P. Simonov, humour as a sense of superiority of something new over
inconvenient outdated norms may be also classed with superconscious phenomena.
Yu. B. Gippenreuter believes that the unconscious includes the following
phenomena:
-
unconscious mechanisms of conscious actions,
-
unconscious stimuli of conscious actions,
-
“over-conscious” processes.
Some excerpts from:
L. S. Vygotsky
THE PSYCHE, THE CONSCIOUS, THE UNCONSCIOUS 1
Выготский Л.С. Психика, сознание, бессознательное // Л. С. Выготский. Собрание трудов /
Текстологический комментарий В. Пешкова. М., 2001.
1
13
<…> E. Spranger, one of the leading exponents of “understanding” psychology, or
psychology as a science of spirit, advanced the requirement that psychology must be
studied exclusively by psychological methods. In other words, he insisted that psychic
phenomena should be explained relying exclusively upon psychological instead of
physiological observations.
As H. Münsterberg stated in 1914, “from psychological standpoint, there is no
actual interrelation even between fully conscious psychological phenomena, so they
cannot serve as a cause or an explanation of one another. Consequently, inner life of a
man, from psychological point of view, does not develop according to causation
principle which may be applied to psychological phenomena only from the outside
because they are, in some sense, supplementary to physiological processes.”
E. Husserl indicated (1911) that in the sphere of consciousness the difference
between a phenomenon and being disappears. Everything that consciousness
imagines is real. Psychology viewed in this manner resembles geometry rather than any
natural science (physics, for example). Following W. Dilthey, Husserl argued that
psychology must become mathematics of spirit. Clearly, the psychic becomes then
entirely identified with consciousness because intuition means that one’s experience
immediately becomes conscious. However, there is another psychological approach
that, according to Spranger, meets his requirement to study psychology by
psychological methods but does it in the reverse order. This line of research does not
consider all psychic phenomena to be conscious and places the unconscious in the
centre of psychic activity. If we take it into account in considering psychic phenomena,
we may to proceed with describing them in terms of general psychology, fill in the
blanks in our knowledge of the psyche and reveal the causality of the phenomena
keeping in mind that a cause must be homogenous or at least congenial to its effect.
<…> All this allows to consider psychology as a specific science. However, this
statement is highly ambiguous because the science of psychology comprises two
essentially dissimilar trends. Spranger justly points out that Freud, the chief exponent of
psychoanalytic theory, reasons from the same principle as “understanding” psychology
(though he does not voice it), this principle stating that researches in the field of
psychology must be carried out, as far as possible, by psychological means.
Unwarranted or occasional excursions into the province of anatomical and
physiological issues can identify psycho-physical links but cannot explain psychic
phenomena.
<...> Freud tried to extend conscious relationships between psychic phenomena
to the sphere of the unconscious and suggested that conscious phenomena are
14
governed by unconscious ones which may be revealed by way of analyzing their
traces and interpreting their manifestations. Spranger makes a strong objection to
Freud’s doctrine noting its peculiar theoretical fallacy: while avoiding the errors of
vulgar physiological materialism, it is not free of mistakes of psychological materialism.
The Freudian theory implies a major metaphysical premise about the dominance of
sexual drives that serve as the rationale of all other psychological phenomena.
<...> So there are three alternatives: to study the psyche in terms of the psychic
(descriptive psychology), do it in terms of the unconscious (Freudian psychoanalysis) or
refuse to study it (reflexology). These are three systems of psychological research
differing radically in their understanding of mental processes. The evolution of the
science of psychology dead-locked any investigation in this field, and the only let-out is
to abandon old philosophical foundations of psychological research. Dialectical
approach to this problem shows that absolutely all questions concerning the conscious,
the unconscious and other psychological matters have been posed with errors. And
insofar as questions were improper, they could not be answered. While metaphysical
thinking is unable to distinguish between psychological and physiological processes, this
presents no problem to dialectical thought that regards all processes of development
as continuous but going on in leaps leading to the emergence of new qualities.
<...> Dialectical psychology postulates, first and foremost, the unity of
psychological and physiological processes. It agrees with Spinoza for whom human
psyche was not something estranged from nature, a sort of an autonomous state, but a
part of nature directly involved in the functioning of the highly organized matter of
human brain. Like all nature, it was not created in a flash but is the result of evolution. Its
rudimentary forms are found in every live cell capable of reacting to environmental
influences and of changing.
<...> However, advocating the unity of the psychic and the physical and
assuming, first, that the psyche appeared at a certain stage of organic matter
development and, second, that psychic processes make up an inseparable part of
some larger compound entity and hence should be studied together with it, we must
not identify the psychic with the physical.
Dialectical psychology denies this identification and does not
confuse
psychological and physiological processes, it postulates qualitative singularity of the
psyche that cannot be reduced to anything else but states at the same time its
oneness. In other words, we must recognize the existence of sui generis integrated
15
psycho-physiological processes that are the highest form of human behaviour. We offer
the term “psychological” to denote them, in contrast to terms “psychic” or “mental”
and by analogy with distinguishing them from the term “physiological”.
Psychologists of our country, however, often make a mistake in respect to this
dialectical unity (but not sameness) of psychological and physiological processes
opposing them, which leads the psychologists to believe that dialectical approach
mechanically combines two different procedures: a purely physiological study of
conditioned reflexes and introspective analysis. There can be nothing farther from
dialectics.
<...> As noted above, Husserl proceeded from the assumption that the psyche
does
not
distinguish
between
a
phenomenon
and
being.
Accepting
this
phenomenological postulate, we inevitably come to the conclusion that there is no
difference for the psyche between things that seem to exist and those existing in reality.
Then semblant phenomena would represent real essence, and we would have only to
take this essence for granted, to discern it and systematize our observations, which
would be far from empirical science.
<...> Since the subject matter of psychology is integral psycho-physiological
behavioural process, it is clear that its psychic component alone, especially as
reflected by an individual self, cannot describe this process adequately. In fact, selfobservation always provides us with data of self-awareness which may distort and
inevitably distort the evidence of consciousness. The latter, in turn, can never reveal all
characteristics and trends of the integral process they are a part of. Relationships
between the data of
self-awareness and consciousness, between the data of
consciousness and the process are identical to relationships between a phenomenon
and being.
<...> Modern psychology positively states that in the world of the psyche
phenomena cannot be identified with being either. Sometimes we imagine that we
know motives of our actions while in reality they are quite different. Sometimes we
believe, on seemingly good grounds of our own first-hand experience, that we possess
a free will, but it turns out to be a grand mistake. This leads us up to yet another basic
problem of psychology.
<...> There were times when psychologists identified the psychic and the
conscious, all psychic being necessarily considered conscious. For example, F.
16
Brentano, A. Bain and some other scientists insisted that even posing the question about
the existence of unconscious psychic phenomena is incorrect. A foremost natural
characteristic of the psychic is the fact that our consciousness recognizes it, we
perceive it in our first-hand experience, which fact inclined these authors to regard the
expression “unconscious psychological processes” as senseless as word combinations
“a round square” or “dry water”.
<...> But some of the old scholars saw it proper to introduce the concept of the
unconscious in psychology and advanced three major arguments in favour of it. The
first argument was that there are various degrees of awareness: we experience some
events more vividly and consciously than others. Some things exist at the very border of
consciousness and alternately come into its field and out of it, some are perceived
indistinctly; some experiences – dreaming, for example – are more or less closely related
to real senses. If a phenomenon becomes less conscious, these scholars were
reasoning, that does not mean that it becomes “less psychic”, so why not assume the
existence of unconscious psychic phenomena.
<…> Their second argument was based on the fact that different elements of live
psyche are in a certain competition with one another to enter the field of
consciousness, their struggle resulting in the repression of some elements by others,
attempts to resume their functioning, sometimes their obsessive reproduction. J. Herbart
saw human psychology as an elaborate mechanical system of apperceptions, some of
them being obscure or unconscious. They have been displaced from consciousness
and persist as subliminal striving for representation. This idea carries the germ of two
concepts of the unconscious: the Freudian one which states that the unconscious arises
from repressed material and that of H. Høffding for whom the unconscious is similar to
potential energy in physics.
<…> The third argument is as follows. The psychic experience embraces
separate series of events, and it seems natural that they continue to exist even
becoming inaccessible to our consciousness. I recollect something that happened
some time ago. The question arises, what has been going on with that something over
the period when I did not think about it? Psychologists never doubted that any
perceived image or idea leaves a dynamic trace in the brain, but it was not quite clear
if there could be an actual phenomenon corresponding to a given trace. Many
thought there could.
17
<…> In the earlier psychology, the main problem of the unconscious was
whether to classify it with psychic phenomena or with physiological ones. H.
Münsterberg, T. Ribot and some other authors did not see any other possibility to explain
psychic phenomena than in terms of physiology and declared the unconscious
physiological by nature.
For a complete understanding of this issue it should be noted that there is a third
line of approach to the problem of the unconscious, namely that chosen by Freud. As
has been mentioned above, his approach is not wholly satisfactory. Freud does not
answer the cardinal and essentially insoluble question whether the unconscious belongs
to psychic phenomena or not. He says that in studying behaviour and emotions
experienced by nervous patients he came up against certain gaps in their memory,
dropped out associations, forgotten facts that he managed to restore in the patients’
memory by way of analysis.
Freud tells about a female patient who performed compulsive actions and could
not explain their meaning. The motives of these unconscious actions were revealed
during analysis. As Freud writes, her behaviour reminded him of a man whom H.
Bernheim had hypnotized and ordered him to put up his umbrella right in the room 5
minutes after coming out of the hypnotic state. The man did as he had been told to
without understanding why he did so. In Freud’s opinion, that proved the existence of
unconscious psychic processes. He was ready to give up this assumption only in case
somebody could describe these facts in terms of exact science, otherwise he would
stick to his opinion shrugging off any objections and rejecting the statements that reality
of the unconscious does not have in this instance any scientific foundation. If it is not
real, how can it exercise so noticeable effect as compulsive action?
This point should be thoroughly clarified because Freudian theory brings forth
one of the most sophisticated concepts of the unconscious. On the one hand, the
scientist argues that the unconscious is a real factor causing compulsive behaviour and
not just a term or a means of expressing a psychic phenomenon, which seems to
directly contest propositions of Münsterberg, but on the other hand, Freud does not
explain the nature of the unconscious.
We think that here Freud devises that sort of a notion which is hard to imagine in
a concrete form but which is often employed in physics. An unconscious idea, Freud
says, is as impossible as imponderable frictionless ether and just as unconceivable as
18
numerical value of “– 1”. In our opinion, such notions can be used only if one
understands that he is dealing not with facts but with abstracts.
<…> Here we are confronted with the weak point of psychoanalysis indicated by
E. Spranger. On the one hand, Freud regards the unconscious only as a mode of
describing known facts, a system of conventional notions, while on the other hand he
presents it as a real factor bringing about compulsive actions. Freud himself wrote that
he would be glad to replace psychological terminology with physiological one if
modern physiology could put such terms at his disposal.
<…> Dialectical psychology addresses the problem of the unconscious quite
differently. Earlier, when psychological and physiological processes were viewed as
isolated from each other, it was only logical to deliberate whether a particular
phenomenon is of a psychological or physiological nature. In the former case, it was
examined by “understanding” psychology, in the latter by scientists like I. P. Pavlov. The
difference between Husserl and Pavlov in solving general psychological problems was
the same as that between E. Hartmann and Münsterberg in their approach to the
problem of the unconscious. The important question for us is whether the unconscious is
psychological by nature and can be handled, like other analogous phenomena, as a
certain element
of human behaviour along with integral psychological processes
mentioned above. The answer to this question can be deduced from our previous
treatment of human psychology. We consider the psyche to be a compound of
complex processes that is far from being wholly represented by consciousness, so
subdivision of psychological processes into conscious and unconscious ones is fully
justified: the unconscious is potentially conscious.
<…> Thus, the very nature of the unconscious, its ability to influence conscious
processes and behaviour, demands to recognize it as a psycho-physiological
phenomenon. Another consideration is that facts must be described in terms related to
their nature, and the advantage of dialectical approach lies in its postulate that the
unconscious is neither psychic nor physiologic by nature but psycho-physiologic, or,
more exactly, psychologic. This definition fits well with the real character of the object
studied because it regards human behaviour as a complex of integral processes.
<…> In conclusion it should be added that the approach taken by dialectical
psychology makes it possible to actually realize all achievements of both subjective
and objective psychology. For example, subjective psychology revealed in psychic
phenomena a number of qualities that can be truly explained and assessed only from
19
the new dialectical standpoint. Old psychology pointed out, in particular, spontaneity
of psychic phenomena, a peculiar way they may be cognized (self-observation) and
their close association with self, with the personality. F. Brentano believed that the main
distinguishing feature of psychic phenomena is their “intentionality” in referring to the
object – in other words, they are in unique relation to the object, they represent it or are
object-oriented in a specific manner.
<…> Let’s take another example that approaches the same problem from the
opposite direction but supports the above statement. Objective psychology tried to
solve the problem of the unconscious. J. Watson put emphasis (1926) on the difference
between verbalized and non-verbalized behaviour. Behavioural processes may
be
accompanied by words from the very beginning, verbal activity may provoke certain
behaviour or even substitute it. These processes are “accountable” to us, as V.
Bekhterev used to say. Other processes are not verbalized, hence “non-accountable”.
Freud also wrote about verbalization pointing out that only notions not expressed in
words may be regarded as unconscious.
Close interdependence between consciousness and verbalization of various
processes was also stressed by some critics of Freud who tended to equate the
unconscious with the asocial and the asocial with the non-verbal. Watson, too,
regarded verbalization as one of the principal distinctions of consciousness. From this
premise, he drew two extremely interesting conclusions. The first of them suggests that
we cannot remember details of our infancy because our behaviour was not verbalized
at that time, so the earliest part of our life remains beyond our consciousness forever.
The second conclusion pinpoints the weak spot of psychoanalysis displayed when the
analyst tries to work on the patient’s non-verbalized unconscious processes by means of
speech.
<…> We do not mean that Watson’s postulates are absolutely right and must be
a starting point in studying the problem of the unconscious, but we do mean that the
idea of the interrelation between the unconscious and the non-verbalized (which idea
is shared by many other authors) contains the grain of truth that can develop and bear
fruit only on the breeding ground of dialectical psychology.”
Some excerpts from:
V. P. Zinchenko, M. K. Mamardashvili
HIGHER PSYCHIC FUNCTIONS
20
AND THE CATEGORY OF THE UNCONSCIOUS 1
“At the early stages of research into higher psychic functions and especially into
creative thinking, the most difficult issue for analysis, all speculations on the nature of
creativity necessarily involved the concept of the unconscious. Without this concept
the works on this subject written by F. Galton, H. Poincaré, H. Helmholtz and others
would lose much of their scientific value. The unconscious was ontologized and
regarded as a sphere of subjectivity (“the antechamber of consciousness”) where
thoughts and images combine with each other like atoms moving in space. A popular
expression was “a play of thoughts and images” which goes on best when the state of
consciousness changes and there is no voluntary control or game plan. The
unconscious was considered to be the source, the means and even the locus of all
insights,
discoveries,
decisions,
motives
and
attitudes.
Such
interpretation
of
unconscious functions belittled the significance of higher psychological processes. Their
characterization was often rather meaningless: “insight takes place in a short time
interval”, “intuitive problem solving needs to be prepared unconsciously”, “intuitive
decisions are made with absolute confidence in the accuracy of the result”. Such
characteristics led to inconsistent recommendations concerning means of intensifying
creative work: “it is desirable to lessen external interferences (solution may come during
sleep)”, “it is desirable to have a sort of a clue (insight may occur at some most
unexpected place – in front of a cage with monkeys or near a fireplace). The
approach to the problem of the unconscious was quite naturalistic, scientists only
sought optimal conditions for its cultivation.
The apparent success in describing and interpreting the creative process with
the help of the category of the unconscious encouraged
investigators to further
generalize this category and use it in studying nearly all psychic phenomena. It is worthy
of note that Freud, despite his essentially constructive approach, adhered largely to the
old naturalistic interpretation of the unconscious. This served as a reasonable and often
unconscious cause of its criticism. Moreover, in the same naturalistic manner Freud
interpreted also consciousness and, in particular, repression. The main thing here is to
understand repression not as some automatic process (though this seems logical) but
as a special psychic activity, even if it is unconscious. Repression is not sinking of
unbearable contents down to some lower layer (“physical bottom”) but a specific
В. П. Зинченко, М. К. Мамардашвили. Изучение высших психических функций и категория
бессознательного // Бессознательное. Сборник статей. Т. 1. Новочеркасск, 1994. С. 69-77.
1
21
encoding of these contents, i.e., a peculiar kind of semiotic activity. As a result,
consciousness receives nothing but encoded “messages” that may be decoded only in
the course of psychoanalysis since consciousness changes the meaning of a
phenomenon so radically that it cannot recognize the real substance of the message.
While in the course of development of the theory and practice of psychoanalysis the
categories of the conscious and the unconscious became more and more operative
and assimilated by general culture, in the study of cognitive processes they were still
treated, just as processes themselves, naturalistically. This led to the situation when the
concept of the unconscious was gradually being replaced in the description of
creative activity by other psychic functions and processes (imagination, intuition), as
well as by non-psychic ones. As experimental psychology developed, the role of the
category of the unconscious in higher psychic functions grew increasingly neglected.
The lot of the category of the unconscious was the same as that of the conscious.
Reactology, reflexology and behaviorism tried to exclude these categories from
scientific psychology together with the notions of the soul and the psyche. They
attempted to replace both conscious and unconscious psyche with the dynamics of
nervous processes. Decision making was now performed not in the province of the
unconscious but in the sphere of brain functions by the trial-and-error method.
<…> In distinguishing between the conscious and the unconscious Freud invoked
thus a most important archetype of psychological science maintaining that the psyche
is structured in layers. Though the first who articulated the notion of this archetype was
Aristoteles, it was Freudian conceptualization of the archetype that had an impact on
the whole science of psychology.
The dichotomy “the conscious – the unconscious” is represented in a number of
binary oppositions widely used in modern psychology: external – internal, voluntary –
involuntary, reflexive – non-reflexive. The concept of interiorization and hierarchic
cognitive models go back to Freud’s theory of multilayer structure of human psyche.
There are various conceptual schemes differing in their subject matter and the notions
they operate with, but these differences are not irreconsilable; moreover, they show
similarities that are far from being formal.
The knowledge of psychic activity, its nature, structure and operational content
has become deeper and wider since the times of Freud. Meanwhile the attitude of
many contemporary as well as earlier psychologists to the problem of the unconscious
may be characterized as a strong inclination to exclude it from their reasoning. It is
22
considered improper to mention the unconscious in the respectable company of
psycho-physicists, psycho-physiologists and mathematics-, physiology- or linguisticsoriented psychologists. Cognitivists also use this term only in a historical and theoretical
context. However, the issue of the unconscious is as enduring and vindictive as “Id”.
Drawing this prudish veil of silence results either in anti-psychological approach (hence,
in diverse forms of reductionism) or a regress to early attempts to ontologize naturalistic
interpretation of the unconscious – of course, with due encoding of terms used. An
example of
the latter may be found in modern cognitive psychology where the
structure of higher psychic functions is described in terms of block- modelling.
As long as cognitive psychology analysed the operation of potential blocks, it
did not face serious problems. The problems began when it was necessary to explain
the mechanism of block synthesis. The point is that the time of their functioning makes it
impossible for consciousness to coordinate them. However, to turn for help to the
category of the unconscious was out of the question. The rescue came from demons
and homunculi (summoned by D. Norman, F. Attneave and others) or, on the opposite
pole, from physico-chemical formations of the brain and genetic codes. Reduction to
the latter is, apparently, a fond hope of J. Piaget’s genetic epistemology and cultural
anthropology of Lévi-Strausse’s kind. But this attempt to describe cognitive processes
paradoxically returns us to the admission of “demons” or “amperean little men” floating
in the brain canals through which synthesis of structures is effected.
The question arises: wouldn’t it be better to drop the tactics of suppressing the
problem or of encoding it and employ the strategy of its explication and solving? To
fully assimilate the idea that it is the resistance of the unconscious that demonstrates
best of all the impossibility of reducing the sphere of consciousness and the entire
psyche, we must overcome the unconscious in our scientific investigation. We think that
modern science of psychology has accumulated an ample armoury of means to fulfil
this task and is able if not to solve the problem of the unconscious then at least consider
it correctly and reasonably along these lines. It will be only natural though surprising that
not the unconscious but the conscious turns out to be the problem par exellence.
<…> It is a simple and at the same time exceedingly baffling matter. Just as we
have been struggling hard in physics to adjust ourselves to the theory of relativity, we
find considerable difficulty (due to the phantasms of our everyday self-oriented
language and the habits of our psychologized culture) in trying to drag up and
23
apperceive the idea that we actually deal with distinguishing two kinds of phenomena
inside consciousness:
1) phenomena that are regulated and realized by consciousness and will (and
are thereby ideal constructive);
2) phenomena and associations existing in consciousness but related to it only
implicitly and not controlled by it (therefore, not controlled by the subject and
generally subjectless). It should be emphasized that we are speaking about
distinguishing between two kinds of phenomena inside consciousness and not about
objects of the outworld acting upon it or physico-chemical processes in the brain
which,
from
phenomenological
viewpoint,
are
also
objects
external
to
the
consciousness. The case in point is that something in consciousness itself exhibits
qualities of real being that may be objectively analysed and are related to
consciousness as individual psychological reality. The extent and measure to which real
being manifests itself, or, if you prefer it, acts in consciousness, are in inverse proportion
to the extent and measure to which it reflects its own self-oriented action and the
objects of this action in the world. Clearly, in the light of these views such notions as
“physical action”, “objective” (independent of consciousness), “external”, “law-like”,
“spatial” and the like should be revised and their meaning should be broadened.
In investigating the reality of a human being and in working out his conceptual
categories it is particularly important to realize that man is not a fact like other facts
existing in nature on their own but an act. One of the reasons why we insist on using the
term “act” is that contemporary psychology and psychoanalysis oppose the categories
of “communication” and “word” to the categories of “activity” and “tool” meaning
that man tries to trace in his life some self-existent reality that cannot be differentiated
from observations of conscious life and its meaning with the aid of physical investigation
(that is, by observation from outside).
<…> A great merit of Freud was that he treated the unconscious as an atemporal
and metapsychical phenomenon, which at the level of the method and specific plastic
characteristics of analysed cases neutralized considerably his own positivistic
preconceptions inherited from the 19th century. Ontologizing of the unconscious,
converting it into some really existing deep layer of the psyche, a sort of Pandora’s box,
took place much later and was a vulgarization of psychoanalysis.
24
Speaking of free action, we understand Consciousness as atemporal states of
fusion with topologically meaningful objects’ (but not objective) reality rather than a
phenomenon represented in our inner psychological reality screened by our self. Only
in this way we can register and check genuine higher psychic functions and states, i.e.
self-existent manifestations of life, or, as they used to say in the past, of “Invisible” or
“Supreme” essence, these manifestations forming non-constructed sequences in some
continuously observed action. In the experience of mankind such manifestations could
be observed in various forms of meditation, in psychotechnically organized reconceptualizations or changes of consciousness. To end off the consideration of this
subject, it should be noted that all these descriptions of free phenomena like
“emergence” and “actual genesis” are always associated with symbolic objects
constructions, with “objects assembly”. That is the main reason why it is important for the
progress in studying higher psychic functions to take advantage of the achievements of
psychoanalysis for investigating particular cases of such things existence (for example,
phantasms having all material attributes of somatic phenomena, meaningful bodily
processes, organs concerned with desires, etc.). All this is quite similar to the
interpretation of movements, attitudes, images and notions adopted by modern
experimental psychology that treats them as organs of individual functioning with every
action of a given organ being unique, hence creative. But in case of the unconscious
being the subject of psychoanalytic consideration some “apparatuses” develop that
fail to form adequate connections and leave persistent imprints in the psyche whose
meaning is changed by empiric consciousness, so that they become pathogenic.
However, psychoanalysis has a healing effect that is exercised during communication
between the patient and the analyst and consists – only during their work! – in
reconstructing these apparatuses, actuating them and knocking them together, this
clash being able to release the frozen, misinterpreted, deviated, non-experienced and
non-realized potentialities.
<…> Atemporal character of the unconscious in situations critical for an
individual is similar to that of creative work with its insights and discoveries which are
also possible only in conditions when the individual dissolves in “the act of freedom”,
that is, breaks with his own empirical subjectivity and discontinues spontaneous activity
of cultural and semantic “natural qualities” inherent in psychism. If we are not mistaken,
it was P. Florensky who stressed the importance of intense emotional experience in love
for creative work. True love is distinguished by self-denial for the sake of the very
condition of being in love, the only condition when another reality is revealed together
25
with genuine infinity of conscious experience. In this respect, such personal experiences
as love, desire and the like are in a sense contrary to nature or, better to say, exclusively
human. It is the more so with such state of the thought when the existential force (or
power) of Consciousness manifests itself first and foremost.
<…> This phenomenon is difficult to analyse by scientific methods because, as in
case of repression, the process of decoding “messages” is very often inaccessible to
introspection. Еven when there is only a distinction in the form of representation
between the problem model of the situation and the clue, so that decision can be
taken by analogy, the identification of the two modes of representation may be very
troublesome. Just for that reason the process of decision making defies self-observation
and possesses such formal external features as above-mentioned flash of insight and
others. What is left on the surface is the result and assurance that it is valid (as Èvariste
Galois said, “I know my results long beforehand, but I don’t know yet how I’m going to
obtain them”).”
Some excerpts from:
Michel Henry
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONCEPT OF THE UNCONSCIOUS
FOR THE STUDY OF MAN 1
<...> Let us turn our attention to the definition of consciousness given by Freud. His first
remark on this point may may seem deceptive and confusing: “There is no need now to
explain what exactly we call the conscious and what is in fact the consciousness of
philosophers and public at large.”
2
His later statement strikes us, in contrast, as being
very clear-cut. In his work A Note on the Unconscious in Psychoanalysis (1912) Freud
objects vigorously against philisophical tradition to equate “the psychic” with “the
conscious”: “…we call ‘conscious’ only that representation which exists in our
consciousness and is perceived as such; we insist that this is the only possible meaning
of the term ‘conscious’.” 3
M. Henry. Signification du concept d’inconscient pour la connaissance de l’homme // M. Henry. Autodonation. Beauchesne. 2004. (Russian translation: М. Анри. Значение понятия бессознательного
для познания человека // Бессознательное. Сборник статей. Т. 1. Новочеркасск, 1994. С. 11-26.)
1
2
Freud S. Abrege de psychanalyse. Р., 1985. Р. 12. (Note of the author of the article.)
3
Freud S. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 8. S. 431. (Note of the author of the article.)
26
It should be noted that such defining the conscious by seemingly inevitable
logical deduction leads to opposing the unconscious to the conscious, which served
Freud as a basis of his argument that the unconscious really exists and all attempts to
dispute it are futile. If the essence of consciousness consists actually in presentation, i.e.,
in a statement made to oneself in the form of doubling or divarication, then everything
presented, i.e., set before anything seen and cognized (or, in Freud’s words,
“representation which exists in our consciousness and is perceived as such”) is subject
to finitude that is inherent in any representation as such and is the limit of the space
revealed by it. In other words, at a given moment I can imagine only one thing – surely,
surrounded by a zone of attendant roundabout representations, but this zone is narrow
and is already in shade. Consequently, if “to be” means “to be conscious” and “to be
conscious” means “to be presented”, then this being is almost fully excluded from the
sphere of actual or existing representation. This cardinal ontological finitude may be
also explained by the assumption that the representation loses its content almost
entirely. Then it remains only to state the existence of the represented, i.e., apperceive it
beyond the boundaries of real representation but preserve the structure and the forms
taken from the representation – the structure of pro-posed being existing as such
independent on the act that posed it before consciousness. That is just what Freudian
unconscious is in its original state: an assembly of unconscious representations regarded
as
self-sufficient
formations
existing
beyond
consciousness
and
outside
the
representation but preserving the same ex-position structure that is characteristic of the
latter.
The following excerpt presents the formulation of the “evidence” of the
unconscious existence as well as of its other being in the foreworld whose form is the
same as that of the world.
“The existence of unconscious psychic state may be proved by the rationale
that at every given moment consciousness holds a minimum content, so the bulk of socalled conscious knowledge is of necessity latent hence unconscious during rather long
periods. If we take into account all our latent memories, it will be quite unthinkable for
us to deny the existence of the unconscious.”
1
The argument in favour of the
unconscious is built up on consideration of the classical problem of memory. Freud
raises the question: what happens with memories we are not thinking of at the moment?
The answer he gives together with H. Bergson and all other philosophers of the time is:
1
Freud S. Gesammelte Werke. 1967. Bd. 10. S. 265-266. (Note of the author of the article.)
27
they are kept in the unconscious. But memory, as they all saw it, is a quality generated
by representation. It follows that this argument as well as conclusion drawn from it refer
not only to recollections but also to all representations outside the scope of actual
consciousness, the conclusion mentioned implying their “other being” in the form of
virtual representations contained in grossly realistic unconscious that has been invented
with the purpose to incorporate them.
The interpretation of consciousness as representation is not confined to a certain
epoch and is of universal significance. It is associated with Descartes’ “cogito” and with
all subsequent philosophy. The most important interpretations of “cogito” were given in
France by M. Gueroult and in Germany by E. Husserl and M. Heidegger. Husserl holds
that consciousness is defined by intentionality because one is
always conscious of
some thing. Intentionality is consciousness itself and to demonstrate it as such means to
separate it from
that which is given in this way and to find in and by this
transcendentality a transcendental correlate, the cognizable (cogitatum). In his work
The crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology Husserl refers to
the first edition of Descartes’ Meditations and writes that “one moment in them remains
to be brought out expressly as highly significant, though completely undeveloped:
intentionality, which makes up the essence of egological life. Another word for it is
cogitatio, having some thing consciously, e.g., in experiencing, thinking, feeling, willing,
etc.; for every cogitatio has its cogitatum. Each is in the broadest sense an act of
believing and thus there belongs to each some mode of certainty – straightforward
certainty, surmise, holding-to-be-probable, doubting, etc.” 1
Heidegger reduces the essence of the Cartesian consciousness to representation
even more decidedly. “In the most important passages of his tractate Descartes
instead of the verb “cogitare” (to think) uses the verb “percipere” (per-capio) which
means “to master something”, or, in this case, “to pose in front of oneself” because he
wishes to emphasize that one poses something before oneself to “re-present” it. That’s
why the German equivalent of the word “cogitatio” is “Vorstellung” (representation)
meaning both “vorstellen” (to represent) and “Vorgestelltes” (something represented).
This double meaning is parallelled in the Latin word “perceptio” which combines the
Husserl E. La crise des sciences europeennes et la phenomenologie transcendentale. Р., 1976. Р. 96.
(Note of the author of the article.)
1
28
meanings of “percipere” (to pose before oneself) and “perceptum” (something posed
before oneself, or, in a broader sense, something-that-became-visible).” 1
Due to the decisive role of “cogito” in the development of modern thought this
notion is interpreted as “metaphysics of representation” which idea reaches its peak in
the theory of Kant who reduces the structure of any possible experience to relation
between the subject and the object. The inner sense of this relation requires that the
latter be understood as consciousness proper, phenomenality, or experience regarded
as pure experimentation and testing considered in itself as such. Then the subject is not
something opposed to the object but is in essence identical to it and ultimately signifies
simply the structure of objectivity in its pure form in which and by which any being
incognizable in itself (that is, noumenon) attains the state of the ob-ject, i.e., of
something that is represented and for us is a phenomenon. That is why analysis of the
subject in Kantianism is nothing more nor less than analysis of the structure of objectivity
and its principal forms.
Associated with this concept of consciousness as representation is Kant’s
peculiar interpretation of the problem: on the one hand, this consciousness is empty in
itself and any content of the experience is directed aside and distorted before it and in
its presence in the form of an object; on the other hand, consciousness itself is in a state
of unconsciousness of a sort because that what manifests itself as a real phenomenon is
just something that enters the state of the object, the state of being presented, seen
and cognized. That is the paradox pervading this singular philosophy: instead of
assigning absolute phenomenological status to “I think” of pure consciousness which is
the essence of phenomenality it implies its negation and goes to extremes advancing
the idea of unconscious character of consciousness itself and of “transcendental
consciousness”.
However, this interpretation follows from the very nature of phenomenality that is
always a presupposition, ob-jectification of ob-jectified, initial exteriorization of
transcendental exteriority and, ultimately, ecstasy (Ek-stase) of Being, so this concept is
central not only in Kantianism. After Kant, it was immediately taken up by all German
idealistic philosophy and by Schelling in particular who has played a decisive role in
introducing the concept of the unconscious into modern thinking – it is predominant in
his first great work The System of Transcendental Idealism. The understanding of
1
Heidegger M. Nietzche. Р., 1971. Р. 122. (Note of the author of the article.)
29
consciousness as ob-jectification, or pro-ducing, leads to the conclusion that selfconsciousness and self-pro-ducing take place only in the pro-duct and the ob-ject, i.e.,
in the form of the latter and in no way in consciousness itself because self-actualization
is pro-duced while consciousness is inborn. In such a manner philosophy of
consciousness, unable to substantiate the principle it is based on, transforms into its
opposite which it is actually identical with, i.e., into philosophy of nature, hence of the
unconscious. Actually, the destiny of consciousness-representation is to exist in the form
of the theory of cognition, which ultimately leaves only the object that destroys and at
the
same
time
accumulates
the
entire
objective
reality
together
with
phenomenological one, that is, Being as objectivity. Nothing but Being and
Nothingness.
Psychology of the 19th century imparts a dual character to the above
assumptions and to everything that concerns the unconscious, this character being
inherited from
the philosophy of consciousness. First, every possible presence is
denoted as the presence of the ob-ject that somehow rises above a dark horizon which
surrounds and enveils it; second, and more important, consciousness itself remains in the
shade while the horizon starts being flooded with light, and in the course of that process
pre-positioning, pro-duction or the act of re-presentation as such take place.
Entertaining the idea of this double unconscious, marginal and transcendental, the
scientific thought of the end of the 19th century was getting ready to accept the
aborning psychoanalysis or rather to generate it as a by-product. In France, the first
major treatise dealing with Freudian theory was Psychoanalytical Method and the
Doctrine of Freud by R. Dalbiez1 who wanted to demonstrate, in a historical
perspective, a historical affinity between philosophy of consciousness, philosophy of
nature, psychology of his time and psychoanalysis proper.
<…> With the aim to introduce the psychoanalytical method to contemporary
science and legitimate it, Dalbiez advanced the theory of consciousness that asserts in
various ways its original unconsciousness. Thus, when seeing a tree, “we do not in the
least become aware of what we see, we grasp its meaning only post factum, by a
second act.”
2
This applies not only to external sensations, like vision, but to the whole
psychic activity. Perception of a colour merely shows us this colour; perception,
Dalbiez R. La method psychanalytique et la doctrine freudienne. Р., 1936. (Note of the author of the
article.)
1
2
Ibid. Р. 34. (Note of the author of the article.)
30
unconscious in itself, becomes conscious only by virtue of and at the moment of a new
separate act of apperception that relies on the perception and is a matter of
cognition. Heterogeneity of the second act in relation to the first one derives from its
accidental character: the first act does not necessarily entail its cognition, if in a new
form. As Dalbiez writes, “It is quite conceivable that sensation and thinking develop in us
but stay unconscious.” 1
Here, the psychoanalytical method appears to be an illustration of the abovementioned thesis that consciousness is a secondary phenomenon in relation to an
epiphenomenon of immediate perception of an object (a tree, a colour). Association
of ideas is just the continuous augmentation of any representational content in
conditions peculiar to it which is going on in such a manner that this augmentation as a
production process is always unaccountable and concealed in its product. For this
reason the latter, being cut off its roots, emerges as something incomprehensible,
unexpected, startling, indiscernible – and this incoherent and mysterious character is,
according to Freud, the habitual feature of the content of consciousness. It means that
to understand what is contained there one must bring into operation associative
processes that generated this content. Association is the process of production itself,
and unconscious character of the production process stems from the unconscious
character of association.
<...> This affectivity [of a passion] is transcendental. It is not “a psychic state” as
psychology understands it and not empirical content of inner experience as was
understood by Kant and classical philosophy. It is characteristic of this content (i.e., of
sensations, feelings, desires and so on) that it needs the faculty of revealing itself in a
force differing from it
that would demonstrate it and make it a phenomenon, a
conscious state, or, as Freud put it, “conscious representation”. This force, capable of
revealing and demonstrating, is just consciousness-representation that in its original
existence in the form of an object performs an act of apperception and representation
in intuition with the help of its ultimate basis, the first ecstasy of time which is nothing else
but Kant’s “inner understanding”.
This interpretation of affectivity characteristic of philosophy of the past and
psychology of the future is a result of double misconception:
1
Ibid. Р. 12. (Note of the author of the article.)
31
1) affectivity becomes not of ontological
but of optical nature; it does not
perform any more primitive and essential revelation in itself and through itself but is now
an impenetrable dead content which needs intervention of the faculty of revealing
other than itself;
2) since that faculty is the faculty of ec-static ex-position, the being of affectivity
is distorted for the second time and becomes a transcendental content, an object of
experience presented as something which it never can be.
<…> In this way the first dimension of experience is revealed where that which
must be seen as the Basis of the Psychic tests itself in radical immediacy prior to the
appearance of any “relation” to an “ob-ject”, before the creation of the world and
independently of it. Descartes called this first archaic dimension of experience “the
idea”. “By idea I mean that form of every thought of ours which is perceived first-hand
and owing to which we recognize our thoughts.”
1
The original essence of cognition
consists not in intentionality or representation, not in revealing the primary exteriority
and, through it, something else, some foreign apperceived object, but in disclosing the
apperception itself and its self-sensation that precedes the sensation or representation
of the object to itself, in making this apperception possible. If we turn from this
fundamental thesis of Descartes to the described above doctrines of Dalbiez, of
American neorealists and other psychologists and philosophers of that time who insisted
that seeing and understanding are unconscious while only their object manifests itself
and “apperceives”, then we shall see, first, how their doctrines disagree with one
another and, second, how the concept of the unconscious should be completely
reconsidered.
The unconscious of latent representations and memories that we do not think of
any more concerns only the sphere of representation. Only the reality which is
apperceived in this sphere and derives from finitude inherent in any ecstatic exposition
bears its indelible trace. If the psyche was predestined to emerge in the world and be
given to us by the world’s virtue, then we are justified to say that nearly everything slips
away from psychic reality defined in such manner into the sphere of the actual and the
real, of represented being which is thus outside the reality and, as Freud phrased it, in
“the unconscious”. But if the psychic is revealed to itself from the very beginning in the
immediacy of the affect and its emotional content independent of the state of
1
Decartes. Oeuvres. Р., 1904. Vol. 9. Р. 124. (Note of the author of the article.)
32
objectivity and prior to any representation, then all this reasoning is senseless. On the
one hand, since the psychic is not constituted in itself ontologically as represented
being, it a fortiori does not need the preservation of the structure it does not possess
when it turns out to be beyond the limits of
phenomenological actuality of the
conscious, i.e., represented being. The concept of unconscious representation is
decidedly absurd. On the other hand, it is that original inner essence of the psyche that
must be conceivable for itself if our task is to arrive at a new and more profound
understanding of man that will not reduce him to a hollow subject or dead content of
representation, as do traditional philosophy of consciousness and positivistic schools
following it.
Descartes rejected the arguments of his opponents who said that all ideas
making up the content of the soul can not be present in it simultaneously. 1 What the
soul possesses is not the representative content of ideas but the ability to generate
them. That is why we must, when analyzing, turn from inadequate representation to
essential determinants of the psyche, the force and the ability.
<...> Only the concept of life [as our body merging with our faculties] allows us to
recognize our body as our own. If our knowledge of our body that the body itself has
were formed on the basis of outside representation, these faculties of the body would
be seen by us as something distant, separated from objectivity, and we could not join
with it and put it to practice. No wonder that classical thought was not able to explain
the interrelation between “the soul” and “the body” as long as it considered this
interrelation to be representational, an interplay between cognition and cognized
(cogito-cogitatum). It tried to understand how these gingerly attempts of consciousness
become capable of inducing objective modification in a body regarded precisely as
an object. Perhaps this impact of the spirit upon the body is incomprehensible and has
magic origin? Nothing of the sort. In reality, quite another process goes on. We have
experienced the effect of a force we merge with and can therefore set it in motion. The
body I possess by birth (and its faculties) may be characterized by the phrase “I can,
therefore I am”, which implies the faculty of acting that is directly tested by life and
experienced in subjective bodily praxis. The same praxis, however, may be represented
in the form of an objective process going on in the world. Therefore there is no transition
from the subjective to the objective, the more so a mysterious one; there is only the
1
Ibid. 1905. Vol. 8. P. 366. (Note of the author of the article.)
33
movement that is given to us twice: first in reality, in a form of everyday practice, and
then in the objectivity of the representation of the world.
Freudian concept of the unconscious cannot be reduced to the effect and
transformation of metaphysics of representation. In fact, it denies this metaphysics.
Therein lies a most profound significance of his theory as a means to guide us beyond
the limits of representation to that sphere of life which cannot be represented. The first
characteristic feature of this sphere has been indicated above when discussing the
phenomenon of the body: it is action, force, praxis. This bias of Freudian concept of the
unconscious towards primary fundamental levels of our experience is evident in his
Outline of Psychoanalysis (1912). In this work, the proof, or ”explanation” of the
unconscious by the latency of the majority of constituents of the psyche gives way to
quite other consideration. The case in point here is not sudden spontaneous
emergence of these constituents (for example, memories) after a lapse of time (which
substantiates the hypothesis that the state of psychic unconsciousness coincides with
this period of latency), the main argument now is the unconscious character of activity
that is going on independently of consciousness-representation and prior to it. Further
still, when Freud discards classical idea that latent or virtual character of representations
indicates their weakness and argues that unconscious thoughts are much stronger and
make up “the effective unconscious”
1
he moves toward his radical thesis that may be
formulated as follows: not merely is an action possible only in unconscious state, it is
accomplished only as unconscious, beyond any representation because the operating
force merges with itself in radical immanence and in the Night of primordial subjectivity
where it does not stand out from itself, where neither intentionality nor an object exist,
where the light of objectivity never finds its way to.
This primordial Night, however, is not the night of blindness or Chaos, the hold of
irrational instincts whose threat impending the shining world of people should be
averted. More likely the opposite is true: the unconscious contains principal elementary
earthy skills: ability to move hands, lips and pupils. The latter is necessary, for example,
for reading, and all these skills are prerequisites for obtaining scientific knowledge and
lay ground for it. These skills allowing us to stand up and move attend the mankind from
its cradle and keep it living. They ensure its ability to do something, to act, so we call
them praxis and do not mean that this praxis is a reduction and gradual abandonment
of the unconscious as the element of the psyche which cannot be cognized and
1
Freud S. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 8. S. 435. (Note of the author of the article.)
34
represented, we mean only that it is little by little illuminated by consciousness. That
which cannot be represented in itself and reduced to scientific knowledge precedes all
stages of this cognitive process as an instinctive but necessary condition of its access to
everything it knows and especially to everything it creates.
To be precise, it should be noted that this unrepresentable which in metaphysics
of representation is known as the unconscious cannot serve as an argument in favour of
any irrationality and is rather the basis and the prerequisite of any knowledge, scientific
one including. Indeed, we must not forget the historical situation in which the concept
of the unconscious appeared: Schopenhauer introduced then strict limitation into
prevailing postulate of objectivity that had been systematically worked out in Kantian
metaphysics. Against the inert realm of representation (depicted by Schopenhauer only
in its external and transient aspect) he contraposed the essential ontological definitions
of force and action that antecede objective cognition which is only their delayed
representation. Schopenhauer designated these definitions as Will, or will to live.
<…> If we want to determine at least what beneficial effect the concept of the
unconscious has on the study of man then it is important to show that absolute
unconscious indistinguishable from objects of nature such as a stone cannot be a basis
of human psyche, - on the contrary, this unconscious refers to the primary sphere of
experience, or, more exactly, to the experience itself in its primary form. Freud in his
work The Psychopathology of Everyday Life backed up this opinion in his own way
when he proposed general theory of mythological, religious and metaphysical outlooks
which he regarded as an external projection of psychic reality and as revelation of
repressed psychic elements by representational consciousness. It seems that this
projection implies, in effect, that consciousness is not aware of what it projects.
“Unaccountable (or endopsychic) recognition of facts and factors of the unconscious
is reflected … in the construction of supersensible reality which is transformed by
science into psychology of the unconscious.” 1
<…> If an affect is maintained in its phenomenological state, outside the
framework of representation, so that it need not disappear from the given
representational world it has never belonged to together with the representation it was
initially linked with, it does not mean that this affect stays unchanged in itself. The most
remarkable feature of Freudian analysis of impulses action is that it shows real
1
Freud S. Gesammelte Werke. 1969. Bd. 4. S. 287-288. (Note of the author of the article.)
35
development of affectivity from the very beginning during which an affect organizes
consecutively significant ties with the world of representation before being transformed
again in some manner into its own essence, which happens when anxiety arises – not
the fear of some object but pure fear (or, if you prefer, the fear of the impulse).
Here we cannot but suggest the essential connection between the Force and the
Affect which forms the Basis of the Psyche and of psychoanalysis as well, if we
understand it in its true philosophical meaning. Actually, the Basis of the Psyche is the
impulse, but, properly speaking, it can be called psychic only as an affect that is a true
“representative” of the bio-energetic system of the body in the psyche.
<…> As Freud writes, “it is useless to try to escape from the drive, for one cannot
escape from oneself.” 1
According to Freud, the impulse is not a particular motion but inner autoimpressibility that makes it impossible to escape from oneself and, since this autoimpressibility is effective, a state is produced when a burden lies heavy on one’s inner
life. It is just this auto-impressibility, or auto-excitation, that is the essence of affectivity,
i.e., the force and essential condition making its existence possible. That which feels
locked in this immediacy without let-out is afraid to be itself, suffers extremely under this
heavy burden, wants most of all to escape from itself, from this suffering and is anxious
to change, to be transformed into something more enduring. It wants to act in order to
throw off this heavy burden loaded on it. That is the manner and the meaning of the
impulse’s action. The impulse as such is formed on the basis of the affect and on the
essence of affectivity within it, the essence of life within it. Basing on this concept of the
essence of life, that is, on the impulse, it is easy to understand the totality of
phenomena belonging not only to the sphere of the psychic but to culture and
civilization in general because all cultures and civilizations of the earth represent
different paths paved or discovered by a need waiting to be satisfied.
Significance of the concept of the unconscious for the study of man lies in the
fact that it probes into human being deeper than does the classical concept of
consciousness,
i.e.,
the
thought
understood
as
objective
cognition
and
as
representation. The world of our representations as well as every of its elements are
intelligible only via some formation that cannot be reduced to it. It may be the sphere
of impulses, desires, needs, actions and efforts which give this world its form that
1
Freud S. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 10. S. 248. (Note of the author of the article.)
36
precedes the forms of the thought, and the thought can perceive it only by hindsight.
Therefore our reflection on the affect and the impulses does not in any way divert us
from the world of people but, on the contrary, brings us back to its roots so that we
could establish the true driving force of nature, the true reason.”
In recent years, the possibility of using cybernetic representations and methods
of modelling the unconscious have been discussed.
Hermeneutics and contemporary psychoanalysis
Psychoanalytical model of the unconscious
Objectivities of the past are transformed into real
essences of the present. (M. Buber)
Freud distinguished between the concepts of
“descriptive” and “systematic”
unconscious. The term “unconscious” refers to psychic representations a person is
aware of; physiological processes of, say, blood circulation or transmitting impulses
through the neuron network may be also called “unconscious”. Freud referred to the
“psychic unconscious” exclusively, just as when he spoke of “sexuality” he meant not
the hormonic apparatus but a sexual drive. He wrote about “psychosexuality” and
argued with “wild psychoanalysis”, i.e., with oversimplified views of some of his
followers who deduced all psychic problems of the patients from sexual dissatisfaction.
Freudian concept of “descriptive” unconscious does not discord so much with
previous theories (for example, with the concept of the “subconscious” of French
psychiatrist and psychologist P. Janet) and with views of some “heretics”. All
proponents of “depth psychology” believe that along with conscious psychic processes
there are unconscious ones, from subliminal sensations to the “forgotten language” of
dreams. In the interspaces between our clear and distinct ideas there rises from the
depths of the psyche something different, and attempts to apperceive these
representations often meet with resistance as if something keeps them from entering
consciousness. In his work The Psychopathology of Everyday Life Freud shows that even
in the most ordinary of everyday situations we have to deal with working of the
unconscious. We all happen to forget the name of a good acquaintance or the
meaning of a foreign word we know or to vainly rummage about for a long time in
search of some book that we find at last lying under our nose. Various slips of the
tongue, lapses of the pen, mistakes in reading and other slip-ups are not accidental but
are caused by unconscious motives. Here, like in dreams, we are confronted with
repressed forbidden contents that try to enter our consciousness, distort our memories
37
or create a quaint world of dreams (compared by Freud with a short-term psychosis).
Hallucinations of psychotics, visions of mystics or poets, day-dreams and reverie we all
indulge in, they all result from the work of the unconscious.
However, it is important for the psychoanalysis not only to describe these
phenomena but also understand their causes, the mechanism of the “psychic
apparatus”. Here lies the principal difference between various branches of depth
psychology that offer different viewpoints concerning psychic activity though proceed
from the same experience of interpreting dreams and of free associations. In the works
written in the beginning of the 20th century, Freud proposed his first concept of the
psyche structure. It consists, he stated, of three parts: the conscious, the preconscious
and the unconscious.
In the 1920s Freud revised this concept and suggested the structural model of the
psyche with principal components Id, Ego and Super-ego. Unconscious drives (Id) clash
not only with conscious Ego but also with Super-ego, that part of the psyche which splits
off from Id in infancy and which the individual is not aware of. Our Ego gets between
the hammer and the anvil: natural drives come in conflict with social bans whose
meaning we understand no better than the repressed content of drives. In this second
Freudian model the terms “unconscious” and “pre-conscious” are used rather as
adjectives for they refer not only to Id but to Super-ego as well and even to certain
parts of the Ego (the so-called “defences”). The unconscious resides beyond the
stream of consciousness having temporal character, it is a sort of eternal nature (or
Schopenhauer’s Will) that intrudes into the world of conscious phenomena. True, Freud
did not deny that consciousness is relatively independent, can cognize the world and
act in accordance with cognized natural necessity. Freud is justly considered as a
successor of the Enlightenment philosophy because the essence of psychoanalysis may
be expressed by the formula “Where there was Id, there must be Ego”. In other words,
the light of learning stays as the supreme good for all people. The cure of neurotics
comes, according to Freud, with self-knowledge and mastering one’s own irrational
impulses.
Our self, however, is governed not only by the nature outside and inside us but
also by a psychic authority named Super-ego, that is, internalized social prohibitions
and prescripts expressed actually as “the still small voice of conscience”, as fear and
feeling of guilt that grip us when we violate social taboos. We get accustomed to obey
this authority during a long period of childhood when we depend on and are
38
educated by our parents, school and other social institutions with their traditions. Of
critical importance in psychoanalysis are relations the patient had with his parents in his
childhood because everyone undergoes a primary socialization in the first years of
one’s life when one tries on male or female roles identifying oneself with mother or
father. The so-called Oedipus complex is an unconscious psychic structure developing
at the a age of 3 – 5. It is in trying to cope with this “complex” that Super-ego emerges
as an element possessing enormous “psychic energy”: in Freudian theory all
psychological processes are described in terms of energy of a sort.
For all the difference between Id and Super-ego, they have one feature in
common: they are impersonal forces of mankind’s past opposing the individual and
competing for the control over his Ego: individual’s biological heredity comes into
irrepressible conflict with values he receives from social institutions, laws and
prescriptions as well as from culture as a whole.
The orthodox psychoanalysis on the “man of instincts”
S. Freud paid great attention to bodily aspects of being and saw the working of instincts
even in most complicated psychic phenomena. Having discovered a wild primitive
creature extant in modern civilized man he came to the conclusion that the savage is
a primeval essence of Homo sapience who only pretends to be high-minded.
Surely, savage animality is inherent in some aspects of the unconscious but it is by
no means central or the most significant element in the structure of the psyche. As
noted above, at the stage of mastering one’s body and gaining experience of
affectivity the “savage” content of the unconscious is indeed actualized and then
“assimilated” by the conscious, a savage is converted into a human. The instinct
cannot take possession of him any more, he can receive any of three simplest human
pleasures from free behaviour guided by his drives.
The first consideration in any theory is defining the boundaries within which a
particular assumption remains valid, in this case the assumption about the instinct as the
cause of human existence. A savage governed by instincts is too infantile and sexy,
thirsts for power and possession (sexual possession of his parents including), is unable to
withstand affective stress and test reality adequately. Repressed “savage” drives
contained in the unconscious can initiate mental disorder. But it is well known that
drives are not the only possible cause, there are a lot of others of quite different nature
39
– existential anxiety, for example. Freud, however, did not see other causes or any
spiritual dimension of human life.
According to Freud, unconscious (primary) language is symbolic, metaphorical
and affective while that of consciousness (the secondary one) is paradigmatic and
abstracts from primary wishes and feelings. A mature person can use both primary and
secondary languages with equal success. Lack of skill to use primary language is always
associated with disintegration of a person and sometimes with psychic pathology. Thus,
a neurotic rationalizes irrational content of his unbeknown unconscious mystifying both
himself and reality and believing that his fantasies really exist. In this manner a primary
process breaks down the resistance of its host and makes its way into consciousness
playing a malicious trick on the host and making him to believe in reality of the nonexistent. As C. Jung said, “a great deal of content and description of the unconscious
seems to be mystic if a person is quite indifferent to it, i.e., ignorant. It is precisely that
which gives rise to genuine mysticism. ”
Freud described the emergence of psyche in “the man of instincts” in his model
of psychosexual development which postulates that the psyche grows “out of the
body” when certain parts of the body (oral, anal and genital ones) make contact with
the outworld. The structural model of the psyche proposed by Freud is a logical
consummation of his fundamental idea that the instinct is a source of all psychic
processes repressed by society.
But Freud was too shrewd a scientist to be fully satisfied with this monistic
interpretation of the psyche, and his doubts led him to dualistic belief in the existence of
two kinds of psychic energy: sexual drive (libido) and death instinct (mortido). By the
end of his life he came to the conclusion that energy is equal in both cases, and this
assumption required complete reconsideration of his monistic theory and its
transformation into a dualistic one. Metodologically, the theory of Freud was, of course,
doomed to fail. Nevertheless, as noted by C. Jung, Freud introduced and defined
many of contemporary notions of depth psychology, laid the foundation of
psychoanalytical principles of working with the unconscious, developed and verified
four basic methods of psychoanalysis: associative analysis of symptoms, regressive
hypnosis, analysis of anamnesis and analysis of unconscious content of dreams and
fantasies. The question arises whether Freud really believed that “the man of instincts” is
the bed-rock essence of Homo sapiens?
40
A person with a neurotic primordial unconscious usually “cultivates” in himself a
pseudo-intellectual personality that thinks instead of acting (S. Freud). His fallacious “I”
and false spirituality prevent him from establishing true and durable relationships both
with himself and the world. Instincts play a modest role in the life of a really spiritual
person, no greater than a breakfast or sleep. Their functions are strictly defined and
must ensure comfortable conditions for the existence of the body, all other tasks are
fulfilled basing on individual value system.
Freudian and Jungian analyses present two complementary methodological
alternatives. Freud was a materialist, he discovered and studied the “man of instincts”
and saw instinct as a sole basis of all psychic phenomena. Pantheist Jung brought
psychotherapy back to “spiritual man”, to man’s soul; he followed the thinkers of the
old times believing that universal foundation of the psychic is the heart of the soul, the
power of the Spirit.
Ego-oriented psychoanalysis (S. Freud, M. Klein, R. Sterba, K. Horney, H. Racker,
O. Kernberg and others) may be defined as a method of search for meaning on the
reflective level of psychotherapeutic communication while the psychology of the Self
(C. Jung, H. Kohut, J. Hillman and others) may be called a mode of making a new
meaning on a non-reflective level. Surely, the methods are complementary, however it
is difficult for analysts to combine them in their everyday practice, and the choice is
playing increasingly important role for therapists and researchers.
Ego psychology
Priority of the word: the meaning is conveyed by words, so words are used to analyse
the meaning.
Priority of manifestation: only what is manifested (actions, pronouncements, feelings
expressed) is interpreted.
Priority of health: there is a health formula common to all.
Transference and countertransference in Ego psychology.
Speaking about above-mentioned attributes of orthodox psychoanalysis Freud
emphasized that they may be not only a mighty tool of therapeutic healing but a
severe hazard as well. The latter arises in the absence of conscious reflective attitude of
the analyst towards the manifestations of transference and countertransference.
41
The essence of transference-countertransference process consists in the
exchange of stories invented on the basis of the patient’s past experience or ensuing
from the nature of relationship initiated by him. Lester and Ellen Luborsky who worked
out the CCRT (core conflictual relationship theme) method well-known in modern
psychoanalytical practice made up a “transference pattern matrix” that comprises 22
points summarizing Freud’s ideas:
 desires directed toward others are significant;
 responses of the others as well as one’s own come into conflict with
desires;
 it is especially true for erotic desires;
 it is not fully recognized;
 it stems from child's earliest experience of relationships with the parents;
 the analyst is involved in this situation;
 the patient's transference may be a result of his perception of the
analyst’s personal traits;
 perception may be distorted;
 there is one persistent key pattern;
 there are sub-patterns pertaining to other members of the patient’s
family;
 patterns are individual for each person;
 patterns are lasting;
 they are changing slightly with time;
 their intensity is prone to short-term fluctuations;
 exact interpretation changes the pattern being observed;
 understanding of the pattern may be of great benefit for the patient;
 a pattern may be a form of resistance on the part of the patient;
 when a pattern is excited, the patient can exhibit neurotic symptoms;
 patterns may appear both in the therapy and outside it;
 positive patterns may be distinguished from negative ones;
 patterns may appear in narratives and dreams;
 their appearance depends on innate predisposition to them.
In the most general sense transference may be defined as the analyst’s
awareness of the fact that the patient has an unconscious way of understanding some
Others, which stems from his experience (“new editions of old conflicts”, as Freud called
it) as well as from conscious beliefs.
42
As
Jung
pointed
out,
there
are
various
interpretations
of
the
term
“countertransference”, ranging from the entire content of the analyst’s psychological
response to the analysand to infantile aspects of therapeutic relationship. Freud, as it is
well known, introduced this term by evident analogy with transference wishing to draw
the analyst’s attention to the possibility of his generating his own neurotic patterns in
“total countertransference”. The analysts intently investigating
countertransference
have singled out two types of this phenomenon:
- concordant countertransference response reflects thoughts, feelings and wishes
of the analysand with respect to the objects; it is based on introjection and projection,
that is, on resonating of the external in the inner world of an individual (“this part of me
is you”) and is impossible without empathy;
- complementary countertransference response reflects thoughts, feelings and
wishes of the objects with respect to the analysand: the analysand perceives the
analyst as if the latter were his own internal object projected onto him.
Both types of countertransference rely on the identification of the analyst with
the analysand which provides a basis for understanding the Other. Reflection over
haphazard thoughts and spontaneous feelings of the analyst that appear during the
session is a precondition of using contertransference as a means of analysis. This
instrumental function of countertransference depends on the extent of the analyst’s
awareness of the fact that among the ways of apperceiving the reality mastered by
him there appear inevitably those analogous or complementary to the ways of the
analysand. Doubtless, phenomena of transference and countertransference need
further in-depth investigation.
There are several variations of the theory of object relations including those
outside the Ego psychology which sprouted out of psychology of drives. This theory is
the fundamental doctrine of developmental psychology, its cornerstone being relating
with objects. A search of an object and relations with it define the development of the
Ego (which depends on the environment and personal experience). This branch of
psychology subdivides into two directions: The British school of object relations (M. Klein)
and The American school of object relations (M. Mahler, H. Kohut).
In the theory of object relations, the object is either some real person/object of
the outworld (external object) or a mental image of the subject himself or other
person/obect (internal object), or some emotional experience associated with certain
43
situation. In other words, everything the subject relates to is the object, the precondition
of realizing libidinous and aggressive drives of the subject. An infantile person divides
objects into “good” and ”bad” ones: “good” objects are those with libidinous drives,
“bad” are those with aggressive drives. “I repeatedly put forward the hypothesis that
primary “good” object, that is, mother’s breast, forms the core of the Ego and is vital
for its development…” (M. Klein). In a mature person aggression merges in a fair
amount of love, and libido is busy at its constructive work.
Object relations are that attitude of the subject to the world which is the result of
certain self-organization of an individual. “Psychoanalytical child” of Ego psychology
and the theory of object relations is, in principle, very much like Freudian “Maugli” living
unconsciously. According to H. Thomae and H. Kächele, this child has the following
traits:
* he is infantile and sexy (S. Freud);
* in the “mother – infant” diad, he is characterized by primary intersubjectivity (S.
Trevarthen);
* he is autonomous and possesses integrative competence (M. Papoušek);
* he is tragic like Narcissus who failed to see himself in the mirror of love (H.
Kohut);
* he is aggressive and envious (M. Klein).
В теории объектных отношений придается огромное значение первичному
опыту отношений:
The theory of object relations places very strong emphasis on the experience of
the earliest relationships:
“Throughout my career I have recognized a fundamental importance of the very
first object relations of an infant: his relationships with his mother and her breast. I came
to the conclusion that if this introjected primary object is ingrained in the Ego steadily
enough, then it serves as the foundation of satisfactory development. <…> In normal
conditions, this psychic and physical nearness to satiating breast compensates to some
extent the loss of prenatal unity with the mother and the feeling of security it gives. It
depends in a large measure on the ability of the infant to form strong attachment
(cathexis) to the breast or a bottle symbolizing it. In this manner mother becomes a
favourite object. … A good breast is accepted and integrated into the Ego, so the
child who was originally inside his mother now takes her in.” (M. Klein)
44
A transition from infantile condition of the Ego to adulthood takes place during
the process of separation-individuation (M. Mahler) which begins at the age of 9
months and ends in the puberty period when distinct boundaries of the Ego are
established. The neurotic infantilism of adults as well as of narcissistic, borderline and
psychotic personalities is associated somehow with the extent and the quality of
separation. Incomplete separation results in the formation of symbiotic relations with
objects characterized by coexistence and co-dependence. In symbiosis, two
functional radicals of relationships coexist: one of them is subordinate and passive (“you
are everything, I am nothing”), the other domineering and active (“I am everything,
you are nothing”). These poles are complementary and may be easily inverted, they
cannot exist without each other because each of them is a part inseparably
connected with its counterpart. Thus, all primitive forms of love are symbiotic and inhibit
the development of individuality.
The stage of separation-individuation beginning at the age of 9 month is
preceded by the stage of normal autism (when the child does not distinguish between
subjects and objects, the internal and the external) and the stage of normal symbiosis,
or complete merging with the mother. In the latter case the child needs his mother’s
affirmation of his existence and her positive support. If at an early age before
separation social environment of a child is deficitary, he develops an Ego distorted by
anxiety and splitting, which may bring about either subsequent psychosomatization or
borderline, narcissistic psychotic personality disorders, drug or alcohol addiction.
M. Mahler distinguishes 4 phases of the stage of separation-individuation:
* the phase of libidinous object differentiation (affective relationship with the
mother, interiorization of her image);
* the phase of practce (exploration of the world accompanied by exuberance
of feeling caused by the expansion of capabilities);
* the phase of rapprochement (fluctuations between love and hate, between
integration of benevolent and hostile mother image);
* the phase of libidinous object stability (development of self-identity,
self-control and integrated image of the Ego).
The theory of object relations interprets the concept of the Ego depending on
the aspect of analysis as primary organizing principle, a certain psychic structure, a
45
whole conscious personality, a mode of subject representation to the object, identity
formed by its psycho-social environment, “the world of self-images” (Ph. Tyson, R.
Tyson). D. Winnicott introduced the notions of “true” and “false” self. True self includes
both “good” and “bad” integrated whole images of the self, false self is identified either
with “good” or with “bad” self-object. The rejected half is split off and displaced into
the sphere of the unconscious, which, in its turn, provides the foundation of forming
projections in relations with the object. Actually, the Ego is just the field where complex
many-sided phenomena of internal and external reality are synthesized and integrated.
A discontinuance of these processes leads to splitting and projecting.
Affects are of vital imporance during these dicontinuities because they
accompany pre-verbal representations of Ego interactions that are based on primary
processes and lay the foundation of Ego verbal representation. The presence of
positive pre-verbal libidinous support lent by the object causes formation of positive
integrated Ego and adequate logic on the verbal level of secondary processes which,
according to the theory of object relations, include both conscious and higher
unconscious processes. Positive and integrated Ego is characterized by stability and
strength, i.e., ability to stay whole under the impact of vigorous external inflational and
stressful attacks. Such Ego belongs only to a mature individual able to verify the reality
properly and accomplish his goals by making advatageous agreements with social
environment.
Positive and integrated Ego exhibits affective maturity, that is, it is capable of
expressing all kinds of feelings and controlling them. Maturation of the affective sphere
of a person is possible only at a sufficient level of affect expression when a definite skill
in expressing is acquired and controlled as one’s own product. Primarily uncontrollable
basic affects “pleasure – displeasure” (Freud) are connected directly and actualized
only in bodily reactions in the form of laughing or crying. In the course of further
development of the affective sphere mental organization of affects becomes more
complicated, there appear in their structure, along with affective somatic expression,
motivational, communicative and cognitive (semantic) components (Ph. Tyson, R.
Tyson).
Hartmannian endogenous smile transforms in the process of socialization into
Spitzean exogenous smile; the affect grows out of simple signal (relation to and
evidence of the object) into complex factor of the psyche involving one’s feelings and
meaning-making. In a deficitary social environment the development of the affective
46
sphere comes to a hold and affective phenomena almost totally disappear from
psychic activity. That causes alexithymia, inability to identify and describe emotions,
which accompanies psychosomatic disorders because affect belongs to the body.
In the theory of object relations affect displacement is called vertical splitting
“verbal – sens” which means that a person is capable only of making verbal contacts
but not of pre-verbal representation or sensual experience.
The absence of sensual contacts hinders first of all the establishing of intimate
relations. As M. Buber writes,
“The spheres in which the world of relation arises are three.
First, our life with nature. There the relation sways in gloom, beneath the level of
speech. Creatures live and move over against us, but cannot come to us, and when
we address them as Thou, our words cling to the threshold of speech.
Second, our life with men. There the relation is open and in the form of speech.
We can give and accept the Thou.
Third, our life with intelligible forms. There the relation is clouded, yet it discloses
itself, it does not use speech, yet begets it. We perceive no Thou, but none the less we
feel we are addressed and we answer – forming, thinking, acting. We speak the primary
word with our being, though we cannot utter Thou with our lips.”
In the process of maturation, the sensual-bodily sphere of being is pervaded with
a diversity of emotional experiences and meanings. One of the most amazing
phenomena of this kind is silence à deux full of the presence of “I” but welcoming
“You” either. Generally speaking, words do not mean anything by themselves. Without
sensual-bodily semantic content their forms are nothing but beautiful empty soap
bubbles.
The meanings helping man to integrate separate parts of the world and of
himself are found in his consciousness. The main problem related to meaning making
which man is solving in his life is just to combine diversities, to accomplish integration on
the conscious level of his being.
A child tries to cope with combining “good” and “bad” images in a new third
one, unified and whole, that will be beyond the limits of these “Cartesian coordinates”.
A young person makes efforts to defend his autonomy and form intimate relations with
the beloved. An adult finds himself in-between being and non-being, meaning and
meaninglessness and strives to comprehend simultaneity of polarities and the space inbetween…
47
“The meaning that has been received can be proved true by each man only in
the singleness of his being and the singleness of his life. As no prescription can lead us to
the meeting, so none leads from it.” (M. Buber)
The sphere of cognition, of reason originates in fantasies, i.e., in the primary
symbolization producing unconscious irrational symbolic images of things non-existent in
reality. Myths, fairytales and legends embody panhuman experience of conscious
fixation of free primordial process whose mechanism as well as laws it obeys differ from
those of rational thinking. Secondary conscious processes effecting adaptation to
reality organize the perception of the world and the consciousness of the subject by
means of ideas. Ideas help us clarify meanings and find connection between various
phenomena. Infantile mind is infected with fantasies of the primary process but it
structures them in accordance with rigorous logic of the secondary one. “Extended”
consciousness is able to differentiate between primary and secondary processes and
understand their “unexpected” meanings.
Mind does not identify or conceive symbolic equivalents of the unconscious
when the subject perceives them too literally. The subject who cannot try himself out
adequately recedes from reality because he fails to distinguish between the real and
the fictional. He recedes to resume after a while with renewed energy his attempts to
get proof of his precious protective illusion.
Infantile mind is not only narrow-minded, limited by literalism and replete with
phantasms, but also egocentric, i.e., unable to decentralize the process of thinking (J.
Piaget) or to go out beyond the boundaries of the space of the self where alternative
views on the same subject exist. In the course of psychotherapy a patient is given the
opportunity to develop the ability to decentralize his thinking, the ability usually absent
in neurotics.
In the flush of creative activity, the culmination of one’s true being, the
integration of primary and secondary processes, of affective experiences and drives,
of words, images and meanings, of the past, the present and the future, of the real
moment of being and infinity takes place… In the act of creation, one’s being
acquires completeness, wholeness and higher meaning.
48
Hermeneutics, analytical philosophy and analysys of J. Lacan.
The unconscious as interpreted in Lacan’s model.
In his book A New Model of the Unconscious Vadim Rudnev made an attempt to utter
the unconscious through his free associations. He delivered this utterance in the written
form according to Lacan’s principle which states that the unconscious is structured like
language and “there is no unconscious besides the one that speaks”. Lacan voiced
another allied idea: the unconscious is what we do not speak of. Rudnev’s position is
even more destructive since he insists that the unconscious contains depression and
death as likely as love and assertion of life. Rudnev discerns three approaches to
understanding the unconscious: the line of Freud – Jung – Groff which raises the
question of collective unconscious, the line of Freud – Klein – Bion concerning projective
identification and the line of Freud – Lacan expressing ideas of logical positivism. The
existence of the latter line seems arguable. Rudnev comes to the conclusion that the
unconscious is a mystery that structures the reality.
Some excerpts:
Jacques Lacan
ON NONSENSE AND THE STRUCTURE OF GOD 1
<…> If we accept the principle that in unconscious matters the relation of the
subject to the symbolic is fundamental <…> [then we should] abandon the idea,
implicit in many systems, that what the subject puts into words is an improper and
always distorted enunciation of a lived experience that would be some irreducible
reality. <...> There is, for an entire species of modern intellectual, something irreducible
that intelligence is by definition bound to miss. Bergson did much to establish this
dangerous prejudice.
The unconscious is fundamentally structured, woven, chained, meshed, by
language. And not only does the signifier play as big a role there as the signified does,
but it plays the fundamental role. In fact, what characterizes language is the system of
signifiers as such. The complex play between signifier and signified raises questions that
we are skirting since we aren't doing a course in linguistics here, but you have a good
enough idea of it now to know that the relationship between signifier and signified is far
from being, as they say in set theory, one-to-one.
1
The Seminar of Jacques Lacan. Book III: The Psychoses (ed. J.- A. Miller), N.Y.: Norton, 1993.
49
<…> Without this fundamental duality of signifier and signified no psychoanalytic
determinism is conceivable. The material linked to the old conflict is preserved in the
unconscious as a potential signifier, as a virtual signifier, and then captured in the
signified of the current conflict and used by it as language, that is, as a symptom.
Henceforth, when we explore delusions with the idea that they can be
understood in the register of psychoanalysis, in the order of the Freudian discovery,
according to the mode of thought that regarding symptoms it makes possible, you
readily see that there is no reason to reject the explanation Schreber gives of his world
system as being the effect of a purely verbal compromise, as a secondary elaboration
of the terminal state, even if the testimony he provides is, undoubtedly, not always
beyond criticism.
<…> It's in this respect that analysis of the delusion provides us with the subject's
fundamental relationship to the register in which all the manifestations of the
unconscious are organized and unfold. Perhaps it will even explain to us, if not the
ultimate mechanism of psychosis, at least the subjective relationship to the symbolic
order it contains. Perhaps we shall be able to understand how over the course of the
evolution of the psychosis, from the time of its origin to its final stage, assuming that
there is a final stage in psychosis, the subject is situated in relation to the whole
symbolic, original order – an environment distinct from the real environment and from
the imaginary dimension, with which man is always involved, and which is constitutive
of human reality.
<…> Like all discourse a delusion is to be judged first of all as a field of meaning
that has organized a certain signifier, so that the first rules of a good interview, and of a
good investigation of the psychoses, might be to let him speak for as long as possible.
One forms an opinion afterwards. I'm not suggesting that in an observation it should
always be like this, and clinicians have on the whole approached things fairly well. But
the notion of an elementary phenomenon, the distinctions between hallucinations,
between disorders of attention, perception, and the various levels within the order of
faculties, have certainly contributed to obscuring our relationship to the delusional.
<…> Don't we analysts know that the normal subject is essentially someone who
is placed in the position of not taking the greater part of his internal discourse seriously?
Observe the number of things in normal subjects, including yourselves, that it's truly your
fundamental occupation not to take seriously. The principal difference between you
and the insane is perhaps nothing other than this.
<…> First, is there an interlocutor? … What Schreber expresses shows us both the
unity he feels there is in him who maintains this continuous discourse before which he
50
feels himself to be alienated, and a plurality in the modes and in the secondary agents
that he attributes to the various parts. But the unity is very fundamental, dominating,
and he calls it God. We are at home here. If he says it's God, the man has his reasons.
… What is this God, then, who has revealed himself to him? First, he is presence. And his
mode of presence is the speaking mode.
There is nothing more fascinating than to see how the delusional voice that has
emerged from an indisputably original experience involves in this subject a sort of
burning of language that manifests itself in the respect with which he upholds
omniscience and good intentions as being essential to the Divinity. But he can't fail to
see, particularly at the beginning of his delusion when these painful phenomena come
at him from all sorts of harmful characters, that God has despite everything allowed it
all to happen. This God practices the absolutely inadmissible politics of half-measures,
of halftormenting, in respect of which Schreber lets slip the word perfidie. In the end
one has to suppose that there is a fundamental disturbance in the universal order. As
the voices say – Remember that all that is worldizing implies a self contradiction.1 There
is beauty here that I don't need to highlight for you.”
Some excerpts from:
V. N. Tsapkin
SEMIOTIC APPROACH
TO THE PROBLEM OF THE UNCONSCIOUS 2
“1. Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Morris were the first to emphasize the intimate
connection between semiotics and psychology. Prominent examples of effective
elaboration of semiotics in psychological context are given in the works of L. Vygotsky
and Ch. Morris devoted to the role of sign in the regulation of human behaviour, of V.
N. Voloshinov (M. Bakhtin) who wrote that consciousness is structured on principles of
semiotics and of Ch. Osgood whose observations
are of use in any branch of
experimental psychosemantics. Though it is too early yet to speak of any full-fledged
science being established at the interface of psychology and semiotics – like, say,
psycholinguistics, a number of investigations both in Russia and abroad provide strong
evidence that interconnections of these two sciences are getting stronger and more
"Don't forget that the end of the world is a contradiction in itself." Mem, 14. (Note of the publishers.)
[Mem – D.P. Schreber, Memoirs of My Nervous Illness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1988.]
2
В.Н. Цапкин. Семиотический подход к проблеме бессознательного // Бессознательное. Сборник
статей. Т. 1. Новочеркасск, 1994, с. 81-91.
1
51
extensive. The outlines of the branch of science called psycho-semiotics or semiopsychology become more and more distinct. The study of the unconscious is one of the
promising lines of psycho-semiotic research.
2. Understanding the language as a sign system was a revelation for linguists
which showed them their subject in a new light and gave a strong impetus to the
development of structural linguistics and semiotics. At the same time, achievements of
these sciences resulted in a great discovery in psychoanalysis: the discovery of Freud
the semiotician. This dicovery was made by French philosopher and psychoanalyst
Jacques Lacan.1 In 1950s, Lacan with a group of his followers (J. Laplanche, J.-B.
Pontailis, S. Leclaire and others) declared that linguistic models are at the heart of the
entire theory of Freud. A ready response to this structuralist interpretation of his doctrine
has been observed lately in other countries as well where publications began to
appear reconsidering psychoanalytic concepts on semiotic lines.
The suspicion is raised, however, that this revelation concerning semiotic
foundation of Freudian theory is a sort of scientific hoax, an attempt to sell old product
in a new wrapping. Some grounds for such a suspicion are given by the fact that works
of Lacan do have a touch of mystiification as well as by a parabolic character of many
psychoanalytic categories (Eros and Thanatos, libido, Oedipus complex, etc.), each of
them being a miniature myth sui generis giving free scope for broadest speculations.
But it might be well to agree with the opinion of modern expositors of Freud who notice
a doubtless mixture of two major trends in his scientific heritage.2 The first of them
consists in designing models of human psyche functioning and exploits the
methodology of 19th-century positivism.3 Another trend drawing psychoanalysis
together with the Humanities is associated with Freud’s attempt to reveal the symbolic
nature of man, to explain the dynamics of meaning of human behaviour. Critics of
psychoanalysis and some of its exponents alike (J. Lacan, H. Shands, M. Edelson and
others) agree that it was just that field of semiotics where Freud made his most
It should be noted that the first treatise concerning the reinterpretation of psychoanalytical problems in
the light of semiotics called “Freudism” was published in 1927 and was written by an outstanding Soviet
scholar V. N. Voloshinov (M. M. Bakhtin). (A note of the author of the article.)
1
In particular, these trends observed in Freud’s works are to a large measure responsible for the division
of modern American psychoanalysts into followers of metapsychological approach and adherents of the
“clinical” theory of psychoanalysis. (A note of the author of the article.)
2
The main cause of revising Freudian theory by his disciples and followers (L. Binswanger, K. Horney, E.
Fromm, H. Sullivan and others) was their wish to smooth some angularity of this trend, desexualize and
humanize the image of man formed by orthodox psychoanalysis. (A note of the author of the article.)
3
52
important discoveries. Thus, Soviet philosopher G. H. Shingarov points out that the import
of the entire theory of Freud “amounts to investigating the issues of sign and meaning in
a highly specific sphere of psychic activity”, i.e. in the sphere of the unconscious, while
American analyst M. Edelson thinks that the greatest merit of Freud is working out
fundamentals of psychoanalytical theory on semiological lines.
To clarify the question about semiological foundations of psychoanalysis, let us
follow the advice of Lacan and return to Freud.
3. As L. Vygotsky writes in his Psychology of the Art, “the unconscious influences
everything that we do, manifests itself in our behaviour, and we learn to use these
traces and manifestations for identifying the unconscious and the laws it obeys”. In his
first works on psychoanalysis Freud demonstrates that these traces and manifestations
of the unconscious are neurotic symptoms, dreams, behaviour slips, symptomatic
actions, witticisms and free associations. Freud attached great importance to the fact
that he managed to reveal the meaning of all above-mentioned phenomena. As he
said, it was just that fact which laid the foundation of psychoanalytical method.
Analyzing processes that generate these phenomena, Freud discovered that they are
homologous structurally and provide an indirect and distorted representation of such
unconscious processes as the conflict of motives, repression of unacceptable drives
and accompanying emotions. For example, he describes the development of the
neurotic symptom in the following way: “… a repressed drive persists in the unconscious
waiting for the first opportunity to wake and delegate its distorted irrecognizable
substitute to consciousness. This substituting delegate is soon joined by the unpleasant
feelings one should have been spared due to the repression. This substituting delegate
is a symptom… The symptom has, along with after-effects of distortion, also remnants of
its affinity with original repressed idea that make the substitution possible.”
From the works of Freud it appears that neurotic symptoms, dreams, behaviour
slips and the like may be regarded as a sort of signs (or texts) that replace repressed
emotional experience (creating a conflict of motives) and represent them in one’s
consciousness and behaviour.
4. Most thoroughly Freud analyses unconscious formation of such signs in his work
The Interpretation of Dreams. He recognizes two functions of psychic activity
participating in the generation of dreams: production of dream thoughts (latent
content) and their transformation into images of the manifest content. Dream thoughts
constitute inner speech existing on a pre-conscious level. “Dream activity” causes
53
verbal representations {Wortvorstellungen} of dream thoughts to regress “through the
unconscious”
to
being
perceived
as
object
representations
or
images
{Sachvorstellungen}. Freud distinguishes two kinds of latent thoughts transformation into
manifest content: condensation and displacement. Condensation consists in combining
elements of different nature (latent thoughts) into a collective image (for example,
making up “compound personalities” basing on people’s similarity in appearance,
name, character, profession, etc.). Condenced images serve as “nodal points” of a
dream where a multitude of chains of mental association are brought together. Such
images turn out to be overdetermined, so their interpretation must be diversified.
Displacement is the representation of meaningful thoughts through seemingly
insignificant details, this operation resulting in the detachment of the elements of latent
content from their context. When Freud discovered that these processes underlie the
formation of all unconscious products, condensation and displacement took place
among the cardinal categories of psychoanalysis. Thus, he writes that during the
analysis of neurotic symptoms “… we find also a number of quite rational thoughts
equivalent to those of our conscious thinking … these normal thoughts have been
abnormally processed [due to repression – V. Ts.]: they were transformed into a
symptom by way of condensation, compromises achieved with the help of superficial
associations, disregard of contradictions and, perhaps, regression.” Ultimately, “latent
thoughts” may be translated into a wide variety of signs: symbols, indices, iconic signs of
dreams, of behaviour slips, symptomatic actions, etc.
In one of his works Freud even compiles a sort of semiotic classification of
neurotic symptoms: “… the unconscious speaks several dialects. Depending on the
difference in psychic conditions responsible for certain kinds of neuroses and their
dissimilarity, there occur natural differences in the forms unconscious psychic impulses
are expressed in. While the language of hysterical gestures corresponds on the whole to
pictographic language of dreams, notional language of obsessive neurosis is
characterized by its peculiar idiomatic traits. <…> For example, the thing that causes
vomiting in a hysterical female will make an obsessive female patient to take thorough
defensive measures to protect herself from contamination. <…> All these phenomena
are various representations either of a repressed wish of the patient to become
pregnant or of her defensive reaction to that wish.” Since symptoms, dreams, etc. are
manifested in signs as a result of condensation and displacement, the interpretation of
each of these “texts” consists in the decondensation and recontextualization of its
components which is done by the analysis of free associations with these components.
54
A plain case of decondensation may be found in the interpretation of a visionary
dream of Alexander the Great. In the night before an assault upon the town of Tyre he
saw in his dream a Satyr dancing on Alexander’s shield. Some ancient forerunner of
Freud decondensed this dream in the form of a phrase expressing the ardent wish of
Alexander who worried about the prolonged siege of the town: “Sa Tyros” which means
“Tyre is yours”.
5. An interesting illustration of the semantic structure of the unconscious “traces”
is provided by the scheme of a rebus. It is well-known that adherents of classical
psychoanalysis consider dream images and neurotic symptoms to be unambiguous
predominantly sexual symbols anchored in the archaic thinking of man and in culture.
Such atomistic extra-contextual understanding of “linguistic units” of the unconscious
agrees with the “second” theory of symbols borrowed by Freud from W. Stekel.1 This
theory has been repeatedly and severely critisized by many scientists, adherents of
psychoanalysis including (L. Binswanger, H. Shands, J. Lacan, A. Wilden and others).
Thus, American semiotician K. Burke refers to analogue non-contextual interpretations
of symbols as to one of those “easy paths that are preferred to long meandering
routes“. In that case, overdetermination is reduced to narrow-minded mechanistic
necessitarianism. Examples of such reduction are Freudian hypertrophy of sexuality,
Adlerian concept of ego compensation or the notion of birth trauma as treated by O.
Rank. It should be noted that Freud himself regarded the “symbolic interpretation”
merely as an accessory technique that is applied to so-called “typical” dreams and is
unable to equal the association method or replace it. Furthermore, the theory of
symbols with universal meanings comes into an irrepressible conflict with Freud’s first
theory. In The Interpretation of Dreams Freud writes that his predecessors erroneously
tried to deduce the meaning of dreams directly from the images of their manifest
content instead of their connection with latent thoughts through casual associations.
He compares a dream with a rebus which looks absurd if regarded as a piece of art
and becomes meaningful if we replace the pictures one by one with the syllables or
the words these pictures represent.
“The content of a dream is presented to us in the form of a pictographic text
{Bilderschrift} whose signs are to be translated one by one into the language of the
dream’s thoughts. We’ll be undoubtedly in error if we try to read these signs proceeding
“…we denominate a permanent connection of a dream element with its meaning a symbolic connection,
and the element itself a symbol…” (A note of the author of the article.)
1
55
from
their
visual
images
{Bilderwert}
and
not
their
semantic
relations
{Zeichenbeziebungen}. ” Viewing dreams as rebuses means, first, that detached from
the language “symbolic” interpretation of the images of manifest content is
inadequate and, second, that the object of analysis (i.e., of decondensation and
recontextualization) is not a “pictographic” but a verbalized text because a
“pictographic” text has meaning only as a verbal signifier. And since superficial
associations link latent thoughts and manifest content, their semantic relations Freud
speaks about may be derived from the data obtained by the association method.
Let us turn now to the semantic structure of dreams and neurotic symptoms
taking as an example the dream of Alexander the Great. The image of the satyr per se
carries no significant information and needs to be translated into verbalized form which
is decondenced, as indicated, into “Sa Tyros” (“Tyre is yours”) which represents the
latent thought of the dream. It means that the “pictographic” image of the satyr is the
signifier and “satyros” is the corresponding signified. “Satyros”, in its turn, serves as a
signifier in respect to the signified “Sa Tyros” representing the frustrated Alexander’s
desire and hence signifies this signified desire. In such a manner the pattern of a rebus
shows us the dream image as a complex “multilayer” and polysemantic connotation
sign. A similar structure is characteristic of many neurotic symptoms. Thus, hysterical
blepharospasm expressed verbally in meaningless lamentations “I can’t see it” or “My
eyes blink at it on their own” may be represented as “I don’t want to see it” or “I blink at
it” which will indicate some unconscious inner conflict. A most important prerequisite of
such semiotic translations that are called by Levi-Strauss “the effectiveness of symbols”
is the polysemy of linguistic signs. In the above example the satyr image appears as a
homonym while hysterical blepharospasm results from polysemy. According to Freud,
polysemantic words are the key ones (“nodal points”) in the texts of dreams and
symptoms because, being a condensed expression of both superficial and significant
associations, they allow a transition from the manifest level of the content to the latent
one. The translation of verbal expressions into hysterical conversions may be prompted
also by the abundance of psychosomatic metaphors established in a language: “I’m
sick to death of…”, “It breaks my heart…” and the like. French philosopher P. Ricoeur
believes that such metaphors entered the language as a result of a reverse translation
from the “body language” into the common one.
6. Of all systems of signs language received the most attention of the Father of
psychoanalysis. It is worthy of notice that in the period of his early neurological
investigations he made an attempt to elaborate his own theory of language in his first
56
monograph Aphasia (1891). Lacan states that in the complete works of Freud the author
discusses linguistic problems on every third page, and “their analysis is the more
thorough, the
closer he touches the concept of the unconscious.” Freud’s great
attention to language was motivated by a particular role the word plays in
psychoanalytical practice. “All that happens during analysis is verbal communication,
a talk between the patient and the therapist. ”1
“Who has eyes to see, who has ears to hear can ascertain that no mortal can
keep a secret. If his mouth is shut, his fingers will let it out.” (S. Freud)
As phrased it a well-known female patient of Dr. Breuer, psychoanalysis is a
“talking cure”. Freud’s practice shows that patient’s repressed emotions that are
unconscious and cannot be expressed either by external or by inner speech are
manifested in a distorted form in neurotic disorders. We may say that these experiences
have lost their adequate “signifier”. Hence it follows that the task of the analyst is to
reconstruct this repressed and unconscious “signifier” basing on the available texts and
to help the patient understand the meaning of his neurotic manifestations. To return the
lost discursive “signifier” in its place, i.e., in the place of the symptoms substituting it
means to become aware of the repressed content.2 In one of his lectures Freud
compared the psychotherapeutic effect of apperceiving pathogenic experiences with
magical charming of spirits:
“ … abnormalities and disorders disappear when their riddle is solved
and
explained and the patient agrees with the explanation. It is hardly possible to find
anything of this sort in medicine; only in fairytales evil spirits lose their power if called by
their real name which they keep secret.”
Re-establishment of the lost meaning of the patient’s speech is the essence of
the psychoanalytical technique worked out by Freud. The main tool of the analyst is
interpretation, that is, analysis of sign structures, primarily those of the language,
because both the available (complaints, recollection of dreams, associations) and the
sought-for (repressed thoughts) are discursive texts. According to J. Lacan, the
1
Speech is not a sole means of communication. In a concrete conversational situation of great importance
are all paralynguistic factors (phonation, rhythm, kinesics, body language, etc.), so the author of The
Psychopathology of Everyday Life saw the full significance of these factors in understanding the hidden,
unconscious level of communication. (A note of the author of the article.)
Freud understood repression as dissociation of certain object representations (analog memory) from
corresponding verbal representations (verbal memory). Hence he regarded the apperception of some
experience as a restoration (formation) of disrupted associations. (Note of the author of the article.)
2
57
peculiarity of psychoanalysis lies in the fact that “its means are verbal because speech
gives meaning to the functions of an individual; its field is the field of a given
conversational situation that is transindividual reality of a subject; its methods are those
of historical science…” P. Ricoeur remarked that “speech by no means characterizes
an individual in full, but speech and language do so with so with psychoanalysis.” It is
surprising that Freud’s followers were so indifferent to the essence of the “analytical
situation”, “the function and the role of the word and the speech in psychoanalysis.”
1
This can be explained, it seems, not only by their short sight.
7. Freud’s linguistic and semiotic bias was clearly defined in his early works.
However, even there deep semiotic allusions, primitive “mechanistic” metaphors and
monotonous variations on the theme of pan-sexuality are no less pronounced,2 while in
the later works they nearly drown out the first of the trends mentioned. The reason of this
is a good intention of Freud to substantiate his theory from a scientific viewpoint.
However, his efforts taken on this line resulted only, as cybernetician A. Wilden joked, in
creating an image of man depicted as “a neurotic steam engine … operated by
kybernetal, Eros and Tanatos who are constantly bickering over the consumption of
coal”. Moreover, in spite of numerous references to linguistics (for instance, to C. Abel’s
concept of primal words with ambivalent meanings), Freud’s views in the field of this
science were rather naïve. He never got acquainted with the theory of de Saussure that
could, as H. Shands holds, radically alter the fate of psychoanalysis.
While a wish for scientific validity made Freud to reconsider his initial bent for
linguistics, the same motive paradoxically prompted many modern psychoanalysts to
turn to linguistics as a discipline that can equip psychoanalysis with a scientific method
most suitable to its subject, the unconscious.3
Fonction et champ de la parole et du langage en psychаnalyse (1953) is the title of the seminal work of
Lacan that became a sort of a manifest of new French psychoanalysis. (A note of the author of the article.)
1
The diversity of numerous independent “voiced ideas” (using the expression of M. Bakhtin) in the works
of Freud makes them sound rather polyphonic and distinguishes them from a monolithic monologue. This
is, perhaps, both the strength and the weakness of Freud the scientist. It was just the conceptual
polyphony and figurative style of his scientific publications that were responsible for contradictions in
their subsequent interpretations that embraced pansexual (E. Jones, S. Ferenczi) and neobehaviouristic
(J. Dollard, N. Miller) approaches as well as explications in the spirit of modern cybernetic (A. Wilden,
Litovetz) and neuropsychological (K. Pribram) theories. (A note of the author of the article.)
2
This paradox can be easily explained by the evolutional changes in linguistics that took place after the
publication of the Course in General Linguistics by F. de Saussure. This publication marked the nascence
of a new scientific direction, structural-systematic philosophy of human sciences. (A note of the author of
the article.)
3
58
Let us consider some important points in the theory of the most eminent
representative of this trend, Jacques Lacan, paying attention to his structuralist
interpretation of Freudian doctrine. The general conclusion that may be drawn from
Lacan’s works is that the unconscious is not a container of chaotic instinctive drives but
“that part of concrete speech in its transindividual form which the subject lacks and is
therefore unable to restore the wholeness (the continuity) of his conscious [i.e., discrete
– V. Ts.] speech”. In Lacan’s theory, the notion of the unconscious coincides in fact with
the “symbolic function” of C. Levi-Strauss who defines this category as a set of universal
rules governing one’s individual vocabulary and combining the words in a coherent
speech. In this manner, according to Lacan, the unconscious becomes structured as a
language while its primary rules are condensation and displacement. This thesis of
Lacan is supported by results obtained by R. Jakobson who studied the problems of
aphasia. His works define the correlation between paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes
of the language, that is, between the choice of elements from a code and their
combination in a given message, on the one hand, and the opposition of the
metaphor and the metonymy in rhetoric and stylistics, on the other. Lacan finds that
condensation and displacement are equivalent to mataphorical and metonimical
operations that form, as Jakobson states, the basis of any communication process.
Marshall Edelson, one of the most prominent exponents of “linguistic”
psychoanalysis in the USA, draws a parallel between the transformational model of
linguistics worked out by N. Chomsky and the activity of the unconscious as described
in the early works of Freud. Chomsky holds that deep semantic structures (abstract
kernel sentences) are transformed in speech, according to certain rules, into surface
phonetic ones. Likewise, latent thoughts (deep semantic structures) of a dream are
transformed into pictographic texts (surface structures). Owing to transformational
operations, any sentence, any image of a dream or a symptom with one surface
structure may represent several meanings (deep semantic structures). This is the effect
of semantic condensation. (Let us recall a well-known example given by L. Vygotsky of
various interpretations of the phrase “The clock has fallen”.) At the same time, several
different surface structures may convey one and the same meaning. This is a syntactic
displacement. Consequently, M. Edelson reasons, the task of the analyst is actually
identical to that of the linguist: to re-establish “blacked out connections between
surface and deep structures”, or, in other words, to decondense an recontextualize
surface structures.
59
The main fault of the “linguistic” reinterpretation of psychoanalysis is the absence
of a broad communicative semantic perspective. Thus, Lacanian structuralist
“linguocentrism” makes him to entertain illusion that the whole system of a natural
language and its structure are symmetrical to other systems of signs, which leads to their
desemantization (the signified are practically absent from Lacan’s theory). The linguistic
model is efficient enough in describing only one aspect of unconscious activity, the
transformation and representation of repressed contents.
8. Of the greatest interest for devising the semiotic model of the interaction
between the conscious and the unconscious is Freudian concept of two radically
different “languages” and forms of thinking in the “primary” and “secondary”
processes. Freud identifies the unconscious with the primary process characterized by
free circulation of energy and the system of the preconscious-conscious with the
secondary one which arrests energy and binds it. The language and the thinking of the
primary process have the following peculiarities: m
1) operations with imagery representations, that is, mnemonic traces of visual,
tactile, auditory and other perceptions that are distinguished by insignificant
differentiation, semantic indistinctness, displacement and condensation;
2) continual manner of thinking, neglect of logical contradictions;
3) atemporality or concentration solely on the present;
4) treating words as imagery representations (i.e., processing only iconic aspects
of verbal signs).1
The peculiarities of the secondary process include operating predominantly with
verbal representations, discreteness of operations and abstract logical thinking.
Reconsideration of Freudian ideas about the structure and the functions of
cognitive semiotic systems that he calls the primary and the secondary processes leads
to several important conclusions. From the data on functional specialization of the
cerebral hemispheres obtained by modern neurophysiology it is immediately apparent
that there is essential similarity in general principles of data processing between the
right and in the left hemispheres, on the one hand, and between the primary and the
secondary processes, on the other. This fact allows to draw several inferences as to
Freud offers numerous examples of this phenomenon in Psychopathology of Everyday Life and Jokes
and TheirRelation to the Unconscious. (A note of the author of the article.)
1
60
neurophysiological characteristics of unconscious psychological processes
1
and to
study the problem of interaction between the conscious and the unconscious in a
broader context of modern semiotic and cybernetic investigations.
The primary and the secondary processes may be viewed as the activity of two
most important dynamic systems that make up a unified macrosystem, human psyche,
basing on the complementation of their cognitive semiotic structures and functions.
Stability and adaptability of this open hypercomplex system depends on synergic cooperation of functionally autonomous subsystems in ensuring joint purposeful activity of
entire system and on their informational exchange (sign communication). The primary
process is an analog system, a functional system of effective imagery representations
that carries out simultaneous data processing, non-verbal communication and imagery
continual thinking.
The secondary process is a digital, or discrete, symbolic system, a system of
verbal representations that is responsible for sequential data processing, organizing
verbal thinking and verbal communication. In his work System and Structure A. Wilden
offers a detailed analysis of structural and functional characteristics of analog and
digital communication systems in the framework of the general behavioural theory of
open task oriented systems. This pansophy carries out a comprehensive evaluation of
both positivistic and semiotic lines of Freud’s legacy in the light of findings made in
cybernetics, information science, general theory of systems, mathematical logic,
semiotics and linguistics. Basing on Freudian hypothesis about the imprint of one and
the same psychic content in the form of two different mnemonic “records” as well as
on researches by A. Livio, it may be presumed that both the analog and the discrete
systems possess their own long memory and encode received information in the form of
symbolic or image representations, respectively. Information redundancy of double
encoding is inherent in hypercomplex systems that tend, in case the information is
incomplete, to compensate for this deficiency with increased diversity. It should be
noted that as far as part of information stored in the discrete system, along with the
analog one, cannot be actualized in consciousness, it seems erroneous to identify the
unconscious with the primary process (or to localize it in the right cerebral hemisphere).
D. Galin explains the mechanism of repression as functional splitting of activity between the right and
the left cerebral hemispheres due to low speed of inhibited neural transmission in cerebral comissures. (A
1
note of the author of the article.)
61
However, synergetic interaction of the two systems would be impossible without
some integrating mechanism that would balance discordant diversity and would serve
as a metalanguage organizing intrasystemic (intrapsychic) communication. Works by L.
Vygotsky and N. Zhinkin give grounds to suggest that it is the inner speech that performs
the functions of such metamechanism and metalanguage in the psyche. Owing to its
semiotic characteristics (namely, a hybrid discrete-analog сode) the inner speech is
able to convert discrete elements of verbal information into continuous analog
structures and vice versa – in other words, to perform the functions of analog – digital
and digital – analog converter. Thus, in the dream phase of sleep inner speech converts
verbally encoded information (latent thoughts of the dream) into analog surface
structures (perception images), but when awake perception images (both external and
internal quasiperception ones) are translated into the language of the discrete system.
Since Freud did not make any difference between the exchange of information
and that of energy, it appears quite justifiable to regard, following J. Laplanche and A.
Wilden, “free flow of meaning” as analog conversion and “the binding of energy” in
the secondary process as discretization of the flow of meaning, or as the process of
signification
(i.e.,
of
linking
singled
out
analog
object
representations
with
corresponding verbal representations in the inner speech). In this way, inner speech
gives signification to unconscious meanings and transforms unconscious knowledge
(both analog and symbolical) into conscious one.
The aim of our brief excursus into the field of psychoanalytical concepts was to
emphasize that Freudian ideas about semiotics remain the most relevant part of his
entire legacy up to date. Though many of them are not unarguable, still they need
to be thought over profoundly and may serve as a starting point of contemporary
psychosemantic investigation into the concept of the unconscious.”
Dialectics, the quaternity methodology of
C. Jung and W. Pauli and contemporary analytical psychology.
The unconscious in Jungian doctrine.
Some excerpts from the works of C. G. Jung:
“The unconscious … is the source of the instinctual forces of the psyche and of
the forms or categories that regulate them, namely the archetypes.” (The structure of
the psyche. CW, v. 8)
62
“The concept of the unconscious is for me an exclusively psychological concept,
and not a philosophical concept in the metaphysical sense. In my view, the
unconscious is a psychological boundary-concept, which covers all those psychic
contents or processes which are not conscious, i.e. not related to the ego in a
perceptible way. My justification for speaking of the existence of unconscious processes
at all is derived purely and solely from experience, and in particular from
psychopathological experience, where we have undoubted proof that, in a case of
hysterical amnesia, for instance, the ego knows nothing of the existence of extensive
'psychological complexes, and in the next moment a simple hypnotic procedure is
enough to bring the lost contents to complete reproduction.
<…> The question as to the state in which an unconscious content exists, when
not attached to consciousness, is withheld from every possibility of cognition. It is,
therefore, quite superfluous to hazard conjectures about it. Conjectures concerning
cerebration and the whole physiological process, etc., really belong to such
phantasies. It is also quite impossible to specify the range of the unconscious, i.e. what
contents it embraces. Only experience can decide such questions. We know by
experience that conscious contents can become unconscious through loss of their
energic value. This is the normal process of 'forgetting'. That these contents do not
simply get lost beneath the threshold of consciousness we know from the experience
that occasionally, under suitable conditions, they can again emerge from their
submersion after a decade or so, e.g. in dreams or under hypnosis in the form of
cryptamnesia, or through the revival of associations with the forgotten content.
Furthermore, experience teaches us that conscious contents can fall beneath
the threshold of consciousness through 'intentional forgetting', without a too
considerable depreciation of value -- what Freud terms the repression of a painful
content. A similar effect is produced by the dissociation of the personality, or the
disintegration of consciousness, as a result of a violent affect or nervous shock or
through the dissolution of the personality in schizophrenia.
Similarly, we know from experience that sense-perceptions which, either
because of their slight intensity or because of the deviation of attention, do not attain
to conscious apperception, none the less become psychic contents through
unconscious apperception, which again may be demonstrated by hypnosis, for
example. The same thing may happen with certain conclusions and other
63
combinations which remain unconscious on account of their too slight energy-content,
or because of the deflection of attention. Finally, experience also teaches us that there
exist unconscious psychic associations -- for instance, mythological images -- which
have never been the object of consciousness, and hence must proceed wholly from
unconscious activity.
To this extent experience gives us certain directing-points for our assumption of
the existence of unconscious contents. But it can affirm nothing as to what the
unconscious content may possibly be. It is idle to hazard guesses about it, because
what the whole unconscious content could be is quite incalculable. What is the furthest
limit of a subliminal sense-perception? Is there any sort of measurement either for the
extent or the subtlety of unconscious combinations? When is a forgotten content totally
effaced? To such questions there is no answer.
<…> The functional relation of the unconscious processes to consciousness we
may describe as compensatory (q.v.), since experience proves that the unconscious
process pushes subliminal material to the surface that is constellated by the conscious
situation -- hence all those contents which could not be lacking in the picture of the
conscious situation if everything were conscious. The compensatory function of the
unconscious becomes all the more manifest, the more the conscious attitude maintains
a one-sided standpoint; this is confirmed by abundant examples in the realm of
pathology.” (Psychological types. Definitions. CW, v. 6 )
“Unconscious processes compensating conscious Ego have all elements
necessary for self-regulation of the psyche as a whole. On the individual level they are
represented by personal motives emerging in dreams and not recognized by
consciousness or meanings missed out in the string of daily events and situations, or
conclusions not drawn by us, repressed affects, criticism we fenced ourselves from.”
“In cases when the unconscious becomes overactive, it emerges as symptoms
paralysing conscious action. This seems to happen when unconscious factors are
ignored or repressed. But the catastrophic
catastrophic solution may be also
subjective, i.e. in form of a nervous collapse. Such a solution always comes about as a
result of the unconscious counterinfluence, which can ultimately paralyse conscious
action. In which case the claims of the unconscious force themselves categorically
upon cosciousness, thus creating a calamitous cleavage which generally reveals itself
in two ways: either the subject no longer knows what he really wants and nothing any
64
longer interests him, or he wants too much at once and has too keen an interest – but in
impossible things. The suppression of infantile and primitive claims, which is often
necessary on “civilized” grounds, easily leads to neurosis, or to the misuse of narcotics
such as alcohol, morphine, cocaine, etc. In more extreme cases the cleavage ends in
suiside.” (Psychological types. General description of types. CW, v. 6 )
“Without human mind the unconscious is powerless. It always pursues its own
collective ends and does not care for the fate of individuals.” (Letters)
“Consciousness should defend its reason and protect itself, and the chaotic life of
the unconscious should be given the chance of having its way too – as much of it as we
can stand. This means open conflict and open collaboration at once. That, evidently, is
the way human life should be. It is the old game of hammer and anvil: between them
the patient iron is forged into an indestructible whole, an ‘individual’.” (Conscious,
Unconscious, and Individation. CW, vol. 9i )
A. Voskoboinikov points out the following levels distinguished by C. Jung in the
structure of human unconscious: a) psychoid collective unconscious having traits
common to animals and people; b) panhuman unconscious; c) collective unconscious
of various kinds, from that close to the panhuman unconscious to that of micro groups;
d) personal unconscious containing originally unconscious or repressed psychic
phenomena.
Jung never claimed to having evolved any theory (either that of archetypes or of
depth psychology, or some other), all these “theories” appeared after his death. He
introduced the concept of the archetype to denote a universal structural principle of
human psyche having adopted this term from Goethe. From Schopenhauer, he took
up the idea about prototypes as “original forms of all objects” which Jung considered
to be “a valuable finding”. Plato’s “initial Forms” also had impact on Jung’s reasoning.
Like all Jungian categories, the “archetype” denotes some real recurrent
phenomenon of universal nature. Archetypes establish the order of man’s inner life, they
exist a priori and crystallize the experience accumulated by people, determining
thereby the purport and the direction of identity formation process. The archetype is a
unity of opposing principles, and each of them can be internalized by the subject
individually. Jung was the first among the psychotherapists who described universal
formation processes going on in human psyche. He called archetypal forms matrices
65
for internalizing the reality that is transcendent in relation to consciousness. Having
identified some of them, Jung originated a new era of spiritual psychic therapy.
In depth psychotherapy, formation of archetypes is a universal mode of Spirit
existence that is presented as integration and shaping of the available and the arising
mental content. A subject is able to transform, by conscious effort, any deep content of
his psyche. It is this ability that makes the depth (archetypal) psychotherapy possible.
The archetype is an ontological metaphor, i.e., such inner form that allows to
combine in the subject’s being the contents of his life that were earlier incompatible or
even rejected.
Jung managed to identify all points of archetypal space whose centre he called
the Self. He distinguished the archetype from the archetypal image, the content of
personal unconscious expressed in universal supra-individual form. Besides, he
entertained the notion of archetypal motif which denoted the process of archetype
evolution
and
transformation
during
man’s
lifetime
(the
Path)
represented
metaphorically in the unconscious. The archetype of the Shadow combines negative
and destructive forces and manifests itself not only in its relation to the Ego but in any of
archetypal pairs. These destructive trends are confronted by the positive integrative
spiritual power of the Self.
The most complicated of the Shadow archetypes is the Trickster, a crook and a
dodger of animal nature and human appearance. Trickster is, as J. Hillman put it, an
unconscious “partial personality” who poses a threat of full dissociation of the Ego.
However, as Jung wrote, ”repression would prevent him from vanishing, because
repressed contents are the very ones that have the best chance of survival.” Inferior
qualities of the Trickster are expressed in immoral conduct, in lying, intrigues and other
”refined” human vices catching the Ego in their nets. Jung believes that in the mass
consciousness the Trickster may be personified in the most morally “sterile” historical
periods. These collective personifications were responsible for electing such leaders as
Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini. All Trickster’s actions, however, are usually declared to have
a noble aim.
In religious symbolism, the equivalent of Trickster is the pride. One of the Bible
legends depicts the pride as the Ego which imagined itself to be the highest
achievement of being that is warranted to do whatever it likes – in other words, it went
66
hog wild and turned into its own opposite. Most often people become prone to such
psychic upheavals when they live like slaves.
Jung distinguished bodily consciousness and bodily unconscious. Images of the
body and the ability to control them are centred in the province of Ego consciousness
while affective experiences and special uncontrollable bodily organization are in the
province of the unconscious.
Affectively charged unconscious body organization manifested in the totality of
bodily sensations is complementary to the being of reason. Jung believed that finely
differentiated and realistic human mind leaves for the unconscious only nondifferentiated (archaic) sensations and undeveloped intuitive ability. And vice versa,
abilities of deep sensual experience and of integral thinking exclude the ability of
analytical testing of reality. This is the basis of sexual differentiation in human psyche
reflecting the opposition and the oneness of Logos and Eros.
Jung singled out two heterosexual archetypes in the psyche: the Anima and the
Animus. The Anima is an archetypal image of woman in male unconscious, it represents
man’s bodily sensations. The Animus, an archetypal image of man in the female
unconscious, represents woman’s mind. Spirit and Nature which are separated in a
man or a woman, join not only in their conscious life but also in their unconscious. The
Anima and the Animus are also called psychopomps, i.e., mediators between the
conscious and the unconscious. They both have positive aspects that promote
psychological development and negative ones that obstruct it.
Marie-Louise von Franz, one of the foremost disciples of Jung, writes about the
phenomenology of these archetypes:
On the Anima:
“As shown by Jung, the core of the psyche (the Self) manifests itself, as a rule, in
some quaternary structure. The figure number “four” is also related to the Anima
because, as Jung pointed out, there are four stages of its development. The best
symbol of the first stage is Eve who represents purely instinctive and biological
relationships. The second stage may be seen in Helena from Faust: she personifies
romantic and aesthetic level that is still characterized by sexuality. An example of the
third stage is Blessed Virgin – this figure rises love (Eros) to the heights of spiritual
consecration. The fourth type is symbolized by Sapientia, wisdom that lies beyond the
holiest and the purest. In Solomon’s Song of Songs it is called Sulamith. (Modern man
67
achieves this stage of his spiritual development extremely rarely. The nearest
approximation to this Anima-Wisdom is Mona Lisa).”
“A negative Anima manifests itself in the male personality also in the form of
pungent, acid, humbling remarks that depreciate everything. Such remarks always
contain a grain of truth but they are fastidiously destructive.”
“In this guise the Anima is as cold and heartless as some terrible phenomena of
the nature itself. In Europe, these phenomena have been the cause of belief in
witches.”
“Positive function of the Anima is actuated in a man when he takes his feelings,
moods, expectations and fantasies supplied by his Anima seriously and records them in
some form – for example, in literature, painting, sculpture, music or dance. When he
works with them patiently and thoroughly, a new content rises up from the depths of his
unconscious which is added up to the old one. After a fantasy has taken a well-defined
specific form it must be studied both from intellectual and ethical point of view by the
person who assesses the feelings.”
On the Animus:
“Like the Anima, the Animus goes through four stages in its development. At first it
embodies raw fleshy strength appearing as an athlete, a champion, Hercules. At the
next stage, it takes initiative and acts purposefully. At the third stage, it transforms into
“a word” represented by a figure of a professor or a priest. Finally, at the fourth stage it
epitomizes the meaning. On this highest level it becomes, just as the Anima does, a
mediator of religious experience that gives new meaning to life. A woman acquires
spiritual strength, invisible inner firmness that compensates her outward softness. The
peak of the Animus’ development coincides sometimes with spiritual development of a
woman, and due to this she becomes more receptive to new creative ideas than a
man. That is the reason why in many ancient nations women were visionaries and
prophetesses. Creative daring of a positive Animus produces sometimes thoughts and
ideas that lead people to new victorious deeds.”
“A negative Animus may be personified not only as the death angel. In myths
and fairytales he plays the role of a bandit and a killer, like the Bluebeard who murders
his wives on the sly in a secret room. In this guise the Animus embodies all half-conscious
chilly meditations women plunge into from time to time, especially after they have
68
failed to realize their feelings in life. Then a woman begins to think about family duties
and the like; she harbours complicated designs full of spite and mischief until she works
herself into a state when she wishes death to others.”
“In its positive form the Animus may epitomize the spirit of enterprise, courage
and veracity and, at the peak of this state, also of spiritual profundity. Owing to it, a
woman becomes able to perceive the substance of her objective cultural and
personal position and to find her way to active spiritual existence. This implies, naturally,
that her Animus ceases to intrude its dogmatic opinions.
“A woman should find enough courage and breadth of mind to question the
sanctity of her persuasions. Then she will be able to hear
the suggestions of the
unconscious, especially if they disagree with the opinions of her Animus. Only in that
case messages of the Self will be communicated to her and she will grasp their
meaning.”
Jung wrote about the Anima:
“… It belongs to [a man], this perilous image of Woman; she stands for the
loyalty which in the interests of life he must sometimes forgo; she is the much needed
compensation for the risks, struggles, sacrifices that all end in disappointment; she is the
solace for all the bitterness of life. And, at the same time, she is the great illusionist, the
seductress, who draws him into life with her Maya and not only into life's reasonable
and useful aspects, but into its frightful paradoxes and ambivalences where good and
evil, success and ruin, hope and despair, counterbalance one another. Because she is
his greatest danger she demands from a man his greatest, and if he has it in him she will
receive it.” (Aion, CW, v. 9ii)
According to Jung, the highest authority in the psyche belongs not to the Ego
consciousness but to the element of human existence, the Self, a virtual core of the
personality ever slipping out of the grasp of the conscious. During the first half of his life
man tries to separate the Ego from the Self, in the second half he attempts to reunite
them. This, Jung believed, is possible only by establishing a unitary integration with the
world and forming connection with a divine sacral interpersonal Self.
69
Circular figures symbolizing the unconscious are symbols of the Self; one of them
is mandala, a special sign embodying sacral knowledge and creation. Aniela Jaffé
writes about it the following:1
“In the visual art of India and the Far East, the four- or eight-rayed circle is the
usual pattern of the religious images that serve as instruments of meditation. In Tibetan
Lamaism especially, richly figured mandalas play an important part. As a rule, these
mandalas represent the cosmos in its relation to divine powers.
But a great many of the eastern meditation figures are purely geometrical in
design; these are called “yantras”. Aside from the circle, a very common yantra motif is
formed by two interpenetrating triangles, one point-upward, the other pointdownward. Traditionally, this shape symbolizes the union of Shiva and Shakti, the male
and female divinities, a subject that also appears in sculpture in countless variations. In
terms of psychological symbolism, it expresses the union of opposites – the union of the
personal, temporal world of the ego with the non-personal, timeless world of the nonego. Ultimately, this union is the fulfillment and goal of all religions: It is the union of the
soul with God. The two interpenetrating triangles have a symbolic meaning similar to
that of the more common circular mandala. They represent the wholeness of the
psyche or Self, of which consciousness is just as much a part as the unconscious.
The abstract circle also figures in Zen painting. Speaking of a picture entitled The
Circle, by the famous Zen priest Sangai, another Zen master writes: "In the Zen sect, the
circle represents enlightenment. It symbolizes human perfection."
… Abstract mandalas also appear in European Christian art. Some of the most
splendid examples are the rose windows of the cathedrals. These are representations of
the Self of man transposed onto the cosmic plane. (A cosmic mandala in the shape of
a shining white rose was revealed to Dante in a vision.) We may regard as mandalas
the haloes of Christ and the Christian saints in religious paintings. In many cases, the
halo of Christ is alone divided into four, a significant allusion to his sufferings as the Son
of Man and his death on the Cross, and at the same time a symbol of his differentiated
wholeness. On the walls of early Romanesque churches, abstract circular figures can
sometimes be seen; they may go. back to pagan originals.
In non-Christian art, such circles are called "sun wheels." They appear in rock
engravings that date back to the neolithic epoch before the wheel was invented. As
Jung has pointed out, the term "sun wheel" denotes only the external aspect of the
1
A. Jaffé. Symbolism in the Visual Arts // Man and His Symbols. N.Y., 1964.
70
figure. What really mattered at all times was the experience of an archetypal, inner
image, which Stone Age man rendered in his art as faithfully as he depicted bulls,
gazelles, or wild horses.
Many pictorial mandalas are to be found in Christian art: for example, the rather
rare picture of the Virgin in the center of a circular tree, which is the God-symbol of the
burning bush. The most widely current mandalas in Christian art are those of Christ
surrounded by the four Evangelists. These go back to the ancient Egyptian
representations of the god Horus and his four sons.
In architecture the mandala also plays an important part – but one that often
passes unnoticed. It forms the ground plan both of secular and sacred buildings in
nearly all civilizations; it enters into classical, medieval, and even modern town
planning. A classical example appears in Plutarch's account of the foundation of
Rome. According to Plutarch, Romulus sent for builders from Etruria who instructed him
by sacred usages and written rules about all the ceremonies to be observed – in the
same way "as in the mysteries." First they dug a round pit where the Comitium, or Court
of Assembly, now stands, and into this pit they threw symbolic offerings of the fruits of
the earth. Then each man took a small piece of earth of the land from which he came,
and these were all thrown into the pit together. The pit was given the name of mundus
(which also meant the cosmos). Round it Romulus drew the boundary of the city in a
circle with a plow drawn by a bull and a cow. Wherever a gate was planned, the plow
share was taken out and the plow carried over.
The city founded in this solemn ceremony was circular in shape. Yet the old and
famous description of Rome is urbs quadrata, the square city. According to one theory
that attempts to reconcile this contradiction, the word quadrata must be understood to
mean "quadripartite"; that is, the circular city was divided into. four parts by two main
arteries running from north to south and west to east. The point of intersection
coincided with the mundus mentioned by Plutarch.
According to another theory, the contradiction can be understood only as a
symbol, namely as a visual representation of the mathematically insoluble problem of
the squaring of the circle, which had greatly preoccupied the Greeks and was to play
so great a part in alchemy. Strangely enough, before describing the circle ceremony of
the foundation of the city by Romulus, Plutarch also speaks of Rome as Roma
quadrata, a square city. For him, Rome was both a circle and a square.
In each theory a true mandala is involved, and that links up with Plutarch's
statement that the foundation of the city was taught by the Etruscans "as in the
mysteries," as a secret rite. It was more than a mere outward form. By its mandala
71
ground plan, the city, with its inhabitants, is exalted above the purely secular realm. This
is further emphasized by the fact that the city has a center, the mundus, which
established the city's relationship to the "other" realm, the abode of the ancestral spirits.
(The mundus was covered by a great stone, called the "soul stone." On certain days the
stone was removed, and then, it was said, the spirits of the dead rose from the shaft.)
A number of medieval cities were founded on the ground plan of a mandala
and were surrounded by an approximately circular wall. In such a city, as in Rome, two
main arteries divided it into "quarters" and led to the four gates. The church or cathedral
stood at the point of intersection of these arteries. The inspiration of the medieval city
with its quarters was the Heavenly Jerusalem (in the Book of Revelations), which had a
square ground plan and walls with three times four gates. But Jerusalem had no temple
at its center, for God's immediate presence was the center of it. (The mandala ground
plan for a city is by no means outmoded. A modern example is the city of Washington,
D.C.)
Whether in classical or in primitive foundations, the mandala ground plan was
never dictated by considerations of aesthetics or economics. It was a transformation of
the city into an ordered cosmos, a sacred place bound by its center to the other world.
And this transformation accorded with the vital feelings and needs of religious man.
Every building, sacred or secular, that has a mandala ground plan is the
projection of an archetypal image from within the human unconscious onto the outer
world. The city, the fortress, and the temple become symbols of psychic wholeness, and
in this way exercise a specific influence on the human being who enters or lives in
the place.”
Interpreting Jung’s description of mandala that expresses the archetype of the
Self, A. Kopytin writes that in his work Concerning Mandala Symbolism (1950) Jung
described and classified various circular images that may appear in man’s fantasies
and creative work during the process of individuation. He discerned nine principal types
of mandalas:
*
circular, spherical and egg-shaped images;
*
circles in the form of a flower or a wheel;
*
symbols resembling the sun or a star, or containing a cross with four, eight
or twelve rays;
*
circles, spheres or cross-shaped figures depicted as rotating and forming a
swastika;
*
circular images of a snake that is biting its tale or curling up in the shape of
72
a spiral;
*
circles combined with a cross or a square;
*
pictures representing a plan of a castle, a town or a patio;
*
images of an eye;
*
images that are combinations of a circle with other figures having three or
five (or a number divisible by three or five) facets or elements – that is,
triadic or pentadic figures.
Jung believed that different types of mandalas express the dynamics of psychic
changes taking place in the process of individuation as well as individual traits of a
person. At the same time, his works do not offer any suggestions as to which psychic
processes or personal traits are related to one or another type of mandala. Jung always
relied on natural psychological transformations going on both during analytical work
with a patient and at the transition from one stage of the individuation to another.
Jung’s followers paid great attention to circular images appearing in dreams,
visualizations and creative work of the patients. They tried to determine how various
types of mandalas reflect the dynamics of psychological processes. Thus, E. Harding
distinguished
three
main
types
corresponding
to
certain
stages
of
psychic
development.
* A simple circle which expresses original wholeness of a child’s psyche with low
degree of differentiation and maturity.
* A mandala proper that is a combination of a circle with a square, a cross or a
triangle and corresponds to a high degree of differentiation and maturity of the psyche
having polar traits and tendencies balancing each other.
A circular image having the shape of an egg, a vessel or a womb (the so-called
“transfiguration vessel”) that reflects a higher stage of personal “growth” towards
wholeness and realization of all qualities and potentialities of the person.
J. Kellogg suggested that different types of mandalas created by patients
alternate depending on the dynamics of the analytical process. Results of her multiyear
research show that these types succeed one another in a certain order corresponding
to the patient’s progress in the course of analysis. Kellogg depicted this succession of
mandalas in the shape of a circle and called it “Archetypal stages of the great round
of mandala”.
73
Applying this technique, the analyst plays the role of an architect who teaches
his apprentice to design and construct consciously a circle that embounds the Ego
and allows to integrate the chaos of the unconscious. For that reason the analyst must
first go himself at least some part of this painful road. To be really autonomous in
relations with the world, one must have a mature and whole personality.
In this respect a capable therapist has an additional possibility to objectify his
inner wholeness (along with that which is present in every individual in his relations with
the beloved one, in a sacred marriage of Spirit and Nature united by the soul of love),
the possibility of psychotherapeutic creative process and mutual creative growth
during this process.
Concentration on the aim of achieving one’s wholeness leads one to a higher
spiritual state marked by paradoxality and a multitude of values, to understanding that
“something carries him when he cannot carry himself any more”, that he must “bend
very low to take on his shoulders the burden of his cross” and carry it, “circulating round
a secret centre”, forward and upward, to meet the World face to face (C. Jung).
Analytical psychology, as Jung said, “may justly claim … to be a science of
spirit”. Plunging into the depth of human soul, one explorer discovers the reality of the
spiritual source while another sees the objectivity of instinctual wildlife. One of them
understands “down” as “up”, for another it is really “down”. Nature and Spirit are two
forces eternally opposing each other in human being and united by the Soul; human
mind must work very hard to comprehend the mystery of this unity. Hegel subdivided
science into three branches (that subdivision applies also to psychology, of course):
1. Logic, a discipline of idea in itself and for itself.
2. Philosophy of Nature, a discipline of idea in its other being.
3. Philosophy of Spirit, a discipline of idea returning to itself from its other being.
According to W. Wundt, spirit is an inner being that does not take into
consideration external being: “…in essence, spirit is the living and the enliving”. Spinoza
and Hegel agreed to regard spirit as an attribute of some Universal Integrated
substance. No matter what it is called – God, the Absolute, the Idea – its meaning is the
same. The Christian concept of the Spirit excels natural (bodily) life, i.e., death itself.
Jung believed that the spiritual and the material form a oneness consisting of
three entities:
74
– the soul, an organ of the spirit;
– the body, an instrument of the soul;
– the spirit, a form of the forms, a window into eternity.
The spirit gives life to the soul, the soul gives life to the body, and their intellectual
unity may be achieved only by overcoming the body, by the transformation of the
body into the spirit and of the spirit into the body. As A. Jaffé wrote, “The circle is
a symbol of the psyche (even Plato described the psyche as a sphere). The square
(and often the rectangle) is a symbol of earthbound matter, of the body and reality.”
Squaring the circle denotes a unity, a sacred marriage of Spirit and Nature. It is
this unity that makes up “the centre tested by experience”, “a spiritual sovereign of
everyday life”, the Self, a province outside consciousness (C. Jung). Jung wrote that
alchemic symbolism represents a metaphor of separation – reunification of Spirit and
Nature: “make volatile out of non-volatile and non-volatile out of volatile, and you will
be called a master.”
Therefore, unconscious psyche, being a matrix for conscious psyche, stays
hidden from the Ego and incognizable infinity. Jung held that the core where the
conscious and the unconscious are integrated is the archetype of the Self, “potential
wholeness that transcends conscious thinking” (G. Adler). In this connection, as Jung
wrote, the wholeness of man’s being can be logically expressed by words only partly,
the rest can be represented only by symbols and metaphors, i.e., irrationally. As Jung
wrote, “The Self is an empirical notion. It exists in such a way that it looks as if it does not
exist at all. <…> In the archetypal transformation, sacrifice is a symbol of self-sacrifice
made by egoistic Persona for the sake of that self which I do not create consciously but
which is at hand. ”
Main archetypes described by Jung
Content (Meaning)
The arche-
Form
type
The
Persona
(The
(archetypal images)
The archetype of social boundaries
Corresponds to conscious “I -concept” and
self-images formed in the family and other
social
groups.
May
be
positive/negative,
The Mask, its names and
roles. A house, a tree.
The
Hero
(E. Neumann), The Beauty
(O. Lavrova)
75
Ego)
real/false, realized/non-realized, etc.
The archetype of the Alter Ego, a repressed
All kinds of wild creatures:
Тень
content exactly opposite to that of any other
evil
The
Shadow
archetype, the Self including. The acceptance
hoodoos, witches, ghouls,
of the Shadow is the first step towards the
murderers,
wood
transformation of the Psyche while rejecting it
mermaids,
savages,
blocks the way of spiritual development.
wights.
voodoos
The
and
spirits,
vile
Dragon
(Neumann).
The
Anima
The archetype of the Soul (an intellectual and
A heavenly female figure,
sensual
tender, delicate, sensual,
container)
undergoing
its
own
transformation. A female part of man’s psyche.
Irrational, emotionally unstable, inconsistent,
vulnerable, helpless, stupid.
Or
The
Animus
spiritual.
A vessel. A flower. Ocean
(water). Mother. Earth.
The archetype of the Soul (an intellectual and
Strong
sensual
(confident,
container)
transformation.
A
undergoing
male
part
of
its
own
woman’s
psyche.
Reasonable, logical, purposeful, consistent,
strong, domineering, pushy, coldly persistent,
male
nature
aggressive,
competitive, intellectual).
Phallus.
A dagger (a
sword).
A torch (fire).
Father. The sky.
clever, aggressive.
The
The archetype of the Reason.
A teacher, a priest, a guru,
Wise
Profound wisdom capable of holding inner
a
Old
contradictions and opposing forces in an
magician,
Man
indivisible living rhythm and leading them to
custodian of secrets, an
consolidation. A clear view of being.
oracle.
The archetype of the Reason. A profound
A charismatic woman, a
The
wisdom of sensing and experiencing the
tutor,
wise
stream of life. The peak of intuitive existence.
sacred mystery/secret, a
woman
Deep and genuine experiencing of the reality,
sorceress/fairy, a healer, a
(Senex)
guide
a
(Stalker),
a
healer,
custodian
a
a
of
76
(Sophia)
an aspiration to complete the incomplete.
prophetess, a beatified.
The archetype of the Spirit, manifesting itsel in
The Eternal child,
The
all archetypal images as an integrating, linking
Great Mother, the Great
Self
core. The source of life, the origin of being, the
Father,
the
source,
inner centre of a
sacred animals,
all-
personality. Its nature is
the
bipolar: the integrating, linking force inside the
pervading light, the Sun,
Self is always confronted by the destructive,
the mandala, quadrature
dissociative force of the Shadow. The divine
of circle, the Tree of life,
power fights the demonic one in the stream of
paradise/hell, gold, stone,
human life. Neither of them can exist without
excrements, treasure.
the other.
Semantics of the apposition of mental forms
of the Ego and the Self.
The Ego (predominance of external causality)
The Ego is the centre of consciousness forming under the impact of external social
factors. The concept of the Ego is well-defined, as well as the sphere of “I” separated
by boundaries from the World. There are many “I” cohabiting in the human psyche,
and if the psyche is healthy, one of “I” is a full-fledged master regulating relations with
the World and ensuring the wholeness of the “many I” individual. Individual’s view of
himself is based on his full acceptance of the opinion about himself as having definite
traits.
Views about the World are formed in accordance with views about oneself. It is
always possible to establish logical correlation between the concepts of the Ego and of
the World which will be constructed either on alternative interchange (complementary)
principle or on the basis of their similarity. The content of these concepts is revealed in
transference and countertransference, i.e., in real relationship between “I” and the
World (or its part).
77
The Self (predominance of internal causality)
The Self is the centre of the psyche existing a priori. On the whole, the psyche has
both the traits of the conscious and those of quite different nature belonging to the
sphere of the unconscious.
The Self is an infinite boundless “inner cosmos” of a sort that is part of an integral
transcendent entity uniting the subject with all the universe and separating his existence
from the existence of other objects.
The Self, being a source of internal force and energy, an organizing core of the
psyche, possesses an enormous integrating potential that is balanced by opposite
entropy tendencies. In the Self, order and chaos confront each other. By inner effort
man keeps his wholeness, resists destruction and develops the fundamental “knack of
being”, an ability to resist, to overcome, to preserve his stability and wholeness. This
“knack of being” cannot be obtained consciously, one just has got it or has not. It
pervades human existence on its every level, from that of the body to the spiritual one.
The power of overcoming is a great resource of the Self.
Contrary to the psychoanalytical model of object relations that deals with the
category of development, analytical psychology prefers the term “transformation”. In
using this term analytical psychology differs radically from all other psychological
schools and theories.
Development implies qualitative causative changes. The theory of object
relations indicates one of the causes, the external one, that is, child’s environment. The
ambience created by the family and the society is not very favourable for the child
and leads to neurosis. And since reality is impossible without detrimental factors
hampering the development of the personality, a logical conclusion follows that there
can be no absolutely healthy people, just as there can be no perfection in the world. If
you can imagine a wholesome person who has not experienced “unfavourable
conditions” or “pathogenic parental influence”, you completely drop out of the logic
of the object relations theory. Social environment and contacts with parents do possess
some intrinsic pathogenic “demolition charge” threatening to run down and ruin a
unique creature. Clearly, there are neither ideal parents nor ideal social environments in
the world. But there are still Personalities and Creatives. Where do they spring from?
Why do environments with the same coefficient of pathogenicity produce both
78
neurotics and true personalities? The model of external causality proposed by the
theory of object relations cannot give answer to this question.
Transformation going on in the making of human individuality also leads to
qualitative changes, but they have an internal cause along with external ones. To be a
success, transformation needs not merely a certain complex of external factors but
rather one’s internal effort to master oneself and expand the boundaries of the Ego.
The theory of object relations holds that the Ego originates in the world.
Analytical psychology regards such an Ego as false and destined to move towards the
Self, the true centre of the personality that is given to every man whole and unique but
hidden in the depths of the unconscious.
“Individuation has two principal aspects: first, it is an internal subjective process
of integration and, second, it is no less significant process of establishing objective
relationships. None of them is possible without the other, though often one of them is
domineering.” (M. Jacoby)
When asked how he had made a particular diagnosis Jung said that to give an
answer he had first to explain what the inquirer must know to understand the answer
and added that his observations might seem strange to those who were unfamiliar with
the matter.
In his work Metamorphoses and Symbols of the Libido Jung describes the
structure of the psyche incorporating the contents of the conscious and the
unconscious. The conscious is transitory but necessary for setting man’s life in order.
Processes associated with mind, will and sensation are conscious; intuition, feelings and
drives are far less liable to conscious control and understanding. Unconscious processes
run counter to conscious ones, which phenomenon Jung named by the Greek word
enantiodromia used first by Heraclitus to denote the principle of the interaction of the
opposites. It is the basic assumption in Jungian analytical psychology. Everything that
intellect would not accept finds it place in the available unconscious.
According to Jung, the unconscious contains the source and the form of
mankind’s spiritual legacy – or, more precisely, the possibility of approach to it, the
archetype; he called this level of the unconscious the collective one. Jung bewailed
that the archetype is irrational and therefore difficult to comprehend. However, the
psyche itself, he said, is a natural phenomenon and, as such, “an irrational entity”, “a
79
recognized universe”. The definitions given by Jung to the archetype are numerous.
Here are some of them:
“The archetype is a primordial unconscious psychic image”
“Archetypes belong to a reality that is transcendent in relation to consciousness
and evokes complexes of notions <…> in the form of mythological motifs.”
“There are types of situations and types of figures that repeat themselves
frequently and have a corresponding meaning. Endless repetition of these archetypes
has impressed this experience in our psychic constitution, that experience being
expressed not as images with a concrete content but primarily as forms without a
content which provide a possibility of a certain perception and certain actions.”
“The archetype <…> is a factor that cannot be perceived visually, a sort of
disposition that at a certain moment of human spirit development comes into play and
begins to arrange psychic elements into certain images. <...> Whenever the archetype
emerges, it exhibits great compelling power drawn from the unconscious, and if its
action is recognized, it is characterized by numinosity.”
“The archetype is a live idea that constantly calls forth new explanations through
which it is apperceived. <…> A live idea is always perfect and supersensory.”
The archetype is a psychic formation acting contrary to the will and the mind.
The archetype itself is empty, it only ensures the possibilty of transforming, by a
breakthrough, from its primordial instinctual bodily nature, like from a clay mould, into
new spiritual and divine dimensions.
The term “archetype” was adopted by Jung from ancient philosophers and
Goethe. Plato used it to denote the eternal idea, Philon – the image of God in man, St.
Augustine – a primordial image, the headspring of cognition, the Scholastics – a natural
image performing the same function.
Jungian concept of the archetype stemmed from his opinion, based on
experience, that mankind exists following universal modes. The archetype is
distinguished by a number of certain traits: a collective nature, depth, autonomy, the
force of attraction and a definite form.
Relations between the archetype and the experience are established in the
process of mutual influence of two form-building sides – the internal (archetypal) and
80
the external (related to the environment); each of them affects the other forming
individual experience of the subject. Archetypal patterns solidify the experience of the
past and authorize that of the future.
Archetypal patterns are formations of mixed bodily-spiritual nature: the
archetype is associated both with ideas and drives,
hence it is oriented,
correspondingly, upward and downward. Therefore the archetype is a phenomenon
neither purely material nor purely ideal, it is an ontological metaphor of man’s inner
reality. M. Mamardashvili said that the reality of human existence is indeed a metaphor
revealing behind seemingly isolated empirical facts the logic of their connection.
C. Jung stated that the archetypal image, which is not identical with the
archetype
and
represents
the
archetypal
content
in
consciousness,
differs
fundamentally from the image in memory, even though their content may be similar.
Archetypal content is eternal while that of the memory exists at a given moment. The
omnipresent archetype, being the origin and general principle of human existence,
affects human memory. The leading role is played by the archetype of the Self that will
be discussed below.
Jung’s archetype of the Eternal Child is the prime element of human psyche
symbolizing the Self. The scholar analyses the psychological content of this archetype in
the context of general mythological motifs, namely:

a miraculous birth of the infant-Godman;

his abandonment and orphanage immediately after the birth;

divine potency of the child and his vulnerability;

the rescue of the child and his return;

his androgynous nature (as with most of the gods).
Jung believes that the child, being a symbol, combines the opposites: loneliness
– and the patronage of gods, primitive pre-consciousness – and transcendentality,
something indistinguishable and non-separated – and completion of the numinous and
sublime, vulnerability to danger – and invincibility, and so on.
The child symbolizes the multiple nature of the Self at the earliest stages of the
individuation. Having the Self of a multiple nature, an individual strives unconsciously to
be identified with diversity of a group because he can experience his wholeness and
the continuity of his existence only as a member of a group. The archetype of the
81
Eternal Child holds its leading role at the stage of one’s infancy until the secondary
identification takes place, that is, “the birth of a Hero”.
In the post-Jungian depth psychology, the archetype of the Hero has decidedly
replaced that of the Eternal Child, while the infantile state of the psyche is universally
called by all psychotherapeutic schools “the Inner Child”. For all the transformations
going on in the man’s psyche, his Inner Child remains; this wonderful and shocking child
demands constant attention and, at a certain moment in his life, a realization. His
narcissism is awful but his natural creativity is marvelous. According to Serge Leclaire,
every individual has to commit a symbolical murder of his inner child – in other words, to
transform the original narcissistic outlook of the child living in his soul. My experience has
been that these children often “die” unassisted, and the man they dwell within
becomes heartless and unable to understand his true wishes. Dying as a natural
archetypal transformation has a healing effect and leads to rebirth. “Murder” as a
conscious mental method of modifying one’s soul
cannot lead to anything but
destruction of oneself and one’s soul. It is just another example of too literal
understanding of the deep transformation metaphor of “death and rebirth” which is
really a deep process that does not stand intervention with a surgical scalpel.
Some excerpts from:
A. A. Leontjev
THE UNCONSCIOUS AND THE ARCHETYPES
AS THE BASIS OF INTERTEXTUALITY 1
The idea of drawing a parallel between psychoanalysis and intertextuality may seem at
the first glance a bizarre one. Meanwhile the comparison of fundamental categories of
both theories reveals strong resemblance between Freudian method of analysing the
conscious and the method of philological analysis of texts in the broadest sense of the
word.
The theory of intertextuality has several sources, one of them being F. de
Saussure’s concept of anagrams. According to M. Yampolsky, the structure of the
anagram may be compared to the principle of the intertextuality in such cases when
the text referred to is not immediately obvious in the referring text and needs to be
А. А. Леонтьев. Бессознательное и архетипы как основа интертекстуальности // Текст.
Структура и семиотика. Т. 1. М., 2001. С. 92-100.
1
82
deciphered. That notion agrees with the idea threading the works of Y. Tynanov which
implies that at the base of intertextuality lies the parody. In his article about the short
novel of Dostoyevsky The Village of Stepanchikovo and its Inhabitants Tynanov showed
that the image of Foma Opiskin is built as a reminiscence, as a parody of N. V. Gogol
(see about it in more detail in: В. П. Руднев. Словарь культуры ХХ века. М., 1997).
Gogol’s Selected Fragments from the Correspondence with Friends as well as the figure
of the author himself became a semantic anagram in the novel of Dostoyevsky. “For 70
years
up
to
the
publication
of
Tynanov’s
article
nobody
had
suspected that Gogol is depicted under the guise of Foma Fomich… Most likely,
Dostoyevsky did not suspect it either – there is too much of the unconscious in the
intertext.” (V. Rudnev)
In the 1950s, a new school of structural linguistics was established by N.
Chomsky. The school named the generative linguistics bases its postulates on the
notion of generative linguistic models, which implies that the process of language
modeling, or speech generation, goes on from the syntax to phonology, from the most
abstract syntactic patterns to the simplest elements of language structure.
As Chomsky writes, the aim of generative approach is to proceed from the
surface structure to the deep one by way of analysing the transformations (N. Chomsky.
Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. 1965.). At the same time, the aim of psychoanalysis is to
proceed from the conscious to the unconscious by way of analyzing defense
mechanisms. The depth structure therefore resembles functionally the unconscious.
Transformations in generative linguistics and corresponding expressive means of
generative poetics are not unlike unconscious defense mechanisms studied by
psychoanalysis.
<…> During the analytical therapy, the unconscious of a patient defends itself
from the analyst’s “aggression” with the help of the following mechanisms: resistance
(Widerstand),
repression
(Wiederholung),
(Verdrängung),
exaggeration
replacement
(Verdichtung),
denial
(Ersatzbildung),
(Verneinung),
repetition
transference
(Übertragung).
J. Lacan in his work The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious, or Reason since
Freud emphasized the analogy between defense mechanisms and poetic figures of
speech taken in a broad Jakobsonian sense as macro-rhetoric elements: “the
mechanisms described by Freud as those of the primary process, by which the
unconscious is governed, correspond exactly to the functions this school of linguistics
83
believes determine the most radical axes of the effects of language, namely metaphor
and metonymy – in other words, the effects of the substitution and combination of
signifiers…”
Just as consciousness resists psychoanalysis, so a text resists philological analysis
to the point of a categorical denial of its possibility (hence the idea of the impossibilty
to verify harmony by algebra, Leo Tolstoy’s phrase that the meaning of Anna Karenina
cannot be reduced to a single formula, etc.).
A text may be compared with consciousness, its meaning – with the
unconscious. The author does not know himself what was his exact intent when he was
writing the text, he has just enciphered some message in it. The question arises, what is
the point in enciphering, is not it better to express the purport directly? The point is that
a work of art is generated by a traumatic situation which the text is intended to
conceal (just as a patient’s сonsciousness tries desperately to conceal the recollection
of a traumatic situation that is stored in the unconscious). If we accept this assumption,
then the analogy between psychoanalysis and philological analysis will cease to be
metaphorical.
The subtext of a work of art may be compared to a traumatic situation
concealed in the unconscious. This, on the whole, is in accord with Freudian concept of
sublimation.
<…> Having revealed a unique all-explaining meaning of a work of art, a
philologist has not ”cured” it thereby because superhigh value of an artistic
“unconscious discourse of the other” is not pathological in the same sense as it is in
psychoanalysis. A philologist turns an artistic unconscious discourse of the other into the
one conscious for everybody and above all for himself. The objective pursued in
analyzing a literary text is not healing it (in a sense, it is irremediable) but rather healing
the analyst.
The outstanding Swiss psychologist and psychotherapist Carl Gustav Jung
advanced the concept of the collective unconscious as opposed to Freudian personal
unconscious. The theory of personality worked out by Jung differs radically from Freud’s
doctrine. A. Voskoboynikov points out the following innovations introduced by Jung: a)
an extended interpretation of the notion of libido; b) laying the foundation of collective
unconscious under personal unconscious; c) reconciling antagonistic contradiction
between the conscious and the unconscious, an attempt to find their inner affinity; d)
84
methodological reorientation, rejection of Freudian reliance on the principles of
classical determinism and reductionism (A. E. Voskoboynikov. The Unconscious and the
Conscious in a Man. 1997).
In his article On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry C. G. Jung
defines the tasks of analyzing images created in a work of art. He writes that “in the
case of a symbolic work we should remember the dictum of Gerhard Hauptmann:
"Poetry evokes out of words the resonance of the primordial word." The question we
should ask, therefore, is: "What primordial image lies behind the imagery of art?””
Jung understood collective unconscious as a sphere of unconscious mythology
whose primordial images are the common heritage of mankind. As A. Kozlov
paraphrases Jungian idea, collective unconscious is “a psychological structure that
accumulates the experience of the mankind handed on unconsciously from one
generation to another.” According to Jung, this layer of human psyche is inborn, which
makes a principal distinction from the theory of Freud who believed that the
unconscious originates in the childhood. Dispute with Freud was one of the main
components of Jungian works. Emphasizing the difference between collective and
personal unconscious, Jung writes in the above-mentioned article:
“The latter I regard as the sum total of all those psychic processes and contents
which are capable of becoming сonscious and often do, but are then suppressed
because of their incompatibility and kept subliminal. Art receives tributaries from this
sphere too, but muddy ones; and their predominance, far from making a work of art a
symbol, merely turns it into a symptom. We can leave this kind of art without injury and
without regret to the purgative methods employed by Freud. In contrast to the personal
unconscious, … the collective unconscious … cannot be brought back to recollection
by any analytical technique, since it was never repressed or forgotten. The collective
unconscious is not to be thought of as a self-subsistent entity; it is no more than a
potentiality handed down to us from primordial times… There are no inborn ideas, but
there are inborn possibilities of ideas that set bounds to even the boldest fantasy and
keep our fantasy activity within certain categories: a priori ideas, as it were, the
existence of which cannot be ascertained except from their effects. They appear only
in the shaped material of art as the regulative principles that shape it; that is to say, only
by inferences drawn from the finished work can we reconstruct the age-old original of
the primordial image.”
85
The unconscious, according to Jung, reveals itself in the archetypes,
“manifestations of a deeper layer of the unconscious where primordial images and
motifs of mankind are dormant.” The archetype is, so to say, an accumulator of the
most valuable human experience, and an artist perceives it in the process of creation.
The process of perception goes on unconsciously. At the least attempt to analyze the
experience contained in the archetypal image consciously the latter is destroyed
though does not vanish into thin air fully. The archetype always stays in consciousness
maintaining its meaning and functions, transforming and manifesting itself in images
corresponding to the surroundings. As a means of handing over the experience of
previous generations, the archetype is panhuman; however, it has national and ethnic
peculiarities.
In Jung’s opinion, one or other primordial archetypal image appears in a work of
art when historical conditions of a given epoch favour it. These conditions are the key
that opens the door into the depths of collective unconscious and challenges
archetypes to penetrate into the inner space of a work of art taking a form according
to historical and cultural situation. The archetype, however, does not change its
meaning and functions, so it is recognizable under any guise and its archaic content is
easily discernable.
The ability of the archetype to be actualized in creative work allows to assume
that it is that element of the collective unconscious which is primarily comparable with
the intertextuality as this term was understood by the exponents of the post-structuralist
school – that is, as collective unconscious of a sort that existed before a given text
appeared independently of the will of the author, the latter being rather a mediator
transmitting archetypal images from the uncinscious level of objective psychological
existence into the sphere of imaginary reality. Here, the archetypes guide the thoughts
and the feelings of the author performing thereby the function Jung spoke of.”
In his book Dreaming Wittgenstein’s disciple Norman Malcolm criticizes
psychoanalysts who interpret dreams and insists that the dream itself cannot be
analyzed, we can analyze only narrations in which people tell their dreams. If they did
not do it, Malcolm adds wittily, the notion of the dream would not exist at all.
Does that mean that we must simply distinguish between the use of the concept
of the symbol in semiotics and psychoanalysis? We think that the issue is more
complicated. Melanie Klein does use the term “symbol” in psychoanalytic context of
her article The Importance of Symbol Formation in the Development of the Ego, but
86
does she mean the symbols of the unconscious? She analyses the case of an early
schizophrenia of a four-year-old boy named Dick who was seriously handicapped in his
development and could hardly speak:
“For the most part he simply strung sounds together in a meaningless way, and
certain noises he constantly repeated. When he did speak he generally used his
meagre vocabulary incorrectly. … Sometimes he would repeat the words [after his
mother] correctly, but would go on repeating them in an incessant, mechanical
way…”
It is interesting to note how Melanie Klein understands the symbol:
“Doors and locks stood for the ways in and out of [his mother’s] body, while the
door-handles represented the father's penis and his own. Thus what had brought
symbol-formation to a standstill was the dread of what would be done to him
(particularly by the father's penis) after he had penetrated into the mother's body. <…>
Since no affective or symbolic relation to [the objects] existed in his mind, any chance
actions of his in relation to them were not coloured by phantasy, and it was thus
impossible to regard them as having the character of symbolic representations. His lack
of interest in his environment and the difficulty of making contact with his mind were
<…> only the effect of his lack of a symbolic relation to things.”
PATHS OF INDIVIDUATION
According to Jung, individuation is the road a man goes toward himself, toward full
realization of his unique individuality (passing from his Ego to his Self and from his Self to
his Ego) – in other words, by integrating the content of his inner “I” that grows out of the
source of his personal life linked into “I” that realizes him in his external collective
relationships with the world. Through individuation, the external process of socialization,
i.e., adaptation to the world is complemented by the inner adaptation to oneself. This
Jungian idea lying at the heart of the analytical psychology reveals the issues of the
inner Path which exists independently of the environment though internal conditions are
influenced by the external ones and vice versa. Thus, individuation is the process of
internal transformations of the Ego. Transformation is an internal spontaneous
movement in the space of the Soul manifested in actions, feelings and meanings
experienced in life. Development of Ego-consciousness, the core of the personality,
goes on in two directions: from the external to the internal and back (establishing
relationships with the world, or identification) – and from the internal to the internal
87
(establishing relationships with oneself, identity).
With the development of depth psychology and humanistic psychology, and
particularly with the publication of works by E. Erikson a new psychological term
“identity” was derived from the old one, “identification”. Both terms denote closely
related aspects of personality development, however the notion of identity is wider and
deeper than that of identification. In fact, identification is one of the facets of identity.
Identification denotes a specific type of relations in the process of appropriation
of the object by the subject, namely:
– assimilation to the object (interiorization);
– imparting the object with one’s own thoughts, feelings and desires
(exteriorization).
The process of identification by definition promotes the establishing of the Ego
boundaries. Psychological defences of introjection-projection serve as an example of
the subject’s “getting stuck” at the stage of establishing Ego boundaries when the
subject is confused and cannot say where his “I” ends: he either contracts its
boundaries giving part of his own space to the object (introjection) or expands them
occupying the space of the object (projection). In either case the notion of
identification concerns the external, social aspect of Ego formation.
The ability for identification allows an individual living among various Others who
differ from himself to understand their feelings and intentions as well as his own attitude
towards fellow creatures, which is a necessary condition for successful social
adaptation.
Inability to separate oneself from the Other after identification with him may be
considered as a first sign of failed socialization and undefined boundaries of the Ego. In
the process going on after identification with an object, separation of “I” from “not I” is
possible only under a certain internal condition, namely, the ability to resist outer
perturbations and keep up a stable attitude towards oneself as an object with certain
traits, values, opinions, etc. However, as it is the case with the ability to identify with “not
I” object, too full identification with the “I-object” (self-identification) leads to Ego
inflation (the term coined by Jung), hence to stagnation of development.
88
Gender identity
This notion was offered by Freud to denote some processes in child’s psyche
characteristic of his relationships with his parents and impelling him to play a feminine or
a masculine role. By the age of 18 months a primary identification develops as a
primitive form of the infant’s affection towards his mother (“infatuation with the
object”). Later on, it gives way to a secondary identification that is partial and
ambivalent by nature and is none other than a prehistory of future Oedipus complex. In
an adult person, identification, as it was understood by Freud, has always been
associated with neurotic symptoms that cause an unconscious wish of the subject to
take the place of the object, which deprives him of the ability to satisfy his sexual
needs. Anna Freud developed this thesis of her father and supplemented it with the
idea of gender identification forming in the process of the “I-subject” self-development.
She believed that the experience of one’s identity with the object is a necessary
condition of an emotional attitude towards it without which establishing of close
relations with the object is impossible.
Personality psychology and developmental psychology consider formation of
gender identification as an essential part of individual’s socialization and adaptation.
The psychologists believe, in particular, that to realize one’s inborn resources, one must
become aware of his/her sex and accept it, develop a certain attitude towards
standard patterns of sexual behaviour. In the process of socialization, biological
sexuality produces a gender “façade” (“social sexuality”). An accord between
biological sex and gender is the pledge of psychological and physical health.
Psychological literature has been paying considerable attention to the so-called
“inverted” gender identity which develops in large measure under the influence of the
parents. Typical for contemporary Russia is the case when the mother is domineering in
the family while the father is weak and dependent. The gender façade in this case
relies on inversion principle but proves to be stable because it is sufficiently
complementary.
There are families with polar positions of marrieds when either the wife overplays
her part trying to be a “superwoman” or the husband pretends to the role of a
“superman”. The spouse, as a rule, becomes just a shadow possessing, by definition, all
blemishes projected by the “perfect” partner. If a child belongs to the same sex as the
“super-partner”, he develops negative identity and behaviour patterns that are neither
masculine nor feminine.
89
Phyllis and Robert Tyson distinguish between gender identity and gender
identification. Gender identity is a narcissistic nucleus of original masculinity or femininity
that develops as a result of sensing one’s body. In contrast to it, gender identification is
based on the image of oneself as belonging to a definite biological sex which is
manifested in conscious and unconscious patterns of interaction with others.
E. Erikson uses the term self-identity which again is associated with the inner
adaptation of the subject and, involving him into the totality of mankind existence,
regulates the reproduction of such basic human traits as faith, will power, initiative,
competence, fidelity, love, care and wisdom.
The notion of identity, according to Erikson, includes such elements as object
relation towards oneself (self-identity) and the ability of the Ego to keep the self-object
in changing external conditions and embody “I-object” in other forms of its existence (in
other words, to regulate itself through expression directed outside, to leave a trace).
Erikson emphasizes that the key issue of individual existence is a constant striving
for self-identity and its preservation in the social environment. So identity implies not only
identity with oneself but also a high degree of self-awareness and acceptance of
oneself in all relations with the outworld.
Erikson distinguishes 8 stages of psychosocial development; at each of them a
person has to overcome some crisis.
At the first, oral-sensory stage the infant solves the question that is the crux of all
his life – namely, whether he can trust the world. Erikson believes that if the infant is calm
when his mother disappears from his view, it is a sign that he has developed basic trust.
Growing autonomy of the infant allows him at the age of 1.5-4 years to solve the
second vital task – to master self-dependence and autonomy (as opposed to
dependence and indecision). At this age the child interiorizes what the others see in
him.
At the third stage (locomotor-genital) coinciding with the age from 4 to 6 years
the child makes a choice between initiative and feeling of guilt. He begins to define his
goals, to fantasize and differentiate between fantasies and reality. He plays various
games, anticipates various roles and tries energetically to master the world. Other
people, both adults and his equals in age, become for him at this period objects for
identification.
90
The fourth stage (6-11 years) is marked by the formation of industry and
competence and overcoming self-distrust and the feeling of inferiority. The child
identifies himself with people of various professions and masters cultural symbols.
The fifth stage (at the age from 11 to 20) is crucial for the development of the
sense of identity. Many components of the structure of “I” are reconsidered; all the
adolescent knows about himself is integrated. If the crisis is resolved successfully, the
sense of identity is formed. Erikson calls this stage “the psychological moratorium”, a
critical period of transition from youth to adulthood. Erikson writes that under certain
conditions the moratorium may become lingering and last for years, which is often the
case with neurotics and gifted persons. Unresolved crisis leads to the state of “identity
diffusion” which is a peculiar feature of the adolescence.
At the sixth stage (21-25 years) a young person solves “adult” problems relying on
the psychosocial identity that has been developed. A person is faced with alternatives:
either to marry and establish vast friendly ties or lead an isolated life.
The seventh stage spans the major part of human life and lasts up to the age of
60. During this period, the main choice is made, the choice between progress and
regress. The ability to grow is crowned with a full-blown individuality and uniqueness.
Rising above the level of identity, one is bestowed with a rare gift of being true to
oneself.
The eighth stage completes the life cycle. A person either develops a state of
balance and a sense of harmony associated with the wholeness of his personality or
drowns in endless despair as an outcome of messy life. Only having gained the
experience enriched by concern for other people, by ups and downs in creative work
a person becomes integrated. Integration is the highest achievement, a result of efforts
made at the seven previous stages.
This stage, Erikson writes, is marked “by growing emotional integration, the Ego’s
proclivity for order and meaning, by acceptance of the one and only life style and life
cycle with a circle of certain people, … by establishing bonds of friendship with men
and women of different times and occupations who have created the world around
them. A person who has achieved integrity is confident that the life of an individual is a
chance coincidence of the one and only life cycle with the one and only bit of history
and that the integrity of a person exists as long as the unique integrative style one is a
part of lasts, they disappear together.”
91
The loss of Ego integrity leads to hopelessness and despair, death is seen as the
disappearance of the Ego. In contrast to that, integrated Ego relies on the maxim “I am
what will outlive me”.
If during his lifespan an individual resolves crises at all stages successfully, he
develops a sense of positive identity. Accumulation of unresolved crises of psychosocial
development results in the loss of the sense of identity which is replaced by negative or
confused identity. In both cases, loss of identity reflects the infantile wish of a person to
postpone the attainment of adulthood which, as a rule, is associated with persistent
anxiety about relations with “I-object”, a sense of isolation, barriers of primitive defences
and significantly lowered effectivity of self-presentation. The individual condemns
himself to perpetual doubts as to himself, his place in society and his prospects. Erikson
remarks that an individual inclined to negative identity tends “to become nothing”
while in case of confused one he is fated for destruction (for example, in a pathological
absorption in some lopsided activity).
Elaborating upon Erikson’s scheme of the stages of identity development, I
propose as its variant a principle of frame development not associated with crises but
based on inner revelation and external realization of natural spiritual-psychic mental
forms, self-caused transformation. This model of transformational identity development
is founded on the quaternate frame structure of the identity, a fourfold topos. It is
derived from the metaphor of ontological psyche organization I gave in my book The
Topological Depth Psychotherapy.
The primary and the central element of the psychic ontological metaphor is
spiritual integrating potential (Vita), or, the potential of vitality, the source of the
subject’s inner activity. It is of trancendental nature and is the only cause of its own
existence (causa sui). Three other elements represent three interrelated spheres of
human existence: life sustenance (being of the Body), bodily sensations (being of the
Soul) and meaningful reasonable being (being of Reason). Each of these spheres
develops under the impact of the single integrating force, the energy of the Spirit, of
life, that is the driving force of all movement and development uniting all spheres of
being into one whole. It is a vertical dimension of a fourfold structure.
The horizontal dimension is closely related with the vertical one but has its own
peculiarities manifested in definite interrelations and combinations of three principal
sides of human existence. (Needless to say that all these spatial assumptions are rather
relative.)
92
The identity corresponding to the leading role of the being of the body is called
the topos of the Infant. With this topos, vital instincts predominate, being is reduced to
bodily sensations at the level of primitive affects; the whole existence is regarded as
external one. As other toposes of the Psyche are being developed and mastered, the
Infant undergoes a series of transformations directed generally from the pole of “the
psychoanalytical child” to that of “the eternal child”. But for all other newly emerging
aspects of the Psyche,
the primitive infant in the soul of an individual does not
disappear altogether, it just takes less space. However, a man stuck in the Infant topos
for all his life is a rare occasion.
I propose to call the identity achieved in the realm of bodily sensations (being of
the Soul) the topos of the Beauty, or the topos of the Hero. This topos is distinguished by
a need of company, of love and respect of others; the Soul seeks after the fullest
expression of emotions and feelings, the Reason differentiates between the Ego and
the World, the inner and the outer.
This chapter focuses mainly on the development of the Beauty and the Hero,
with their transformations going on between the poles “the Beauty – the Mother”, “the
Hero – the Tsar”.
The sacrament of man’s and woman’s initiation takes place in close interaction
with a partner of the opposite sex resulting in the birth of Beauties and Heroes, in the
“fostering of feelings” and mastering the nature of bodily sensations, in marriages and
wedding ceremonies. Beauties become mothers, Heroes become fathers. A vital role in
the development of the third phase of the topos of the Psyche, i.e., of the Mother and
the Tsar, is played by integration of natural spiritual resources as well as by integration of
an individual into social life (that is, an integration directed from within outward).
The toposes of the Mother and of the Tsar are associated with the identity in
which the leading role is played by being of reason integrating in itself bodily sensations
inherent in emotionally mature individual and the life of his healthy fully developed
body. At this stage of the transformation, an individual draws ideas concerning his life
from “non-verbal source” of his being. These ideas are based on his own experience of
suffering and making mistakes as well as on overcoming.
The topos of the Charismatic woman (the Chthonian Mother, Cassandra) and the
topos of the Wise Old Man (Senex, the Mana-personality) are associated with the
identity in which the leading role is played by spiritual being, life in its original form that
93
integrates all its manifestations into one whole.
Spiritual development of the personality defines the extent of the bodily
sensation “socialization” that promotes the integration of
all previously realized
resources of the topos of the psyche. If life is fully realized in the body, in the feelings,
thoughts and actions, a special kind of being develops that combines each and all in
the inner world of an individual and in the outer space of his other being. Leaving after
himself a heritage of deeds bearing a mark of his personality, a person becomes a
Human being in the full sense of the word, conquers death itself and continues his
existence as another being.
Many great thinkers emphasized the role of the the spiritual core of being. For
example, Nietzsche and Proust believed that the Being of the Spirit manifests itself in the
subject’s endeavour, in the will to live, in the efforts to understand oneself and to
conjoin with oneself and the world. No transformation can be effected on its own,
without an inner effort on the part of the subject.
Adjusting to himself during his life, the subject inevitably comes to accepting his
inner world with its thoughts, feelings and experiences, his body and his gender, images
of himself projected by the outworld and himself as a source of his own life differing
from lives of the others who are sources of their own lives differing from his.
PATHS OF INDIVIDUATION: THE BEAUTY
Inner transformations bringing about a harmonious being of the Ego follow two
alternative ways: the Path of the Beauty or the Path of the Hero.
C. Jung did not consider the Hero as an individual archetype and included the
heroic into the development cycle of the Eternal Child archetype (as a representation
of the Self.) His followers, however, (particularly, E. Neumann, O. Rank, S. Williams and J.
Hillman) attached the status of the archetype to many psychic phenomena described
by Jung, the Hero including. They hold that the heroic is a mythological metaphor of
the Ego development on the male line.
M. Polster believes, though, that there is such a thing as “women heroism”
despite the conventional opinion that heroism is an attribute of male accomplishments.
To “heroic traits” of women Polster relegates active position in life, ability to change the
streamline of one’s own life, the sense of responsibility and participation, developed
sense of the Other. To my mind, this is rather an inventory of positive contents of the
94
Animus which does not comprise the motto theme of woman’s Soul. To speak about “a
heroic woman” is as useless as to speak of “a handsome man” – it lays a stress on
secondary and minor traits while the essence is neglected and the character distorted.
Masculine (Feminine) archetypal crystal
Spirit
Senex
(Sofia)
The higher,
The divine,
Uniting,
light
Trickster
(witch)
Anima (Animus)
Ego, Hero (Beauty)
Self
Negative Anima
(negative Animus)
Dragon
(Monster)
Infant
The lower,
the demonic,
the destructive,
darkness
Orphan
Shadow
A. Samuels thinks that the theory of the Animus is not so well elaborated by Jung
as the theory of the Anima and is rather factitious resembling in this respect Freudian
philosophizing on the complex of Electra. On the whole, the Anima, as depicted by
Jung and his disciples, looks, in Samuels’ opinion, more attractive than the Animus – “as
if it is justifiable and even appropriate for a man ‘to have a woman inside’ while for a
woman to have a man in is unforgivable and fraught with after-effects.” (Clearly, the
archetypes are meant here.)
In 1981, Silvia Perera who was not enraptured by the totalitarianism of
95
psychoanalysis voiced her opinion that the present psychology is entirely “patriarchal”
and holds purely masculine point of view on the structure of both male and female
Psyche regarding them to be identical. Meanwhile the woman is something
fundamentally different from man’s idea of her.
Ruth Salvaggio insists that “women also can enter a discourse. They are not
objects, but subjects of the discourse who transform it. Felman’s article bears the title To
Open the Question, and that is just what happens when women raise questions on the
subjects of deconstruction and psychoanalysis. They build up the intersubjective space,
they discover 'and' anew.”
Contrary to Freudian theory of psychosexual development with one-gender
phallic stage, Jung held that there are two absolutely different archetypal principles of
psychological functioning related with gender: the masculine principle (Logos
associated with rationality, intellect, achievements and autonomy) and the feminine
principle (Eros associated with the irrational, sensuality, meekness and the capacity to
relate). Both principles coexist in every person independent of the gender but their
proportion depends on the dominance of musculinity or femininity in the person’s
nature. As Jung said, “the function of Eros is to gather and unite what Logos has thrown
about.” Then the function of Logos is, presumably, to wake Eros up?
Taking up Jungian idea of archetypal crystal lattice I propose two obvious kinds
of the crystal: a feminine and a masculine that possess quite different qualities and
cannot be blended into one.
The fundamental difference between the maculine and the feminine archetypal
crystals forms the basis of masculine and feminine Paths of individuation. But before
considering these alternative Paths in detail I would like to give a more explicit
description of these metaphors, of archetypal crystals that allow to sketch if only the
broad outline of the polysemantic space where life evolves by way of inner
transformations.
The principal horizontal opposition in the crystal is that between the Hero and the
Anima. The Hero is represented in Ego-consciousness which is opposed to feminine
unconscious in the male psyche. When a man apperceives and masters the anima
content of his unconscious, he both consciously and unconsciously ascends to the Wise
Old Man. Undergoing transformations during this process, one must inevitably get hold
of the Shadow aspects of the unconscious. The lower part of the crystal belongs to the
96
sphere of the Shadow, and every archetype has its Shadow alternative here. Thus, the
alternative of the Child archetype is the Void, Nothingness. The Void reeks of death as
no other Shadow archetype. A psychotherapist often encounters “murdered infants”,
i.e., died out parts of child’s soul, or “orphans”, abandoned parts of it that suffer in an
absolute void. By the way, it is just that archetypal point where the soul begins its
development in three topological directions: towards the archetypes of the Hero and
the Tsar, towards Anima and towards the Wise Old Man (Senex). In every direction the
way is blocked by the Shadow archetypes: the way to the Hero – by the Dragon, the
way to the divine Anima – by the negative Anima, the way to the Senex – by the
Trickster. Confrontation with the Shadow content of the unconscious demands from a
man a huge inner effort. Having overcome the Shadow, the Infant transforms into the
Hero, the Hero into the Tsar and the Tsar into the Wise Old Man. On this road, the man is
accompanied by his inner woman, the Anima.
The central axis of the feminine crystal structure is the opposition between the
Beauty and the Animus. Their relationship is similar to that between the Hero and the
Anima. The Beauty is represented in woman’s Ego-consciousness which is confronted by
the male unconscious, the Animus.
Apperceiving and mastering the masculine part of her psyche, a woman evolves
in her unconscious toward the Chthonic Mother, the Charismatic woman. The feminine
way of individuation is the path of the Beauty (and not of the Hero). Her life mission has
nothing to do with male heroism and power struggle. Her role is not secondary but
differing from the male one. Singularity of woman’s mission is expressed in the idea of
the Path of the Beauty. It is the path of patience and forgiveness, of fidelity and hope, of
faith and love. On this path, a woman is accompanied by a man, the Hero, a mediator
in her connections with the World. Like a man, she has to struggle with and integrate
the Shadow aspects of her Psyche. Her Shadow takes the guise of an Animal, a Beast,
an evil stepmother, a negative Mother, an awful man, a negative Animus or a Witch
possessing great spiritual power turned to destruction. Only confronting the Shadow,
taking its unconscious power and turning this power to the creation of life a woman
can reveal her soul fully and realize her rich spiritual potential. She undergoes
transformations from an Infant into the Beauty, then into the Mother and at last into
highly spiritual Charismatic woman who is wise and comprehends cosmic mysteries.
Although psychoanalytical literature, as well as that of other branches of depth
psychology often invokes the archetypal fable about the Beauty and the Beast, the
97
concept of the archetype of the Beauty has not been proposed yet as a match for the
archetype of the Hero.
Analysts usually identify individuation process with the Path of the Hero
neglecting a most special issue of woman’s development. That caused me to
introduce the archetype of the Beauty and describe peculiarities of woman’s
individuation, the Path of the Beauty.
THE PATH OF THE BEAUTY
The archetype of the Beauty plays the key role in woman’s individuation, so the process
of woman’s individuation must be considered as a series of transformations
engendered by this archetype. But before analyzing these transformations, it seems
advisable to recall some eternal female images treasured for centuries in myths and
works of art, and quite jusifiably.
For all diversity of female images and mythological stories about women they
have something in common, namely, ideas and stages of transformation. The central
ideas associated with the Path of the woman are fall from grace, self-sacrifice and
love. Basic points of woman’s individuation are as follows: a virgin – a wife – a mother, a
beauty – a beast – a czarine (a wife), sin – birth – death.
In the process of woman’s individuation, the archetype of the Beauty plays the
key role in the development and socialization of her Ego, the centre of her
consciousness. Deep transformations taking place on this road represent, in fact, a new
level of integration of the unconscious Ego-consciousness. It is known that the conscious
and the unconscious are separated by a clear-cut boundary. However, according to
Jung and to therapeutic practice of Jungian analysis, they are at the same time linked
through mediators which function is performed by the Animus (in women) and the
Anima (in men). Jung called them the “psychopomps”, that is, factors uniting and
channelling the opposing contents and forces of the conscious and the unconscious.
The Ego of a man possesses great spiritual strength and heroic content that are
opposed by a weak and sensual Anima whose resources help the man to go out into
the boundless expanse of his unconscious.
The Ego of a Woman posesses high sensitiveness and spiritual richness that are
opposed by spiritually strong Animus. Owing to his resources a woman can develop into
98
a whole and unique personality whose delicate and sensitive Soul integrates all
unexpectedly new and amazing contents of the unconscious.
The Ego (the Beauty) and the Animus may have the Shadow side, negative
representation of the content. While the Ego manifests the positive pole of its
archetype, in the Animus
archetype
the
negative
pole is
developed. The
transformation of the negative Animus, i.e., integration of its positive pole, is a crucial
point in “the birth” of the Beauty, or in the integration of similar positive and negative
poles in the archetypal form of the Ego (i.e., of the Beauty).
If a woman develops a negative Ego-identification (“I am not a woman, I am not
beautiful”), the archetypal content of the Animus becomes the principal Ego-resource.
Such woman either goes along the heroic line of individuation or develops, according
to notorious scenario, into a spinster and a bluestocking or a prostitute, which is, in fact,
one and the same thing.
Analysis of more than 200 real life stories told by the clients as well as of typical
situations concerning woman’s individuation depicted in myths and biblical legends
leaves no doubt that the archetype of the Beauty is indeed central in the woman’s
development and cannot be supplanted by or even compared to the archetype of
the Hero. The Path of the Beauty cardinally differs from that of the Hero and is an
alternative to it.
In my monograph Topological Depth Psychotherapy: Ideas Concerning
Transformation a fourfold frame model demonstrates four transformations making up
the cycle of woman’s identity development (presented in a horizontal plane). These
transformations are also shown against the crises of psychosocial development
described by E. Erikson. The crisis of the stage V of Erikson’s scheme corresponds to the
Maternal topos III that plays, just as in Erikson’s scheme, a decisive role in the
development of frame identity or, in other words, is a peak where many factors
converge: youth and maturity, social success and complexes, gender identification
and values accepted, etc. This peak may be actually not confined to a decade from
the age of 11 to 20 but expand over several decades. The woman who has managed
to integrate inside her the body sensations with reasonable being is the only one who
can transmit it into the outworld – that is, live not from outside inside, as prescribed, but
from inside out, as she wants and is able to.
Any point in the transformations of a woman on the way to her identity
development is regarded as an inevitable result of her immersion into her actual selfcaused archetypal state. The external cause may be the interaction with a real or an
99
imaginary man whose individual traits form an exact replica of the actual state and the
Animus content of her unconscious. The external social plane is seen, experienced,
realized and apperceived as a “life story” (or “love story”). But it is the inner intimate
plane that is revealed in the description of the fourfold archetypal frame on the Path of
identity development, the Path of becoming the woman.
Topos One: the Infant. The topos of the Infant may be considered as a moment
of the Soul awakening and day-dreaming with its inevitable disappointments. The
Sleeping Beauty (that is, still unborn Beauty) dreams of the Prince seeing him as an
unreal fairytale figure. She ascribes to him nonexistent qualities, imagines heroic deeds
performed for her sake and assigns him an indispensable mission of taking her in his
arms and carrying her through the entire lifespan.
Inherent in woman’s infant stage grandiose Ego laden with a solid portion of
narcissism is ready only to one thing: idealization and subsequent decrowning of her
ideal. These fantasies are usually realized in the adolescent period. However, girls
having no fathers or their substitutes or else having a negative experience of relations
with the father may continue to fantasize in a more mature age as well. Spinsters, by
the way, come out of the women who are so angry with bad boys which would not fit
their dreams that they give up any attempts to establish relations with the opposite sex
anticipating another catastrophic disagreement. They stay ever disappointed selfdeceiving suffering lazy sexless creatures who have not had the nerve to lay their
fantasies aside.
The archetypal features of this stage of woman’s development are illusory
perception of herself and of men, helplessness, loneliness, narcissism (claims for
grandiosity), disposition to passivity, submission and dependence.
The total illusion (the first illusion of love) that a woman struggles with at this time
is the expectation that the world will attend, through its representative the man, upon
all her wishes (which are, by the way, not always clear to herself) and will surely shower
her with gifts attesting her grandiosity and great importance for her slave.
Such domineering women (“Empresses”) are really dead-hearted dolls. Their
eroticism at this stage is still sleeping, and they receive gratification only from satisfying
their narcissism. At the same time, they turn out to be fully dependent on the attention
and care of a man.
100
*
*
*
В пустынной хрáмине
In an empty temple
Троилась – ладаном.
Trinity – with myrrh
Зерном и пламенем
На темя падала..
В ночные клёкоты
Вступала – ровне
– Я буду крохотной
Твоей жаровнею:
Домашней утварью:
That dropped onto my head
As grain and fire...
In the night screams
I entered as equal –
I will be your
Tiny blazier:
Domestic utensil:
Тоску раскуривать,
To smoke away the sorrow,
Ночную скуку гнать,
To chase away night boredom,
Земные руки греть!
To warm earthly hands!
С груди безжалостной
Богов – пусть сброшена!
From pitiless bosom of
Gods – let me be thrown!
Любовь досталась мне
I was given a human love:
Любáя: бóльшая!
A bigger one!
С такими путами!
With such bonds!
С такими льготами!
With such privilege!
Пол-жизни? — Всю тебе!
Half a life? – All for you!
По-локоть? – Вот она!
Only to the elbow? – Here it is!
За то, что требуешь,
It is for you because you torment,
За то, что мучаешь,
Because you demand,
За то, что бедные
Because there are
Земные руки есть..
Poor earthly hands...
Тщета! – Не выверишь
It is futile to regulate everything
По амфибрахиям!
By amphibrach!
В груди пошире лишь
You only open the eyes
Глаза распахивай,
Wider in your breast,
Гляди: не Логосом
Not as Logos I came,
101
Пришла, не Вечностью:
Not as Eternity,
Пустоголовостью
But as your twittering
Твоей щебечущей
Empty-headedness
К груди...
To the bosom…
– Не властвовать!
– Not to dominate!
Без слов и нá слово –
To love trusting a word and without words –
Любить... Распластаннейшей
As a swallow
В мире – ласточкой!
Spread-eagled in the world!
Marina Tsvetayeva
All normal women usually retain infant traits in the adult age. However, if these
traits are contorted and as if absent, as it happens with spinsters, or absurdly
exaggerated, as it is with the “Empresses”, the development of the archetype of the
Beauty is blocked. As a rule, the experience of the first love helps a woman to undergo
transformation from the Infant into the Beauty and to part with ultra-narcissism as well as
with an illusion that she is the most precious gift for the world in general and for her
boyfriend in particular. What is left is natural childish naivety, simple capriciousness, pure
playfulness and straightforward coquetry.
Positive outcome of transformation at this stage consists in accepting the world
as existing apart from an individual and disinterested in him (neither loving him nor
rejecting), recognizing oneself as primarily responsible for one’s own life. The resulting
archetype is a Joyful playing Infant, a positive Inner Child.
Negative outcome manifests itself in banal narcissism, limited field of bodily
sensation being due to strictly egocentric narrow-mindedness and expectations from
the world of a priori love and care, “non-birth” of the woman as such and modelling of
an extremely negative image of herself and/or the world. The archetypal figures
representing this state are the Void, the Negative Inner Child, the Murdered Child, the
Doll.
Topos Two: the Beauty. This topos is characterized by awakening sensualism,
sexuality and inner depth of the soul. This gives the woman a feeling that she is beautiful
and has become a woman in the full sense of the word. The adaptation of the body to
sensuality is a painful process. It takes much time to learn to reach the desired relief
through bodily sensation. A woman ascribes to a man her own wild erotic fantasies
approaching rape and imagines he wishes only to satisfy with her help his beastly
102
instincts. The main expectation of a woman is that “after that” the man will marry her. It
is provoked by social taboo enforced on the act of defloration of a woman before
marriage. However, some women ignore this stereotype and find the opportunity to
realize her sexuality free from ties of marriage. But if the pursuit of sexual relations grows
into a habit, the development of the woman is arrested.
Having found her Hero, a woman sticks to him. If a girl has no chances to believe
in her charm because she is too fat, too tall, flap-eared or pimple-faced, feelings are
replaced by a respectable façade of wifehood. Such girls are most eager to marry –
anybody. Then their ugliness will be not so noticeable. Since it is most often not a love
match but a marriage of convenience, the husband is usually devoid of any heroism
and the wife nas nothing to esteem. They both throw away the chance of the most
important achievement – free all-round development allowing to appreciate their own
worth.
Many women think that their beauty and their singular appearance are heavenborn. But in reality the beauty is often the result of everyday physical and mental efforts
and creative work helping to transform a frog into Vasileesa the Beautiful. This
achievement is quite realizable for any hard-working woman.
However, fixation on the external side of existence is a characteristic feature of
women with pronounced symptoms of hysteria. On the other hand, it is hardly possible
to meet a woman having no relish for showing-off. As in case of topos one a woman
may be locked in an entirely dependent state (either as a spinster or as an “Empress”),
so at the stage of the Beauty there may be cases of “freezing up” in the middle of
transformation with resulting sex bombs or manlike “heroines” who identify themselves
with their Animuses. The first do not know the finitude of carnal pleasures, the second do
not suspect of their existence. Both the first and the second are doomed to destruction.
*
*
*
Из палатки вышла дева
A maiden came out of the tent
В васильковой нежной тоге,
Clad in a cornflower-blue gown.
Подошла к воде, как кошка,
She stalked to the water as a cat,
Омочила томно ноги
Wet her feet languishly
И медлительным движеньем
And with a lazy motion
Toгy сбросила на гравий, –
Dropped her gown on the pebbles –
Я не видел в мире жеста
I’d never seen a gesture
103
Грациозней и лукавей!
More graceful and more saucy!
Описать ее фигуру –
To depict her figure
Надо б красок сорок ведер...
Would require some forty pails of paint…
Даже чайки изумились
Even the gulls were dazed by
Форме рук ее и бедер...
The shape of her arms and thighs…
Человеку же казалось,
While the man was feeling
Будто пьяный фавн украдкой
As if a drunken faun
Водит медленно по сердцу
Touched his heart slowly and furtively
Теплой бархатной перчаткой.
With a warm velvet glove.
Наблюдая хладнокровно
I was watching this marvel imperturbably
Сквозь камыш за этим дивом,
Through the bulrush,
Я затягивался трубкой
Puffing at my pipe
В размышлении ленивом:
Пляж безлюден, как Сахара, Для кого ж сие творенье
And wondering idly
For whom this lovely creature
Took such impressive poses
Принимает в море позы
On the beach as deserted
Высочайшего давленья?
As Sahara.
И ответило мне солнце:
“Ты дурак! В яру безвестном
The sun gave me the answer:
“You fool! In a desolete gully
Мальва цвет свой раскрывает
A mallow blossoms out
С бескорыстием чудесным...
Expecting no special interest to itself…
В этой щедрости извечной
This eternal generosity
Смысл божественного свитка...
Reveals the meaning of God’s design…
Так и девушки, мой милый,
Likewise, my friend, the girls
Грациозны от избытка”.
Are graceful owing to exuberance of life.”
Я зевнул и усмехнулся...
I grinned, yawning…
Так и есть: из-за палатки
It was as I expected: from behind the tent
Вышел хлыщ в трико гранатном,
A dude in balaustine tights appeared
Вскинул острые лопатки.
Squaring his bony sholders.
И ему навстречу дева
Приняла такую позу,
Что из трубки,
On seeing him, the maiden
Took a pose so undescribable
That I sucked a double dose
104
поперхнувшись,
Я глотнул двойную дозу...
From my pipe,
Which nearly did me in…
Sasha Cherny. The Plasticity
Both the neglect of bodily sensation for the sake of abstract feelings and the
substitution of sexuality for heartfulness cast into desolation other people, namely, men
and children. In this case, the biological aesthetics either predominates over everything
else or is totally absent as such. While for the Hero individuation begins with the
wakening of pride inciting him to fight the Dragon, the Beauty experiences the
awakening of sensuality that leads her to the meeting with the Beast and sacrificing
herself to it. At each symbolic point of individuation something is lost (life, innocence)
but the Ego acquires instead a new quality, manliness or womanliness. Performing his
exploits, the Hero loses his pride (belief in his omnipotence) but becomes the tsar of his
inner world. The Beauty experiences a fall from grace and a period of abstinence and
suffering, loses her chastity but acquires motherhood. The tale about the Beauty and
the Beast shows that a woman can endeavour to become a Beauty (that is, to go
along the natural, non-heroic way of becoming) on condition that there is a close
affinity between her and her father who gets her off to a journey sending her, in fact, to
essay her powers in relations with a man. Another requirement is that she should
renounce the authority of her mother who possesses qualities the daughter is yet to
develop. She must experience the state of being abandoned by her mother and
perhaps refuse to be her rival – but at the cost of her own life.
At this stage of identity development a woman casts off the second illusion of
love, a persuasion that men love only beautiful women and hunt only their body. At first
she sees a man as a primitive sexy violator (a beast) but gradually begins to perceive
his personality.
It is not to be supposed that everything that happens with a woman in the period
that we call the stage of the Beauty (and first of all defloration) has a purely biological
foundation. Cardinal events occur in her Soul. The development of a woman at this
stage consists not only in the adaptation of her body to aroused sensuality. She revises
her attitude to herself and the world and understands that biological aestheticism is
only one side of her existence and to fully realize the potential of the woman’s Psyche
she must develop omnifacetedly and start from this point on.
105
***
The Maiden caught me in the Wild
Where I was dancing merrily
She put me in her Cabinet
And locked me up with a golden Key
This Cabinet is formed of Gold
And Pearl and Crystal shining bright
And within it opens into a World
And a little lovely Moony Night
Another England there I saw
Another London with its Tower
Another Thames and other Hills
And another pleasant Surrey Bower
Another Maiden like herself
Translucent lovely shining clear
Threefold each in the other closd
O what a pleasant trembling fear
O what a smile a threefold Smile
Filld me that like a flame I burnd
I bent to Kiss the lovely Maid
And found a Threefold Kiss returnd
I strove to seize the inmost Form
With ardor fierce and hands of flame
But burst the Crystal Cabinet
And like a Weeping Babe became
A weeping Babe upon the wild
And Weeping Woman pale reclind
And in the outward air again
I filld with woes the passing Wind
William Blake. The Crystal Cabinet
106
The positive outcome of transformation at this stage consists in wholesome and
in-depth growth (from feelings to bodily sensation), becoming aware of and accepting
one’s own sexuality which opposes fear and control and is included into the general
topos of the Soul as its natural element (sexuality founded on heartfulness). It is
impersonated in the archetypes of the Beauty and Fair Lady radiant with kindness.
On the negative pole are the archetypes of the Beast and of the Heroic Woman
devoid of any sexuality, competing with men and hating other women. Her
distinguishing features are aggressiveness, sexuality and tenacity in her career. She stirs
up destruction and conflicts around her and stifles all creative impulses.
It is difficult to overestimate the significance of the stage of mastering the
archetype of the Beauty in the becoming of a woman. It is especially important for
Russian women oriented by socio-cultural norms and values to the heroic mode of
development. The process of female individuation implies mastering of the Animus that
is projected onto surrounding people and determines a search for a partner.
*
*
*
В быстро сдернутых перчатках
The gloves drawn off quickly
Сохранился оттиск рук,
Retain the form of the hands,
Черный креп в негибких складках
Black crepe with its rigid creases
Очертил на плитах круг.
Forms a circle on the floor plates.
В тихой мгле исповедален
In the quiet shades of the confessionals
Робкий шепот, чья-то речь;
Somebody’s voice, a humble whisper is
heard;
Строгий профиль мой печален
The light of trembling candles
От лучей дрожащих свеч.
Makes my clear-cut profile look sad
Я смотрю игру мерцаний
I’m looking at the blinks
По чекану медных бронз
Playing on hammered copper
И не слышу увещаний,
Что мне шепчет старый ксендз.
And don’t hear admonitions
Whispered by the old priest.
Поправляя гребень в косах,
Readjusting the comb in my plaits,
Я слежу мои мечты, –
I’m running back over my dreams, –
Все грехи в его вопросах
In his questions,
Так наивны и просты.
All the sins look so naïve.
107
Ад теряет обаянье,
The hell loses all its charm,
Жизнь становится тиха, –
Life becomes so still, –
Но так сладостно сознанье
A sense of the Fall, however,
Первородного греха...
Is very sweet…
Сherubina de Gabriack. The Confession
Topos Three: the Mother. The entire four-stage cycle should be by no means
considered as a series of interlocking steps. Every phase of transformation has its own
destination. Neither should it be imagined that negative mothers are the result of failure
in the identity development at previous stages. No woman who has successfully
managed with the stages of infancy and bodily sensation is out of danger of becoming
a negative mother. Each of woman’s archetypes needs a particular effort to be made
for its embodiment in her psyche. The Negative Mother and the Positive Mother are two
sides of the same archetype (the negative one related to the Shadow), like the Infant
and the Doll, the Beauty and the Beast. Experiencing some traits of the negative
mother and integrating them is the same regular developmental task of a woman as
putting up with loneliness at the Infant stage or acceptance of the ugly and the horrid
at the stage of the Beauty.
*
*
*
Отчего не бросалась,
– How could you, Mariushka,
Марьюшка, в реку ты.
Not to fling yourself into the river,
Отчего ж не замолкла навсегда ты.
Into a great silence
Как забрали милого в рекруты, в рекруты. When your dear boy was
Как ушел твой суженый во солдаты.
Я слезами горькими горницу вымою.
И на годы долгие дверь закрою.
Наклонюсь над озером ивою, ивою,
recruited,
When your betrothed one was taken to the army?
– I’ll wash my ben with bitter tears,
I’ll close the door for long years.
I’ll lean over the lake like a willow-tree
Высмотрю, как в зеркале, - что с тобою. To see in its mirror your destiny.
Травушка-муравушка сочная, мятная,
Без тебя ломается, ветры дуют.
The grass, juicy with mint,
Is broken by the wind without you. Долюшка
солдатская ратная, ратная. The warriors are left to wayward fate. Что, как пуля грудь твою не
минует?
What if a bullet won’t miss your chest? Тропочку глубокую протопчу по полю,
I’ll tread a firm path through the field, И венок свой свадебный впрок совью,
I’ll twine
108
a wedding wreath beforehand, Дивну косу девичью - до полу, до полу –
wondrous plait floor-length Сберегу для милого с проседью.
beloved one.
I’ll save a
For my grizzled
Вот возьмут кольцо мое с белого блюдица, They’ll take my
wedding ring to
fortune-tell,
Хоровод завертится, - грустно в нем,
They’ll be reeling in a khorovod,
but it’ll be sad.
Пусть мое гадание сбудется, сбудется,
вернется суженый вешним днем.
Let my wish come true, come true, Пусть
Let my betrothed one return with a
spring
Пой, как прежде весело, идучи к дому ты,
tide.
When coming home sing as merrily
as ever,
Тихим словом ласковым утешай.
Сomfort him with a soft affectionate word.
А житье невестино – омуты, омуты...
Марьюшка, поспешай.
The bride’s life is like a whirlpool… Поджидает
Mariushka is waiting for you, hurry up.
Vladimir Vysotsky. Maria’s Lament
This phase of transformation is characterized not only by becoming a mother
biologically but even to a greater degree by developing such maternal traits of
woman’s soul as giving, care, warmth, acceptance. However, often the traits of a
negative mother are developed instead. Cold-blooded, depriving (killing), rejecting
Negative Mother naturally hates children. Like the Murdered Infant, the Heroic Woman
and the Beast, she is a dead-end on the way to woman’s identity.
Women with a typical vertical split denying they have any negative traits (and
hence demonstrating them unconsciously) are called in psychological literature
“neurotic mothers” who are throwing themselves from one excess to the opposite one
now loving now hating, being now super-positive and virtuous now super-negative and
punishing severely. The amplitude of their split immeasurably exceeds emotional
fluctuations of a normal person who may from time to time hide in his inner world but
does no harm to psychological health of the others.
Another negative outcome is “the schizophrenic mother” with the horizontal split
who is no less ambivalent in her relations with her child or her partner than a neurotic
mother but send simultaneously two controversial messages through different channels
of communication, voicing her love to a child and pushing him away.
Identity development at this stage obeys the same rule as at the previous ones: if
109
the way to a joyous playful Infant opens with the revival of the murdered Infant and the
way to the Beauty – with acceptance of one’s own Beast, the transformation into the
Positive Mother is possible only through the Negative Mother.
Having assimilated the Shadow sides of archetypal forms a woman acquires
ability for natural maternal love without which the seeds of self-appreciation and
humanness will not sprout in her children. “They will be known by their fruit,” says the
Bible. A child is the primary fruit of the marriage of two people loving each other. If a
woman failed to become a biological mother, she can nevertheless experience the
necessary transformation in close relations with other children, trying in this case, so to
say, to merge her personality with the personality of the child, to continue her own
being in him (in his consciousness, his values and transformations). Of course, it cannot
be compared with the maternal feelings of a woman bearing children from a man she
loves.
*
Прошлогодних сокровищ моих
*
*
I have enough treasures of the past
Мне надолго, к несчастью, хватит. to last me longer than I need, or
Знаешь сам, половины из них
Злая память никак не истратит:
Набок сбившийся куполок,
want.
You know as well as I… malevolent memory
won’t let go of half of them:
a modest church, with its gold cupola
Грай вороний и вопль паровоза,
slightly askew; a harsh chorus of сrows;
the whistle of a train;
И как будто отбывшая срок
a birch tree haggard in a field
Ковылявшая в поле береза,
as if it has served the term allotted to it;
И огромных библейских дубов
Полунóчная тайная сходка,
a secret midnight conclave
of monumental Bible-oaks;
И из чьих-то приплывшая снов
and a tiny rawboat that comes drifting out
И почти затонувшая лодка...
Побелив эти пашни чуть-чуть,
предзимье уже побродило,
непроглядную муть
of somebody’s dreams, slowly foundering.
Winter has already loitered here,
Там
lightly powdering these fields,
casting an impenetrable haze
Дали все в
Ненароком оно превратило.
that fills the world as far as the horizon.
И казалось, что после конца
I used
to think that after the end
Никогда ничего не бывает...
there’s
nothing, simply nothing at all.
Кто же бродит опять у крыльца
Then who’s that
110
wandering by the porch
name?
И по имени нас окликает?
Kто приник к ледяному стеклу
frosted pane? И рукою, как веткою, машет?..
branch? А в ответ в паутинном углу
again and calling us by
Whose face is pressed against the
What hand out there in waving like a
By way of reply in that cobwebbed corner
Зайчик солнечный в зеркале пляшет. a sunstuck tatter dances in the mirror.
Anna Akhmatova. March Elegy
Having dispelled the third illusion of love a mature woman understands that
maternal love is not the only predestination of a woman and it cannot be a substitute
for love to a man. Such a woman will not devote all her life exclusively to children
smothering them with her “love” but will help them, when they achieve psychological
independence, to win social independence as well. As for herself, she will not lose her
physical charms and will find the possibilities of further development.
The main positive outcome of this stage is the affirmation of life full of vitality
which is represented by the archetype of the Great Mother.
Opposing it is the transformation into the Negative Mother.
Topos Four: the Charismatic Woman, the Chthonic Mother, Sofia. At this stage, a
woman reaches a new, spiritual level of existence. The fact that it is numbered as the
fourth does not mean that it comes only after three other stages. The pattern of
archetypal transformations considered is structured rather as an open frame with four
toposes, each of them undergoing its own independent transformations that may go
on simultaneously. The sequence of transformations follows the logic of consciousness
that cannot perceive them as taking place at the same time.
Jung introduced the archetype of the Chthonic Mother which is analogous to
the Wise Old Man but primordial nature is more pronounced in it.
The term charisma denotes an inner source of light and spiritual power whose
function is to promote creation, consolidation, growth and development. A charismatic
personality is a phenomenon far rarer than the Mother or the Beauty. The Psyche of a
woman must work hard to experience a feeling of incomparable pleasure of dashing
flying-off and ineffable peace in the harmony of being. To reach this state of
perfection, a woman has to suffer a lot and overcome the suffering. If she manages to
survive, she will find this inner source; if she loses her faith, her hope and her love, she will
111
be doomed to become a true Witch, a Shadow side of the Chthonic Mother
archetype.
In full accord with mythology, the witch is nice and beautiful in the daytime (in
the Persona, in self-consciousness) but beastly and ugly at night (in the Shadow, in the
unconscious). This type of a woman was brilliantly impersonated on the screen by
Sharon Stone.
It is awful if enormous potential the woman possesses becomes an instrument of
evil and murder. But to avoid this danger, it is not enough to turn away from darkness to
light. With each new transformation the power of the Shadow part of the unconscious
grows and it is harder and harder for a woman to hold the torch of light and life in her
hands.
A bright and gifted woman who has come through trials but failed to recognize a witch
in herself will become in all probability a witch in reality. A developing woman who
boldly meets the witch face to face will most likely take the witch’s power and
transform it with the help of creative force of the Spirit.
*
*
*
Rapelle-toi Barbara
Remember Barbara
Il pleuvait sans cesse sur Brest ce jour-là
It was raining nonstop in Brest that day
Et tu marchais souriante
and you walked smiling
Épanouie ravie ruisselante
artless delighted dripping wet
Sans la pluie
in the rain
Rapelle-toi Barbara
Remember Barbara
Il pleuvait sans cesse sur Brest
It was raining nonstop in Brest
Et je t’ai croisée rue de Siam
and I saw you on rue de Siam
Tu souriais
You were smiling
Et moi je souriais de même
and I smiled too
Rapelle-toi Barbara
Remember Barbara
Toi que je ne connaissais pas
You whom I did not know
Toi que ne me connaissas pas
You who did not know me
Rapelle-toi
Remember
Rapelle-toi quaand même ce jeur-là
Remember that day all the same
N’oublie pas
Don’t forget
112
Un homme sous un porche s’abritait
Et il a crié ton nom
Barbara
A man was sheltering under a porch
and he called your name
Barbara
Et tu as couru veis lui sous la pluie
and you ran toward him in the rain
Ruisselante ravie épanouie
Dripping water delighted artless
Et tu t’es jetée dans ses bras
and you threw herself in his arms
Rapelle-toi cela Barbara
Et ne m’en veux pas si je te totoie
Je dis tu a tous ceux que j’aime
Même si je ne les ai vus qu’une seule fois
Remember that Barbara
and don’t be angry if I talk to you
I talk to all those I love
even if I’ve seen them only once
Je dis tu a tous ceux qui s’aiment
I talk to all those who love
Même si je ne les connais pas
even if I don’t know them
Rapelle-toi Barbara
N’oublie pas
Cette pluie sage et heureuse
Remember Barbara
Don’t forget
that wise happy rain
Sur ton visage heureux
on your happy face
Sur cette ville heureuse
in that happy town
Cette plui sur la mer
That rain on the sea
Sur l’arsenal
on the arsenal
Sur le bateau d’Ouessant
on the boat from Ouessant
Oh Barbara
Оh Barbara
Quelle connerie la guerre
What an idiot war
Qu’es-tu devenue maitenant
What has happened to you now
Sous cette pluie de fer
In this rain of iron
De feu d’acier de sang
of fire of steel of blood
Et celui qui te serrait dans ses bras
Amoureusement
Est-il mort disparu ou bien encore vivant
Oh Barbara
Il pleut sans cesse sur Brest
Comme il pleuvait avant
Mais ce n’est plus pareil et tout est abîmé
and the one who held you tight in his arms
lovingly
is he dead vanished or maybe still alive
Oh Barbara
It is raining nonstop in Brest
as it rained before
But it’s not the same and everyithing
113
is ruined
C’est une pluie de deuil terrible et désolée It’s a rain of mourning terrible and
desolate
Ce n’est même plus l’orage
It’s not even a storm any more
De fer d’acier de sang
of iron of steel of blood
Tout simplement des nuages
Qui crèvent comme des chiens
Des chiens qui disparaissent
Au fil de l’eau sur Brest
Et vont pourir an loin
Au loin tres loin de Brest
Dont il ne reste rien.
Just simply clouds
that die like dogs
Dogs that disappear
along the water in Brest
and are going to rot far away
far far away from Brest
where there is nothing left
Jacques Prévert. Barbara
The identity achieved at the toposes of the Charismatic Woman and the
Chthonic Mother opens before a woman her own Path of free creation. On the one
hand, it allows to fully use all resources of the Ego, but, on the other, it requires greater
and greater efforts with every step. It is the Charismatic Woman who is able to realize
her inner potential and learn other forms of being outside the time and space of her
life.
At this stage of transformation a woman parts with
the fourth illusion and
understands that her great potential is not limitless and her singularity is not the reason
to despise the lazy and the inactive ones. The sensing of her own colossal strength
tempts a woman to believe that she is gifted with the character of sublimity. However, it
does not mean that one has the right to be scornful of those who do no dare to be
masters of their fate.
At this stage a woman experiences a transformation and recognizes there is a
source of spiritual power in herself that makes her able to establish conditions for
spiritual development of others and to create, in the natural course of her life, the
products of her spirit’s new being. At previous stages, the essence of spiritual
development consisted in the antinomy between the will to stay passive and the will to
act (to struggle, to overcome obstacles). Extreme patience, forgiveness and ability to
wait are in woman’s nature while men personify the will to assail difficulties.
114
Positive outcome of the stage is worthy co-autonomous spiritual life, Hieros
Gamos. The corresponding archetypes are the Charismatic Woman, the Chthonic
Mother, Sophia.
Negative outcome is despair and destruction represented by the archetype of
the Witch.
A Fairytale of the First Illusion of Love
Once upon a time there lived a girl. She was an orphan and there was nobody to take
care of her. She felt very lonely and unwanted. When her loneliness became too
painful, she began dreaming about a valorous knight or a rich prince who would come
some day and make her happy in a jiffy because he would be bound to see her
ethereal beauty, her holiness and delicacy. Dreaming thus, she paid no attention to
ordinary boys living nearby. Finally she chose a husband at random and was as
unhappy as ever because her husband was not a prince. (Another version: So she
vainly waited for her prince to her death, and her life was very dull.)
A Fairytale of the Second Illusion of Love
Once upon a time there lived a girl who was ugly. She had only one eye and no mouth
at all. In addition, her legs were crooked and she was lame. For all her leniency and
kindness, she was doomed to be unloved. One day an old woman, having disengaged
from her wig, her wooden leg and a set of false teeth, explained to the girl that her life
would change radically as soon as she became two-eyed, long-legged, long-necked
and her mouth would be full-teethed. The girl started looking for a wizard who would
transform her and at last she found one, and he worked the miracle. Soon she hooked
a husband and thought herself quite happy. True, her happiness was somewhat
overclouded by the fact that her husband was only able to do his matrimonial duties
by means of a phallus instead of his own penis, so, alas, they could not have children…
A Fairytale of the Third Illusion of Love
Once upon a time there lived a girl. She lived together with her mother and her
grandmother but had neither a father nor a grandfather. Mother loved her daughter as
much as grandmother loved mother. By the way, mother had 24 brothers and 40 sisters.
So that her daughter would not feel lonely, she bore for her a little brother, then a little
sister, then another sister, and so on… 84 years passed. Mother brought forth 40 boys
115
and 43 girls. She loved them all and was afraid that they would feel lonely because
they were so few as compared with the totality of other people. The only thing that
becalmed her was that the girls, on having grown up, began at once to bear children:
the first one bore 6 boys and 6 girls, the next one 5 boys and 5 girls, and so on. But the
boys wasted their lives, alas…
PATHS OF INDIVIDUATION: THE HERO
First of all, I would like to emphasize/indicate that the point in distinguishing a particular
archetype of the Beauty is not to oppose two different ways of individuation for men
and for women but rather, having revealed obvious differences between the two
companions, find a “Joint Way” unifying them
C. Jung admitted that the woman’s path of individuation still stays vague and
mysterious resembling a labirynth as compared with the clear path of man’s
individuation, as straight and assertive as an arrow darted from a bow.
The way of the Hero has been widely discussed in the literature by
psychotherapists and analytical psychologists. It is clear now that this way, as it is
described, is the way for men exclusively. For women, it is extremely dangerous and
often fatal. A heroic woman has masculine traits. She has been confused by gender
issues and has lost her sensuality. The same is true for an effeminate Handsome man
who has failed to separate himself from his mother, to trust his strength and put up a
good fight.
Woman’s personal transformations are associated first of all with their relations
with men while men’s identity is developed in opposition to the World at large. Unlike a
woman, a man gives battle to the entire Universe, his mission is to win and become the
Hero. For a woman, a significant and real world is that where She, He and children
dwell. The universe seldom moves her.
Thus heroic achievements are the keynote of man’s becoming. The way to the
masculine identity consists of four stages: the Infant, the Hero, the Father and the Wise
Old Man (the Mana-personality). While the first and the last toposes of this four-part
frame structure of the identity have much in common with corresponding stages of
woman’s development, the second and the third ones differ radically.
Topos One: the Infant. A man whose Psyche is in an infantile state seeks for a
woman older than himself who would play the role of his Mother. He is ready to be her
116
slave and behaves like an infant demanding warmth, food, water and love. At this
stage of transformation he looks up at a woman like at an idol to whom he must bend
the knee. He imagines her to be innocent and naïve though in reality she can be far
from it.
An example is Prince Myshkin (from Dostoevsky’s novel The Idiot) whose love
towards Nastassya Filippovna is in many respects infantile.
An infant is a slave of his illusions, his perception of the reality is distorted, still “out
of the mouth of babes…” At this stage, male egocentrism is in fact an introjection, a
narcissistic extension assuming the form of the woman a man has appropriated. Men
unable to outgrow this condition stay stuck in it as mudge boys, Pygmalions or Blue
Beards.
*
В середине сентября погода
*
*
The weather in the middle of September
Переменчива и холодна,
Is cold and changeful;
Небо, точно занавес. Природа
The sky hangs like a curtain, and all nature
Театральной нежности полна.
Is filled with theatrical subtlety.
Каждый камень, каждая былинка,
Every stone and every grass-blade
Что раскачиваются едва,
Vibrating lightly in the breeze,
Словно персонажи Метерлинка Talk… Like characters in Maeterlinck’s plays,
Произносят странные слова:
L…
– Я люблю и умираю...
– Погляди, душа как воск, как дым
Say very strange things:
– I love, I’m dying…
– Look, my soul is melting like wax or
– Скоро к голубому раю
– Soon we’ll turn into swans
– Лебедями полетим.
– Flying to the azure heaven
Осенью, когда туманны взоры,
Путаница в мыслях, в сердцах лед,
In autumn, when your eyes are hazy,
When you’re in a muddle and your heart
is chilled,
Сладко слушать эти разговоры,
It’s sweet to listen to these talks
Глядя в прaзелень стоячих вод.
Looking into slack green waters,
С чуть заметным головокруженьем
Проходить по желтому ковру,
smoke
To pace the yellow carpet
Feeling a bit giddy,
117
Зажигать рассеянным движеньем
To light up absent-mindedly
Папиросу на ветру.
A cigarette in the wind.
Georgy Ivanov
Every man is to some extent an infant acting out weakness from time to time
and demanding from a woman maternal care and warmth (behaving like Puer, an
eternal youth).
The positive outcome of the transformation at this stage is the acceptance of
one’s isolation in the world, abandoning one’s home to wander endlessly in search of
oneself and the meaning of life. It is represented by the archetypes of Playful Infant and
Positive Inner Child.
The negative outcome is eternal attachment to a woman-mother and selfdestruction. The corresponding archetypes are Puer, Emptiness, the Negative Inner
Child, the Murdered Infant, the Robot.
Topos two: the Hero. At this stage of transformation a man acquires physical and
intellectual strength, the latter basing primarily on his skill to overcome obstacles, which
is the distinguishing feature of man’s path as compared with the woman’s. The principal
peculiarities of male four-part frame identity development are summarized below.
The path of the Hero is a popular subject of heroic myths. All the examples may
be roughly subdivided into two groups: myths describing the positive way that leads to
victory, success and awards and those describing the disastrous negative way. The
common motives of the positive way in Greek myths (Heracles, Hermes, Apollo,
Odyssey, Persues and others) are as follows:
 fighting against a Dragon: gathering of physical strength allowing the Hero to
vanquish and kill monsters;
 friendship: making friends and allies who help the Hero on his Path;
 love: meeting with a Beautiful Woman (who becomes his chosen); salvation and
resurrection after deceptions, betrayals and other trials in relations both with men
and women;
 conquest: development of intellectual power allowing the Hero to conquer the
world;
 reigning: marriage, ascending the throne, winning God’s favour (who helps the Hero
along his way) and sacred initiation.
On the positive path, the Hero is born (and/or reborn) and develops his will and
118
heroic qualities. His Path is motivated socially but implies some aspects of man’s
individuation which requires the integration of the archetypes of the Shadow, the
Anima and the Wise Old Man as well as using resources of the Self.
The negative path leads the Hero to ruin. While there is only one archetypal way
of becoming the Hero, the opportunities to perish are plenty. Here are some of them:
 malevolent fate of loneliness, narcissism and pride (Narcissus, Bellerofontes);
 death due to betrayal (Theseus);
 death because of love (Orpheus);
 the curse of eternal suffering as a punishment for deceitfulness (Sisyphus).
Death of a Hero is as natural as his entire life; it is a variation of the archetypal
motif of death and rebirth. On his way of developing heroic Ego-consciousness the
Hero repeatedly meets death. Dying, he parts with his previous personality and acquires
a new content of the unconscious which opens new prospects before him.
*
*
*
О моя дорогая, моя несравненная леди,
Ледокол мой печален и штурман мой смотрит на юг,
И, представьте себе, что звезда из созвездия Лебедь
Непосредственно в медную форточку смотрит мою,
Непосредственно в эту же форточку ветер влетает,
Называвшийся в разных местах то муссон, то пассат.
Он влетает и с явной усмешкою письма листает,
Не отправленные, потому что пропал адресат.
O my dear, my unequalled Lady,
My icebreaker’s unhappy, the navigator is looking to the south,
And, only imagine, a star from Swan constellation
Is peeping straight into my little copper window,
And straight into the same window the wind is flying in
That’s called monsoon or trade wind in different places.
On flying in, it leaves\fs the letters with a bald grin;
The letters are unmailed because the addressee is lost.
Где же, детка моя, я тебя проморгал и не понял,
119
Где, подружка моя, разошелся с тобой на пути,
Где, гитарой бренча, прошагал мимо тихих симфоний,
Полагая, что эти концерты еще впереди?
И беспечно я лил на баранину соус ткемали,
И картинки смотрел по утрам на обоях чужих,
И меня принимали, которые не понимали,
И считали, что счастье является качеством лжи.
When did I footle you away, my baby, where did I misunderstand you?
When did we begin to drift apart, my girl?
When did I miss gentle symphonies, clanging my guitar,
Thinking these concerts were yet to come?
I sprayed the mutton with tkemali nonchalantly
And in the morning eyed pictures on the wallpaper in other people’s homes
These people entertained me not understanding me
And believed that happiness is an attribute of lie.
Одиночество шлялось за мной, и в волнистых витринах
Отражалось печальной фигурой в потертом плаще,
За фигурой по мокрым асфальтам катились машины,
Абсолютно пустые, без всяких шоферов вообще.
И в пустынных вагонах метро я летел через горы,
И в безлюдных портах провожал и встречал сам себя.
И водили со мной хороводы одни непогоды,
И все было на этой земле без тебя, без тебя.
Loneliness haunted me and was mirrored in corrugated show windows
As a melancholy figure in a threadbare raincoat
Behind which cars were wheeling on wet asphalt,
They were absolutely empty, without drivers at all.
I was flying in empty subway cars among mountain tops,
I was meeting myself and seeing myself off in peopleless sea ports,
Rough weather being my only partner in dancing,
And everything on this planet was happening without you, yes, without you.
Кто-то рядом ходил и чего-то бубнил - я не слышал,
120
Телевизор мне тыкал красавиц в лицо - я ослеп,
И, надеясь на старого друга и горные лыжи,
Я пока пребываю на этой пустынной земле.
О, моя дорогая, моя несравненная леди,
Ледокол мой буксует во льдах, выбиваясь из сил,
Золотая подружка моя из созвездия Лебедь,
Не забудь, упади, обнадежь, догадайся, спаси.
Somebody tagged along with me droning something – I did not hear him,
TV set thrust beauties in my face – I did not see them,
And so I pass days away in this solitary land
Laying my hopes on an old friend of mine and on downhill skiingSKIES.
O my dear, my unequalled Lady,
My icebreaker is overstraining its strength skidding in the ice
My golden girlfriend from Swan constellation,
Don’t forget me, fathom it out and fall down, give me hope, save me.
Yuri Vizbor
The positive outcome of the transformation at this stage is a logical step on the
positive Path of the Hero. A strong Ego has been developed; the man achieves a great
social significance realizing the potential of the archetype of the Hero.
The negative outcome may be diagnosed in the case when, for inner reasons,
the actualization of a strong Ego becomes impossible. A weak Ego is developed
instead that may have one or several flaws:
 inability to discern the boundaries between oneself and the world (“The world is
myself”);
 absence of will to fight, non-aggressiveness (“I am too clever for that”);
 absence of will to go in for intellectual occupation, phallic infatuation (“I am a sexual
giant”);
 inability for self-criticism (“I am a superman, all the rest are only my shadows”);
 inverted (feminine) gender role identification.
Corresponding archetypes are the Handsome Man, the Genius (the Superman),
the Dragon.
121
*
*
*
По-осеннему деревья налегке,
Trees are in light autumn clothing,
фиолетовые пятна на реке,
the river is in violet blurs,
Керосиновые пятна на воде,
The water is in kerosene blots
ты сказала мне тихонько: “Быть беде...”.
You told me in a low tone:
“I forebode a disaster…”
Я позабыл твое лицо,
I forgot how your face looks,
я пьян был к полдню,
I was drunk by noon,
Я подарил твое кольцо,
I gave somebody your wedding ring –
кому - не помню,
I don’t remember to whom,
Из шутовства, из хвастовства
Out of buffoonery, out of braggery
в то балаганье
among all that penny gaff
Я бросил все твои слова
I nailed all your words
на поруганье,
to the barn-door,
Качалась пьяная мотня
The drunken crowd was swaying to and fro
вокруг прибойно,
around us,
И ты спросила у меня:
You asked me:
“Тебе не больно?”
“Doesn’t it hurt you?”
Не поймешь, не то январь, не то апрель,
It’s hard to make out whether it was January or April,
Не поймешь, не то метель, не то капель.
Whether it was a snow-blast or thawing.
На реке - не ледостав, не ледоход,
The river was neither freezing up nor breaking the ice,
Старый год, а ты сказала - Новый год,
It was still the old year – “New Year,” you said.
Их век выносит нa гора,
И - марш по свету,
Одно отличье - номера,
Другого нету,
The age casts them up like burrow grassed
And sends them batting around,
They may be distinguished only
By their numbers,
122
О, этот серый частокол –
O, the grey picket fence,
Двадцатый опус,
Opus 20,
Где каждый день, как протокол,
Every day here is like protocol,
А ночь - как обыск,
Every night like a skin search,
Где все зазря, и все не то,
Here everything is in vain and amiss
И все не прочно,
Everything is frail,
Который час, и то никто
Nobody can tell even
Не знает точно.
The exact time.
Лишь неизменен календарь
Only the calendar is dependable
В приметах века –
Showing the signs of the century –
Ночная улица, фонарь,
The night, the streetlamp,
Канал, аптека...
The canal, the pharmacy…
В этот вечер, не сумевший стать зимой,
At that night which did not succeed in becoming winter
Мы дороги не нашли к себе домой,
We could not find the way to our home,
Я спросил тебя: “А может все не зря?”
I asked you: “Maybe all that is not in vain?”
Ты ответила старинным: “Быть нельзя”.
You answered: “Impossible”.
A. Galich. The New Year
Topos three: The Tsar. The main characteristic feature of this stage of
transformation is a sort of “messianism” of a man taking responsibilty. Such man “reigns”
and “rules” over the world. His biological fatherhood does not matter so much for him
as motherhood does for a woman. The most important points of biological fatherhood
are giving birth to a son, his bringing up and initiation. In his son, a man sees his own
continuation as well as prolongation of his Path. The son, however, must sustain an
intense struggle with the Father before Father will give him over his regal baton
(phallus), a symbol of his will to rule over his self and the world. Socially, fatherhood is
objectified in the possibility to affect social events through sons, thus making every man
a sort of a real ruler. The Tsar rules over that part of the world which has been
123
conquered by the Hero. He has the woman given to the Hero as an award for his
exploits. In other words, the Tsar realizes himself in the world through his will, approved
and supported by his subjects. Realized leadership of a man is the essence of this
transformation. True positive leader is sure to win because he trusts his power and has
no doubts of his success.
The faults of the negative fatherhood/leadership in relations with sons or other
men are manifested either as their downright suppression or as avoiding any fights for
fear of being defeated and thrown down from his throne. The latter means that this
coward fleeing the battlefield has been beaten once and failed to recover. Such men
are usually outcasted from the ranks of Real Heroes, so they prefer women’s company
where they like to tell stories about their pseudo-victories and conquests. As a rule,
negative men have negative domineering mothers and weak despirited fathers who
are eternal mudge boys and symbiotics.
*
*
*
Tu n’as rien compris
You haven’t understood a thing
S’il te faut des trains
If it takes trains
Pour fuir vers l’aventure
Et de blancs navires
For you to flee towards adventure
And white ships
Qui puissent t’emmener
For you to be carried away
Chercher le soleil
To search for the sun
á mettre dans tes yeux
To place in your eyes
Chercher des chansons
To search for songs
Que tu puisses chanter
So you are able to sing
Alors…
In that case…
S’il te faut l’aurore
If it take the dawn
Pour croire au lendemain
For you to believe in tomorrow
Et des lendemains
And tomorrow
Pour pouvoir espérer
For you to have hope
Retrouver l’espoir
To rediscover the hope
Qui t’a glisse des mains
That slipped from your grasp
Retrouver la main
Rediscover the hand
Que ta main a quittée
That your hand left behind
124
Alors…
In that case…
S’il te faut des mots prononcés par des vieux
If it takes the words
Uttered by the old
Pour te justifier tous tes rencements
For you to justify
Everything you’ve forsaken
Si la poésie por toi
If poetry to you
N’est plus qu’un jeu
Is nothing but a game
Si tente ta vie
N’est qu’un vieillissement
Alors…
If your whole life
Is nothing but getting old
In that case…
S’il te faut l’ennui
If it takes boredom
Pour te sembler profond
For you to seem profound
Et le bruit des villes
And the noise of the cities
Pour saouler tes remors
For you to drown your regrets
Et puis des faiblesses
And weaknesses
Pour te paraître bon
For you to feel good
Et puis des colères
And anger
Pour te paraître fort
For you to feel strong
Alors…
In that case in that case
Alors, tu n’as rien compris
You haven’t understood a thing
Jacques Brel. S’il te faut (If it takes)
Positive outcome of the transformation at this stage consists in the integration of
physical and spiritual strength. It is represented by the archetypes of of the Tsar and the
Great Father.
The negative outcome is negative fatherhood that is epitomized in the figure of
Oedipus (let grandpa Freud forgive us, but Oedipus it is).
Topos four: the Wise Old Man, the Mana-personality, the Senex. The term “Manapersonality” is borrowed from Jung who used it to denote a mysterious phenomenon of
the integration of bipolar partition personalities: a savage and a godlike being. Mana is
an autonomous centre assimilating unconscious contents and is of a universal worth for
125
it embodies great truth and great love. In other words, when they say ”God within us”
they
mean
Mana.
Jung
and
the
post-Jungians
demonstrated
that
depth
psychotherapy and appreciation of one’s path of individuation lead to constant
augmentation of unconscious material. It is only the transcendent power of Manacentre that is able to hold and integrate this huge bulk of material and only in
approaching this centre one can perceive one’s own wholeness and the harmony of
being.
Another embodiment of this archetype in Jung’s mythology is The Wise Old Man,
or the Senex. The Wise Man appears before a man at the most critical moments of his
life and shows him the way. He knows the sacred and arcane mystery of Creation that
can give a man a feeling of inner and outer harmony, makes him reconcile to
imperfections and promotes his further spiritual growth.
The Trickster (a fraud, a deceiver), as it was pointed out above, is the archetype
introduced by Jung to denote “all too human”, extremely cunning and malicious
shadowy personality. He steps in when a man experiences an inward impulse to
spiritual transformation. The Trickster is able to invert black and white confusing a man
and take place of his Ego. If a man is aware of his personal Trickster, the latter loses his
hold over the Ego-consciousness and spiritual transformation continues unhampered.
The positive outcome is self-worthy autonomous spiritual existence in harmony
with the world. It is embodied in the archetypes of the Wise Old Man, the Senex, the
Mana-personality.
The negative outcome is man’s war with the entire world and its systematic
destruction with the intention to assert oneself. That is the position of the Trickster.
At worst, the Trickster, or the Great Shadow, usurps the place of the Ego, and
then the Hero/the Tsar transforms into an evil genius who crushes everything around him
for he cannot feel his own wholeness otherwise. This outcome is fraught with danger of
a psychosis.
To summarize the above, the development of four-part frame structure of
gender identity along the male or the female lines may be subdivided into four general
transformations:
– separation, or isolation from the world;
– initiation (of sensual or heroic character);
126
– being-in-the-world (as the Mother in relations with others or as the Tsar in
the effort to conquer the world);
– another being of the Author (the mark he made).
Logos of man’s consciousness yearns to meet Eros of his unconscious and is
integrated into the Ego-consciousness which results in the formation of masculine
intrapsychic core of identity surrounded by conscious feminine sensibility. In similar
manner, the movement of Eros of woman’s consciousness toward Logos of her
unconscious and its integration result in the formation of feminine intrapsychic core of
identity surrounded by conscious masculine intelligence. In some sense, a wholesome
mature personality with developed gender role identity may be called unisexual
because it has mobilized resources of what had been hidden in the unconscious by
Eros or Logos.
Human Soul may have some gender distinctions but the Spirit is utterly sexless. At
a certain mysterious moment of human life, spiritual potential realized in the course of
the individuation of personality contracts a “sacred marriage” with Nature, opening
thereby the conjoint way to individuation. Both in men and in women Spirit and Nature,
Reason and Feelings, Logos and Eros meet each other. Owing to this outer meeting, the
opposites get an opportunity to meet inside as well. While at the outset they develop
separately each familiarizing with its own nature, at the second stage their paths join
and they go a unified way of spiritual progress integrating the opposite characteristics
of their structural organization.
Finding self worth
The inevitable outcome of a wholesome life is that a person accepts oneself and feels
whole while one’s life acquires a merit of a special kind, self worth. It means the worth of
being a unique person, having a conscious need to be only oneself and be ready to
make effort to find one’s real and true self. There is only one alternative to self worth:
loss of one’s true self, non-being. It is just the moment of losing one’s true self when one
comes to the therapist. Reasons of the loss vary with the stage of identity development
but its origin is invariably intrapsychic.
The loss of self worth at the stage of the Infant topos always occurs due to the
following separation disorders:
127
• self-absorption and narcissism resulting in inability to reflect on the possibilities
and limits of the Ego and to perceive others and the world as separate from oneself;
• defiant expectation of love and admiration from others and the world, belief in
a priori human love and transfer of one’s own expectations onto those close to oneself
and onto the world at large;
• inclination to dependence on others and union with them, anxiety in situations
when clinging to (or hooking) somebody is impossible;
• blocking of basic affects (pleasure – displeasure) resulting in emotional
immaturity or in absolute inability to express one’s feelings clearly and directly, the
fundamental (wild, primordial) affects being expressed spontaneously.
At the advanced stage of infantilism the worth of the Ego always depends on
some other person. One always wishes to join some group, belong to some entity and
either endow them with oneself or endow oneself with them. “We” appears when the
boundaries of the Ego are violated. If the boundaries are well shaped, there always
exists an “AND”: “I AND You”, “I AND the World” but not “We all together”. The only
exception is probably implicit personal “We” – for example, “These are We, Vadik and
Marina”. Only such “We” is the third that unites two entities into a single supersummative
whole.
Gender role differentiation and individuation: causes of self worth loss (toposes of
the Hero and of the Beauty).
In the course of natural identity development the loss of self worth occurs in the
case when a person:
• considers the way of individuation immanent to the opposite sex as nearer to
ideal and preferable, with resulting transformation into a Heroic Woman or a Handsome
Man.
• rejects gender characteristics of individuation with resulting transformation into
a sexless creature (a travesty, a plain Jane, a bluestocking or an eternal youth: Puer,
Pygmalion);
• exaggerates musculine or feminine features of his or her Persona building up an
image of a super-Persona (the Beauty, the Hero) that camouflages his/her weak and
insignificant Ego.
128
It is surprising how well the following types fit together complementing each
other in pairs: a heroic woman – the Puer, a Handsome man – plain Jane, a superman –
a travesty, a super-Beauty – Pygmalion, a bluestocking – Blue Beard.
Maybe some readers overburdened with psychological knowledge would like to
supplement considered here intrapsychic dimension (that of the nature, the spirit, the
soul) with “lacking” outward interiorized social one. To them, I would like to repeat that
inward self-caused personal transformations are considered in the described above
integrative psychotherapeutic model in connection with outward social environment as
a lacking addition to long-known and long-studied notorious social causality. I just think
it needless to dwell upon the social background of contained in individual
consciousness representations of interpersonal relations, as it is simply the continuation
of the foreground where the life design is written in sipher with invisible archetypal ink. It
is in full accordance with this design that real relations are conceived and experienced
acquiring a special highly subjective significance. Social circumstances are only an
occasion for their realization.
Spiritual aspects of self worth loss
An individual who avoids making any efforts and shrinks away from life with its joys and
sufferings loses his self worth, his personality. Here are a few examples:
• one who would not accept the reality of inevitable loneliness of oneself in the
world and the responsibility for one’s existence tragedizes life and is swallowed up by it;
• one who adheres to the principle “either… or…” unable to look at meaningful
opposites dualistically and bring them together to dialectical unity – will stick in one’s
monistic half-and-half outlook and self-perception;
• one who believes the reality to be stable and changeless will not be ready to
tolerate losses, will not be able to grow and will not recognize God when one meets
him;
• if one is inclined to adopt others’ explanations of facts and events and readymade opinions of such things as “a successful man”, “a family happiness” as well as
happiness in general, love, beauty, etc. , one’s individuality will gradually die out.
129
Transcendental ontology, existential philosophy
and modern existential psychology.
The existential model of the unconscious.
Strange though it may seem, the most congenial to Jung’s views are those of
Heidegger but not of Kant or Plato as one might suppose.
M. Heidegger advanced the concept of Dasein (Being there) that has an
ontological structure of transcendental Being-in-the-World. B. Shirazi writes that
“elements of existential power of Dasein are the derivatives of the whole totality of
ontological potentialities; materiality takes the form of a body only by way of the union
of the psyche and of that which is of bodily nature. Dasein leaves its confinement in the
body and enters the province of the spirit.” In this way the freedom of
existence is achieved, a free spirit is born.
According to J. Needleman, in the Being everything happens unexpectedly and
each time an effort is necessary to conform the events to the requirements of “everbeing”. Freedom is the ability of Dasein to face the tough fact that change as well as a
causative effect of the past are impossible and, through accepting it, design one’s own
future taking the responsibility for one’s being thrown into the world. Neurosis, then, is an
escape from the freedom of the Self and strict obedience to the world order leading to
exhaustion of existential potential. Making no efforts and taking no responsibility, a
neurotic feels growing existential anxiety, becomes unable to understand the world
adequately and loses ground necessary for positive action. Considering the existential
analysis of L. Binswanger, J. Needleman summarizes his basic postulates in the following
way:

Dasein constitutes its world through the meaning which is the context of
existential a priori.

Dasein acknowledges that its world and its Self are constituted in this way.

Dasein conceives the world and the Self in free and open relation and
projects itself into the future recognizing the necessity to be thrown into the
world (in other words, it gives itself to the world as though being governed
from outside by its own modes of structuring the world).

The energy is consumed by the efforts to retain self-definition depleting
thereby the existential potential (neurosis) or absolutely rejecting the freedom
of the Self (psychosis).
130
“Every time he was to make a choice he tore everything to pieces so that it
would not press him to choose. Maybe others act in the same way and beat about
from
one decision to another only pretending they know.” (J. Borgen)
As L.Binswanger writes, “only that may escape neurosis who ‘knows’ that no
existence is free and limitless and ‘rules’ over his existence in the framework of this
disability.”
J. Needleman in A Critical Introduction to Binswanger’s “Being-in-the-World”
reviews the starting points of existential psychoanalysis and, in particular, theories of
Kant, Heidegger and Freud. In his opinion, Kantian concept of a priori transcendental
ideas of reason on which any experience is based has much in common with
Binswanger’s “existential a priori” and Heidegger’s “matrices of Dasein meaning”. The
essential difference between them is that Kant considers the epistemological problem
of the role of ideas in cognition while Heidegger and Binswanger, following him, place
emphasis on the ontological aspect of apperception itself (what for?) and regard ideas
as forms of Dasein expression. According to Kant, ideas of reason are empty a priori
forms and shaping them makes cognition possible (if something cannot take a definite
shape, it is incognizable). Ideas of intellect are, on the contrary, empirical and help to
put the contents of perception in order. Ideas of reason are transcendental because
they are not derived from experience but make it accessible to consciousness.
Existential a priori, as distinct from Kantian ideas of reason, makes a thing possible in the
being of the Ego: idea points out that world exists in my being and that my being exists
amid other being in the world (L. Binswanger). In the act of cognition of the world the
Self comes out into the world voluntarily and constitutes it by force of its being.
Heidegger does not separate the Self and the world for ontologically they form
one mode of being-in-the-world. Dasein is always in the world that is structured by
meaning. Man falls out of the world when he tries to shape it with the help of preconceptual knowledge, to explain it premising from forms and stereotypes that are
already known. That is the way a neurotic acts isolating himself from being-in-the world
in a single image of the world that does not reflect its full diversity. According to
Heidegger, being can only be an understanding being.
C. Jung and M. Mamardashvili hold nevertheless that man existing in a
continuum is positioned somewhere between understanding (comprehending the
world) and experiencing
(receiving impression of the reality of the world). In his
131
existence in the world, a man translates every live impression carrying an affective
charge of some fact of existence into an idea or category that makes the impression
tangible and the world meaningful. The notion of the understanding man implies that
there is something in the being of the Ego, something whose existence has become
accessible to consciousness. The only mode of being is, thus, “preparing oneself as an
empty form” so that one could make an effort and create an absolutely new form
containing something inexterminable and universal.
“A person who has gained some experience seeks for a story describing it
because it seems impossible, having experienced something, to live long enough if
there is no story describing it; sometimes I imagined that some other person has a story
describing exactly what I have experienced…” (Max Friesch)
To experience for the first time some event and receive an impression of it, an
individual must in a sense “flow over” into a free amorphous state as if dissolving
actually in some substance in order to feel himself a participant of the process of free
creation of more or less exact equivalent of a new phenomenon that has become
accessible to him “here and now” and is unlike all other phenomena experienced
earlier.
“Everything was for them first of all a form before it was filled with some
meaning… People can’t stop in time, they just can’t. As soon as they see a form, they
want it to become something they already know – a vase, a picture, Selina with her
sensless perfection.” (J. Borgen)
Existential psychotherapy of I. Yalom.
Another outstanding exponent of existential school of psychotherapy is Irvin Yalom. His
psychotherapeutic system of assumptions, like the system of L. Binswanger, is a direct
clinical alternative to Freudian psychoanalysis and has much in common with the ideas
of Rollo May.
The main assumption in the theory of Yalom is that an individual’s existence
cannot be postponed. His therapeutical method is founded on the concept of primary
existential situation which means confrontation with death, freedom, isolation and
meaninglessness. The latter confrontation is at the heart of half of human problems
whereas the action based on the apperceiving the meaning constitutes an integral unit
of existence. As Yalom holds, an individual during his life is constantly confronted with
132
situations where he must make a choice. If he chooses passivity, anxiety, disrupted and
muddled consciousness, union or isolation in relations with others, he puts himself into an
“incompletely born” neurotic state. Non-being becomes an element of being; anxiety
and a sense of guilt are the signs of being’s rapid sliding away, as a result of which the
individual loses his way.
Once some young maiden asked Jung how to find the shortest way to the Self. –
“To go astray,” answered Jung.
A person who does not plunge from time to time into “nothingness” and does not
make mistakes will not find his way. A neurotic is inclined to exaggerate the
importance of the moments of non-being in his life, absolutize them and create on their
basis a picture of the world and of his own existence in it.
“The progressive enlargement of the sphere of individual experience and
development was accompanied by regressive reduction of the opposite sphere of
interpersonaal relations. ” (J. Joyce)
The only power a man really possesses is the power over himself. The situation
when some other person controls him means that he has lost himself and identifies
himself with something alien to him. Free motion toward the freedom of the other
without any suppression, exploitation, dependence, enforcement and other forms of
Ego defense against itself that obliterate individuality leads the Ego to the peak of its
spiritual existence – to love, the only fact of being that overcomes loneliness.
“Everyone has to go one’s own way with hope alone and with open eyes of a
person who is aware of his loneliness and of the danger of its bottomless depths.” (C.
Jung)
As I. Yalom writes, everyone knows what existential isolation feels like. E. Fromm
believes that isolation is the primary source of anxiety. In a situation of existential
isolation one is in a state of total loss of strength and terror.
“All he felt was weary amazement that people may be so close and at the same
time so far from each other that their ways, as orbits of celestial bodies, deviate in the
opposite directions with mathematical precision and even intersecting depart at once
in obedience to the law that transforms friendship into one continuous parting.” (J.
Borgen)
133
An individual has to sustain all this, and that heavy trial may impel him to another
customary interpersonal unions which may produce an impression of freedom from
isolation. But it will be only an illusion. In autonomous existence, a person accepts
isolation as a fact of his being. For that reason, only an autonomous Ego is able to be
attracted to other person’s existence moved by real interest in this very existence and
not for fear of existential isolation. According to Yalom, isolation is a highly
discomfortable condition that
cannot be improved by any relations. Love can
alleviate the pain of loneliness to some extent and, as M. Buber writes, “great relations
breach barriers of lofty solitude, liberalize its strict law and throw a bridge across an
abyss of dread of the universe from one independent human creature to another.”
The man who has faced and withstood the pain of isolation will be really able to
relate to others with love not waiting for return affection and gratitude, esteem or
awards. He needs solitude rather than supporting ambience (A. Maslow). In this
respect, loneliness makes a man free from objects and people that make use of him (C.
Jung). For a mature person, being with others is filled with care of himself and of others
(according to Heidegger, being is care).
“At a certain age, a man shakes off many illusions and fears, and nothing
compels him any more to lead a social life. He has no wish to visit others and talk either
with acquaintances or strangers.” (Ch. Chaplin)
The man who uses others as objects of his “care” while his real purpose is to
assert his own existence imagines he is having an intimate dialogue with others but in
fact he is alone and single amid mirrors and is reciting his favourite monologue. He is in
a void but is not aware of it thinking it is full of meaning while it is an illusion.
V. Frankl writes that at those moments of life when one’s illusion suddenly
becomes evident to him the state that has, indeed, generated this illusion, i.e.,
existential vacuum, comes into being.
“What will not kill me will make me stronger,” said Nietzsche who stuck, as Jung
put it, in a state of extreme tension.
Solitude of one conscious individual who falls out from the herd of unconscious
creatures makes this individual alien from undifferentiated majority. Having found
himself and attaining his spiritual charisma a man becomes an outcast cursed with
incomprehension on the part of the mob that believes him to be insane. There is,
however, a fundamental difference between an insane and a charismatic personality.
134
The consciousness of the insane one is a sterile object of one’s own unconscious stuffed
indiscriminately with anything that comes handy (“it knows not what it does”). A
charismatic person, on the contrary, reaches seclusion by his own will and exists as a
full-fledged subject of his being. The consciousness of a charismatic personality is an
integrating element of conscious and esoteric being. The mob rejects an insane
because he is incomprehensible even to himself. People either outcast a charismatic
person as an unbearable reminder of their “incompleteness” or, contrarily, overestimate
and halo him. It is the mob that creates charisma with its positive or negative preeminence because a charismatic person has the right to be whatever he likes and,
staying aside from the mob, provokes it thus to form boundaries and single itself out – if
only as a group. Relationships between a charismatic person and a mob belong to the
most complicated ones.
“Love is a part of our soul, more lasting than those various hypostases of our self
that die in us one after another… They want selfishly to return so that I would
remember but… the universal part that is more lasting than the dying selves must be
separated from the creatures it was linked with, whatever pains and disappointed
hopes it would cost, in order to restore oneness and add to that love the
understanding of that love… as it is in the universal spirit, not being restricted to this or
that love… – to those successive variants of our self we would like to merge with.”
(M. Proust)
Narrative trend in modern psychology
Dyadic character of human existence and the unconscious
“Our soul is a missionary of God… It is able to imagine things of ultimate depth
outside the body, just as God is… True, everything that the soul imagines happens
only in the mind but everything that God imagines is objectified in reality…”
(C. Jung)
Neither by dissolving in the World nor by all-sufficient isolation of self one can
experience Being in full. It seems highly probable that the point of integration where the
opposing collective and individual identities of the subject may be reconciled is the
dyadic matrix of relationships that possibly has the status of the archetype.
The basic dyads in which the subject takes the position of co-existing are the
primary dyad “the mother – the child” (or “mother – I”), “the Ego – alter ego”, “I – the
other” and the transcendental dyad “God – I”. Yet the latter, rarely mentioned
135
transcendental dyad must be regarded as really archetypal and serving as a
foundation for all the rest, dyadic communication in psychotherapy and coaching
including. Conscious experiencing of this archetypal dyad becomes possible only in the
second half of human life because it is the deepest layer of Being residing in the
unconscious. Originated in the sacral bond with the Transcendental, the human self
finds itself first in relations with the mother as a response to the outside world and then in
relations with others, after which it returns to the Transcendental, this time discovering it
consciously.
The main quality of any dyad is Love. Psychotherapy is not usually openly called
a profession dealing with eroticism but placed among applied social factors that
maintain in the relationship between two people things necessary to every person:
acceptance, empathy, understanding and sharing.
There is a trend of modern psychology that intensely investigates interactive
forms of human existence, namely, the Dialogical Self. The archetypal side of Dialogical
Self implies the existence of its primordial connection with the sacral dyad “God – I”. As
follows from this hypothesis, to be able to develop in oneself other dyadic relations and
Love, a person must define his position relative to the Transcendental and become
aware that he is only a speck in the Universe.
In the absence of actualized sacral dyad human psyche generates “vacancies
for the position of God” that may be filled either by the subject himself or by the Other,
or by the World. This mechanism plays the most important role in the development of
narcissistic experiences and defenses. The necessity of the Other for leading a full life is
laid at the core of our unconscious whose base unit, as Jung states, is the archetype.
Generally speaking, the term archetype is applicable to structural order that arises
spontaneously in the psyche of any person integrating his individual experience and
collective experience of the mankind.
Dialogical Self is the matrix of man’s existence in the Human World. It is as if in the
very centre of human psyche there were simultaneously two locations unified into one
with “I” at one of the poles and a place for the Other at the opposite one. In the
archetypal context, any dyadic interaction, including that taking place in coaching,
may be represented as objectified Dialogical Self, the basic matrix of Existence of a
man as a social and conscious human being.
Among known social dyads that reconstruct the dialogical matrix with close
cooperation of the social medium the following are of particular historical significance:
136

sacral dyads (man and God) with the participation of intermediaries –
priests, shamans, patriarchs and saints;

psychoanalytical dyads (a patient and his unconscious) with the therapist
acting as an intermediary;

social dyads (man and the World) where the intermediaries are mother
and/or father;

psychic dyads that express the character of conscious cognition, divide
the entire reality into opposite entities.
At present, there are no institutions or professionals that could serve as true
intermediaries, though spiritual subcultures partly perform this function.
“As long as religious function is exercised only formally, in word, and is not
heartfelt, there will be no significant results… ” (C. Jung)
Psychotherapy as a professional activity reconstructing dialogical matrix deals
with dyadic relations “mother – child”, “the Ego – alter ego” and “I – the Other”
(coaching as the latest kind of this activity focuses on the dyad “I – the Other” and on
the collective identity lost in the previous epoch). Both a mother and a therapist
entering the dyadic relationship with the Other (a child, a patient, an analysand) are
at risk that the person they are related to will regard them as God because he is
unaware of this primordial relationship but his soul remembers its cardinal trait
experienced as a flow of absolute LOVE (or why should the entire mankind dream of
it?) and wishes to replicate it in relations with another person. Finding no equivalent to
God in other people, an individual faces the need to cultivate love in himself because
it turns out that to love is as enjoyable as to be loved – provided one is ready to
accept the love experienced by people.
The hope to find divine love among people is a day-dream but all young people
cherish this hope and suffer losing it. Similar feelings have people of many dyadic
professions, psychotherapists in particular. Having grasped the difference between
human love and divine one, a person may experience transformations of middle age
crisis.
Superposition of definiteness
on endless indefiniteness is inner spatial
proportionality of LOCATION containing Someone who imagines himself to be “I”. This
LOCATION has two dimensions: a vertical (transcendental) one and a horizontal
(social). There is another horizontal passing through the same point of “I” – it is material,
bodily, profane. Its ontological existence is undeniable for it possesses the qualities of
137
substance and spatial extent, so it may be measured. This is the side of a person facing
outward, to the world, and for that reason it is the most apparent. Through this hypostasis
“I” proper can be discerned that is situated in quite another dimension, not extended in
space. It appears to be more significant than its material incarnation – if only because it
may control it. Of course, the body also has some influence over “I”, especially if it
cannot come to terms with it.
The aspect of Ego-measurements that has no spatial extension, i.e. that has been
partly turned outward, is expressed in free conscious choice of relationships and
meanings contained in them and represented by four kinds of dyads:
Ego-measurements of the subject’s introjected relationships
Бог – God
Другой – Other
Мир – World
Я [синее., в центре] – “I”
Я [зеленое] – “I”

“I
–
God”
–
represents
conscious
attitude
to
the
Transcendental (faith and the frame of reference lying at the base of
behaviour);

“I – We” – represents responsible attitude to distant social
environment (professional identification and position taken in real civil
matters);
138

“I – You” – represents responsible attitude to one’s close
friends and relations (the experience of love and good durable relations
with the Other);

“I – I” – represents identity (the Self) and its agreement with
the Persona in real life and its style.
Spatially extended social Ego (presented, empirical) operates in the world in
much the same manner as spatially extended quantum objects whose course of action
is rigidly preset from outside. There are locations where the Ego never gets to and those
where it gets most probably. The course of action preset from outside is confined to
several possible most probable locations. At the same time, not extended spatially
(latent, potential) Ego is characterized by limitless number of variances, transcendental
individual features and designs. Surely, “I” may be unaware of its high mission as well as
of its real abilities, however, they are present somewhere, at some LOCATION. This idea
was shared by many great thinkers, Kant including, who supposed that the soul is not a
function of outside influences but can oppose and even control them.
In reality, the subjects dissatisfied with themselves are unable to maintain their
continuity in all dimensions. Some of them can “stay themselves” only when they are
alone (“I – I” dimension), others only in close relations with somebody (“I
– You”
dimension), the third only in groups (“I – We” dimension). First of them, “I”-oriented,
actualize themselves in creative work, the second, “You”-oriented, in love and the third,
“We”-oriented, in career. The first are successful creators, but their works are often
unclaimed by the world and they are in isolation. The second achieve success in love
and friendship, but love comes inevitably to an end and they feel its loss to be a
tragedy of cosmic scale and as a result lose themselves in this world. The “We”-oriented,
for all their social success, cannot surmount the limits of their social role and stay distant
in intimate relations, while social achievements not backed up by inner content with
personal matters often lose their value.
If being is restricted to one dimension, the subject cannot fully manifest oneself in
other dimensions. Thus, “I”-oriented subjects try to form both close and distant relations
starting FROM THEMSELVES, hence they remain without mutual love or social
achievements that are possible only with a reasonable degree of
cooperation.
Subjects oriented to “You” apply in a similar way the pattern of their intimate love
relations to distant ones and try to reproduce in the dimension “I – I” the same attitude
139
to themselves as to the dyad “I – You” failing to satisfy their own wants and ambitions.
“We”-oriented subjects even in intimate relations become captives of social rules and
their own personified role images (a director, a teacher, an analyst, a coach, and so
on); they are unaware of the need to be with themselves and avoid it. As a
consequence, their being is restricted to a single mechanism that CANNOT WORK with
equal success in all dimensions, and the continuity of being is disrupted.
For example, an individual noted for his achievements may be with equal
likelihood a true embodiment of his Self or an imitator sunk in a chronic depression in a
blind alley. It is hard to say onlooking – the same fate most likely awaits everyone: to
get into a jigsaw puzzle whose working out is a procces of self-reproduction of social
“matter”. And vice versa, an impression that one is a looser may be misleading. I have
met more unique and independent personalities among people who appear to be
castaway than among socially adapted and outwardly successful – at least, it is so in
Russia. It seems that social jigsaw puzzles are today even wrongful and of no
importance for the development of the Self.
Peering attentively into the inner world of any human being one can notice
some flickering and overflowing of “I” from Being to Non-being and back. An attempt to
do away with Non-being forever at one dash may cause it to reach you suddenly and,
most probably, stay with you for long. On the other hand, nourishing one’s Non-being
increases its strength and can make it and, hence, destruction the aim of Being.
A COUPLE, a family organization is constituted of two relationship matrices
wedded in the human World and based on the Dialogical Self. The basis of a symbolic
family, as distinct from a nuclear one, is sacred alchemical marriage, Hieros gamos.
The alchemists were mediaeval spiritual practicians who served God relying on
philosophy and scientific experiments. They believed that the matter is lifeless and
passive and the cardinal event on earth is permeating the matter with the Psyche and
its transfiguration by the Spirit. Hieros gamos (a sacred marriage) was the numinous
name of the philosophical stone, the fondest dream of alchemical spiritual enterprise
symbolizing the integration of the higher and the lower, the male and the female, the
earthborn and the heavenly. In his investigations and symbolic rites the alchemist acts
as a direct intermediary between man and God. The symbol of “the Holy family” (or the
archetype of a symbolic family) includes, along with the dyads, the triad “mother –
father – child” that enters into relations with the fourth element, the Transcendental,
forming a quaternion. In a sense, due to the quaternity the individuated subject
140
ascends to the state of integrated Ego and Self and becomes capable of coautonomy in relations with the Other.
One must dedicate enough time to analyzing the life of the Soul so that the
most part of the efforts and energy of libido should be spent on creating one’s own
world of relationships and events. The therapy is a sort of a temporary link, an
intermediate stage after which the analysand again receives the possibility to love
and make good, now lowering to prehistoric almost unhuman pastness, now rising to
the Primary Design.
Psychosomatic and body-oriented approaches in modern psychology. Somatic
symptoms, diseases and the unconscious.
The term “psychosomatics” was introduced into medicine by J. Heinroth in 1818. Ten
years later C. Jacobi offered a similar term, “somatopsychology” that has not taken on.
Further on, psychosomatics developed as a clinical discipline and in revealing causes
of somatic diseases took into account not only biological factors but pathogenic
psychosocial ones as well. The latter were regarded as primary causes of appearance
and development of psychosomatic disorders.
The first who described the causes of seven psychosomatic diseases was F.
Alexander. He explained their origin by hereditary inclination, deficitary emotional
climate in the family and negative emotional experience in adult age. By now a
number of typical psychosomatic disorders of psychogenic origin has been
determined: obesity, nervous anorexia, nervous bulimia, bronchial asthma, ulcerative
colitis, Crohn’s disease, labile essential hypertension (psychosomatosis), cardiac
neurosis, gastroenteritis and some others (listed are functional disorders that do not
lead to any structural changes).
As a rule, the causes of psychosomatic disorders of different organs are the
same. The question arises: why does the same cause affect various organs?
Psychotherapy is yet unable to give a convincing and methodologically satisfactory
explanation of this fact from medical point of view.
Diseases of the digestive tract and cardiovascular system have been studied by
traditional psychosomatics better than others while the psychogenesis of such somatic
disorders as respiratory and skin diseases (especially neurodermitis and psoriasis) is
practically impenetrable to modern science.
141
F. Danbar studied personalities of psychosomatic patients. Basing on her theories,
researchers introduced such notions as Type A and Type B personality (M. Fridman),
cancer personality (H. Weinez), and others. However, most of investigations in this field
show that all these patients have common features non-specific for any particular
disease. These features include, first of all, the following:

alexithymia (the term introduced by P. Sifneos) – bodily expression of
emotion characterized by difficulty in identifying and experiencing one’s
own feelings as well as those of another person; specific cognitive
inabilities manifested in outwardly oriented thinking and underdeveloped
imagination;

manifestation of dependence (or pseudo-independence) accompanied
by reduced self-reflection of feelings, narcissistic disregulation, aggressive
inhibition and depressions;

emotional deficit in the patient’s nuclear family, symbiotic dyadic
relationship with authoritarian, superinvolved, antagonistic and intruding
mother; exclusion of weak father from this relationship;

psychodynamic confrontation of the conflict with the relationship of the
type “dependence/independence” and “intimacy/estrangement”.
So the psychosomatic patient is a largely infantile person with primitive
psychological defenses and a rigid system of behavioural patterns in interpersonal
communication. He wishes to be autonomous and independent but this wish comes
into conflict with his infantile inclination to dependence and fear of “losing the object”
(or, conversely, of union with it). With a poorly developed autonomy, a psychosomatic
patient is predisposed to social integration, easily unites with a group and finds some
leader to worship and serve him.
It should be noted that alexithymitic traits do not necessarily make one a
psychosomatic patient. They are often observed in persons suffering from cancer or
AIDS, drug addicts, alcoholics, gambling addicts and many healthy people with low
mental powers stemming from the very first contacts of the child with the world. A future
alexithymist was forbidden separation when a child, hence he got stuck at the stage of
symbiosis with mother and is vulnerable to every stressor attacking him.
142
Dependent relations of psychosomatic patients with the world are established
through the personality of some other more significant individual. G. Engel showed that
diseases are often caused by the loss of such “key figure” that played an important role
in one’s life. In this case, Engel pointed out, the decisive factor is not real significance of
the loss but rather perceiving it as such. The scientist distinguishes between the threat of
a loss, a symbolic loss and a real loss, each of them able to provoke an illness. As many
theories of Ego-psychology and Self-psychology state, the liability to stress resulting from
“the object loss” (or “the loss of the object”) indicates defects in the Ego structure
formed in the relationships of the child with his parents. The Ego may need archaic “Iobjects” (parents or other caregivers) that would serve as a sort of regulators of inner
balance. The withdrawal of these regulators (i.e., the loss of the object) induces in a
dependent symbiotic feelings of helplessness and hopelessness thereby increasing the
risk of somatization.
MYTH as discourse of the unconscious
Before the 20th century there were two opposite attitudes of the mankind (and
individuals) to the myth and myth-making: one of them scornful (“it is something
primitive and unworthy”) and the other mystic and numinous (“it is something sublime,
fateful and inscrutable”). In the 20th century, H. Bergson, F. Nietzsche, J. Frazer, J. Joyce,
R. Musil, M. Frisch, M. Bulgakov, S. Dali, S. Freud, C. Jung, M. Bakhtin, A. Losev and many
others performed, by joint effort, the so-called “remythologization of culture”.
We
received the myth back in a renewed form reminding us that reality is real so far forth as
it is apperceived.
Myth as a phenomenon of human culture and human psyche deserves not only
to be present in the life of any person but to take also a quite certain scientifically
substantiated position in the general framework of psychic phenomena containing
something special and unique that differs from the objects of reality reflected in them.
The preconscious psychic of the uncivlized primitive man was filled with weird
mythical figures and fantastic images of reality. When the Ego and the boundaries of
consciousness had been formed, human psychic became capable of reflecting not
only its own content but surrounding world as well. In this sense, to apperceive means to
differentiate inner psychic content from the outer one, existing objectively and
reflected.
143
A “civilized” man has learned to test the reality, i.e., to find proof or disproof of his
hypotheses concerning the outworld and himself, which testing serves him as a basis of
establishing relations with himself and the world. Proficiency in testing the reality that
has developed in phylogenesis does not prevent the ceaseless mythmaking process
going on in human psyche but only changes the conditions offering it the realm of the
unconscious.
\a\В индивидуальном развитии человек проходит все филогенетические
этапы становления сознательности и выделения особой способности отражать
свойства внешних предметов, в противовес способности наделять внешние
предметы свойствами внутренних процессов. Впоследствии архаический остаток
этой способности Фрейд назовет трансфером и проекцией. По-видимому,
основные этапы восхождения от бессознательного бытия к осознанному можно
обозначить следующей последовательностью:
In ontogenesis, a person comes through all phylogenetic stages of the
development of consciousness and of the ability to perceive peculiarities of outer
objects as distinct from the ability to endue outer objects with the peculiarities of inner
processes. Freud called the archaic residue of this ability the transference and the
projection. Presumably, the ascent from unconscious existence to conscious one may
be subdivided into the following stages:
*
unconscious
existence,
pure
unmingled
myth-making,
fantasizing,
predominance of primordial processes, union of the Ego with the world (the outer is the
inner);
*
acquiring
conscious
skills,
forming
Ego-boundaries,
separation,
preponderance of mythmaking over reflection of reality, dependence of the Ego on
the world (the grandiose inner; the outer is “for me”);

inflation of consciousness, repression of individual myth-
making, depreciation of the meaning and of the very existence of primary processes,
seeing repressed content outside the Ego, total predominance of secondary processes,
pseudo-independence of the Ego on the world (the inner is the outer);

coexistence on an equality of primary myth-making and
secondary conscious processes with clear distinction between them and resulting
ability to test reality adequately; the autonomy of the Ego (the outer is the outer, the
inner is the inner).
144
Broadly speaking, first three stages of the four listed here may be referred to the
so-called “collectivistic” existence of people in primordial communities, medieval cities
and the civilized society of the 20th century. With the fourth stage a new mode of
people’s coexistence begins that appears to be genuinely humane – if only because
an autonomous personality does not feel the need to use others in his or her own
interests. By the way, mankind has long been fantasizing on these lines, but our world is
unlikely to become really humane earlier than the third or maybe the fourth millennium
– on condition that there will be no regress to the second or even the first stage with
quite non-fantastic antihumane materialization.
Thus, the extent of acceptance and appreciation of the reality of myths and
myth-making may be regarded as a sort of indicator of individual (and superindividual)
balance between conscious and preconscious contents of cultural phenomena in the
psyche.
M. Bakhtin called the myth a universal image of the world associated with all
forms of human being, thus making a distinction between the image of the world (the
subject) and the world itself (the object). S. Agranovich considers the archaic myth to
be the foundation of the culture of the harmony, with the cosmos being the subject and
collective personality in its everyday life – the object, while the role of “the third”, the
Absolute, is played by the destiny identical to cyclic time.
In Agranovich’s theory, the culture of harmony is opposed to the culture of
purpose based on monotheistic ideas of the existence of the transcendental
personality and linear time directed into eternity. The subject in the culture of purpose is
a personality leading an isolated existence, the object is the world (the Universe) and
the Absolute is God. Both ideas – that of the Universe returning to itself in the object
culture of harmony and that of the dialogue of the personality with the Universe
returning to itself in the subjective and personality culture of the purpose – are equally
valid. A person living in binary dimension has to choose between God and Fate. But
there is in fact the third alternative allowing to avoid the first two.
“…we may discern in archaic consciousness the outlines of some structural TRIAD
describing the relationship of an individual with the world: the individual (arch-subject)
who is eager to dissolve in the community, community (arch-object) and the ritual
(arch-absolute) having a sacral and meditative value” (S. Agranovich).
145
The third alternative may be only the Order that is represented by Destiny, or
God, or the Universe, or unus mundum, or some other similar phenomenon of
superpersonal scale. The fourth element that may be added to that triad is a living
human body in which the resultant of the first three is literally imprinted. Thus the
elements coexisting in the quaternary space, appositioned and proportionated, are the
Ego-consciousness (microcosm), the World (macrocosm), the Order and the last
“lower” element, the Body of a real person (or, in a wider sense, the unconscious, the
realm of mothers that is opened by the ritual lingam).
The
archaic
myth is
classed
among
primordial
foundations
of
man’s
preconscious notions of the world Order. It is not the Order itself but its idea – irrational,
ambiguous and lacking a system, characterized by universal signification and syncretic
ideological content. The distinguishing feature of the archaic myth is its irrationality. The
binary structure of the archaic myth makes possible the coexistence and mutual
conversion of the opposites perceived as the alternatives of the world order but
associated in fact with the protoconscious (i.e., the unconscious) characterized by
regarding the external as similar to the internal (and the internal to the external).
“Myth is universal. It contains, along with the generalized picture of the world in
a certain epoch, also embryos of more complicated ideas modelling universal
structures that will develop only in subsequent epochs as components of their own
‘absolute myth’. Myth is a specifically human mode of creating (modelling) and thus of
cognition and mastering the reality, a sort of a universal image of the world that is
important for all other forms of human existence.” (S. Agranovich)
The basic binary oppositions of the archaic myth are the following:

order – chaos;

the living – the dead;

man – woman;

up – down;

right – left;

front – back;

natural (human) – supernatural (sacral, numinous, divine);

clean – unclean;

one’s own – foreign;

some others.
146
As A. Losev wrote,
“Myth is the brightest and the most authentic reality, an absolutely indispensable
category of thought and of life. It is logically, i.e, first of all dialectically necessary
category of mind and of being in general. When integral mythic images are translated
into the language of their abstract meaning, integral mythic-psychic experiences are
perceived as some ideal entities and antinomies of real experience that is always
mythic. Thus, we find in the mythic world such phenomena as zombies, revival of
people and of gods after death, and so on. All these facts are characterized by
different tension of being, different level of realness.”
As we see, Losev emphasizes ontological status of myth: it is a “necessary
category of mind and of being in general <…> sensed and created as living material
reality of bodily, nearly animal nature.” According to Losev, ontological status of myth is
ensured not by its detachment from reality (allegorical or symbolical) but first of all by
the fact that it is “an objective reality created materially and palpably.” “Any
detachment from the meaning of things, he writes, is always present in the experience,
and all the experience becomes thus a mythical one. … The entire world with all its
components, alive and dead, are to the same extent myth and miracle.”
W. Wundt pointed out that “at the base of the myth there is an affective root
because it always expresses one or another vital necessity or interest.”
Ye. Meletinski wrote about the phenomenology of myth:
“In the myth, the form is identical with the content, and for that reason a
symbolic image represents what it signifies. Mythological thinking is characterized by
indistinct differentiation between the subject and the object, the object and the sign,
the thing and the word, a creature and its name, the singular and the plural, the
beginning and the principle, i.e., the origin and the essence. This indefiniteness
manifests itself in the sphere of imagination and generalization.
An emphatic peculiarity of the myth is that it identifies the genesis with the
essence denying thereby causality. In general, a picture of the world model coincides
in the myth with the story of the origin of its individual elements, natural and cultural
objects, as well as of the deeds of gods and heroes that have defined its present state.
A narration of events of the past becomes a means of explaining the principles of world
organization and its present state.”
147
V. Shuklin notes the following merits of mythological outlook:
“Myth does not give a sequence of events, it only highlights those which establish
a stable universal order in the world and originate a cultural tradition. Describing the
events, myth often breaks their sequence and does not explain any reasons or motives
of characters’ actions. Personages in myths are relatively isolated in the regions, spheres
or stages of their life and activity. The incoherence of myths and their contradictions are
explained by the fact that they convey complicated things by simple means. Every
time it is an autonomous isolated world.”
Looking at our contemporaries, one can (and one does) entertain a prejudicial
thought that they surpass primitive preconscious human creatures with their
mythological thinking. That is just the thought which causes inflation of the Ego,
neuroses and psychosomatic disorders. This wonderful, primitive but quite unique
creature lives inside each of us. Its right to exist is just as indubitable as that of the
conscious Ego nurtured and trained by society. Mythmaker (i.e., the unconscious) has
traits absent in the conscious Ego, namely, spontaneity, ability to fantasize and to
create, affectivity and, finally, corporality.
Civilized society often falls into projective neurotic traps of modern myths such as
the myth about the omnipotence of science and its magic eptitude to cope with all
imperfections of the world, the myth about wonders of the world progress, the myth
about UFO as tools of extraterrestrial intervention, the myth about superhuman abilities
(telegnosis, teleportation, etc.), myths about wasted human efforts and the
senselessness of existence; the myth about global catastrophe and hosts of others.
Having digested ideas of his omnipotence (super-abilities) and
advantages of
education (super-knowledge), modern man easily takes mythopoetic fantasies for
scientific truths.
“The acrobat balancing on a rope between the abysses of good and evil he is
indifferent to as he is indifferent to his friends loving them only in winter when he wants
them to warm him.” (J. Borgen)
As it sometimes happens, the creator of the truth tells that he has received it from
little green men. The man possessing realistic knowledge is unable to distinguish
between the inner and the outer for he does not understand and cannot accept the
ignorance and the helplessness of his mythogenic potential, so he apperceives the
emerged unconscious content mechanistically: somebody has come and told him.
148
Any myth, any fantasy or unconscious phenomenon contains only a hint, a
secret sign, a cipher message, a metaphor of eternal meaningful order that tries to
communicate itself. A metaphorical text can be read literally only by an
unsophisticated, egocentric consciousness incapable of introspection that would
reveal it as an observer influencing the character of the phenomenon observed.
Mythmaking is alien to this observer, as is understanding of the meaning of
incompleteness and ambiguity.
For example, Pascal Marson repeats Freud interpreting the mythogenic structure
of the phantasm of primary scene (that is, the scene of parents’ sexual intercourse)
litreally, whereas it may be real only at times. Usually, it emerges as an accompanying
mythological unit concealing the secret meaning of sacred marriage between male
and female halves of the Soul, the meaning of the Creation and of the original sin. This
meaning only verifies the fact of discriminating between sexes, between the conscious
and the unconscious and between the body and the psyche but it is not projected
directly onto real coition of parents (or else onto castration, as in the phantasm of it).
To emphasize once more the significance of the depth layer of unconscious
mythogenic images, I’ll give another example showing two-layer structure of these
phenomena often revealed in psychotherapeutic practice. A neurotic patient
manifests himself most vividly in his opinion that he “has not been loved enough” by his
parents who are allegedly below the imaginary “ideal” ones that accept and forgive
everything. In reality, as we know, parents are different, as are partners, spouses and
children.
All of them do not conform to the neurotic’s ideas of what they must be. The syndrome
of “not being loved enough” tears neurotic’s psyche between an ideal image of the
world and reality leaving in his reality only those things which do not correspond to the
ideal. Both the imaginary ideal object and the reality (a remainder left after subtracting
from the ideal) are for a neurotic two halves of the same fantasy; he manipulates them
perceiving reality too literally, seeing and hearing in it only the negative side. Due to
literal perception of the primary process flat and linear conscious existence of a
neurotic differs from conscious multy-directional being of a three-dimensional
personality who admits that there is something both in oneself and in the world not
known to oneself yet, something that is practically impossible to define completely, so it
is better to leave it undefined. The undefined also has the right to exist.
149
The universal value of the archaic monomyth, as noted by J. Campbell, C.
Naranjo, V. Turner, O. Rank, A. Guggenbühl-Craig and many other psychologists, is the
idea of creating Order out of Chaos, the idea of Transformation. Any myth (i.e., any
message of the unconscious) contains an element of fixation of some act of creation.
Hence appeared the notions of mythmaking and mythmaker that are self-motivated
(he goes as chance directs him) and self-organized according to the laws of
mythological transformations. The main of the transformations is revival. Having revived
out of dead forms, one acquires a new living form, a new life instead of death leaving
behind the old and dying.
Transformations described in myths contain the essential elements of man’s inner
life that are constantly renewing during the lifetime. For a psychologist or a
psychotherapist this is the main value of individual and collective myth-making
because it objectifies hidden inner changes that go on, as analytical psychology has
ascertained, according to common laws and by common mechanisms which are
called the archetypal ones. The archetype is a cross between Myth and Order.
The archetypal character of the unconscious is an objective fact because it is
objectified in meaningful elements of individual and collective myth-making and is, in
Jung’s opinion, an ontological fact of formative psychological process, i.e., a real fact
of the birth of order out of chaos and not a fact of imagination. The ontological status
of the archetype defines our understanding of myth-making and of unconscious
(primary) processes.
The idea of the archetype allows to arrange the process of regulating and
transforming ideal psychic entities as unified general negentropic process eternally
confronting the entropic one, the chaos of uncertainty and meaninglessness.
Archetypal structure of the unconscious ensures its order. Jung singled out the central,
primary element of this order, named it the Self and believed that the order obeys
internal regulative rhythms (1, 2, 3, 4…), the most steady of them being triads and
quaternions creating corresponding forms and proportions.
Thus, according to Jung, the order of the Self is represented geometrically by
four double pyramids enclosed in a circle. These figures express a person’s sensual
impression; the person endows this impression with meaning by verbalizing it.
Therefore, turning to the notion of the archetype and thoroughly analyzing with
its help individual and collective myths an analytical psychologist can conceive the
150
most universal laws of psychological transformations that conduce to the harmony
between the orderly and the chaotic components of man’s inner life.
Russian philosopher and composer G. Gurdjieff who was a mystic (at least, they
said he was) enthused everyone who knew him and left a somewhat scandalous and
misty memory behind. Nevertheless, he impregnated with quite sensible ideas a brilliant
thinker P. Ouspensky who managed to lay the foundation of live psychology stemming
from life and not from speculation, now nearly forgotten. It is well known that human
mind can produce only illusions while true meaning grows out of nonverbal root of
being.
Ouspensky’s views are congenial to the concepts of analytical psychology,
particularly his ideas about “many I’s” and their lack of unity. Following Gurdjieff,
Ouspensky believes that “there are a lot of various ‘I’ in a person, the main being the
Master whose body has a dimension of time” (cf. Jung’s ‘partial manifestations of the
soul’, or various forms of the archetype’s personification in man’s consciousness – O. L.).
There are also other occupants of this “many ‘I’” space: I in my normal state, I the
supervisor, I the manager, I the assistant manager, and so on.
In Ulysses by J. Joyce “many I’s” of the subject’s consciousness are objectified in
the text in such a manner as though the novel were written by a hundred of narrators.
According to Ouspensky, one of the “many I’s” is the Master’s agonist, the socalled false personality: inane imaginary ‘I’ that is conceited and lazy and tends to
defend itself. Its mentation is extremely negative and inexact: “Our archenemy is the
word ‘I’ for we have no right whatsoever to use it in ordinary situations.”
In neurotic and immature persons the false personality takes the place of the
Master. Ouspensky believes that “false ‘I’ cannot be eliminated completely or reduced
in size but it may be reduced in time.” The main ‘I’ playing the role of the Master
prevents the activity of false ‘I’ allowing the personality to acquire its own essence
(compare it again with Jung: the Self as the true essence of a person and the Ego as
social guise; individuation as the way from the Ego to the Self made by inflation of the
Ego. – O. L.).
For Ouspensky, as it was for Gurdjiejj, consciousness is the act of selfremembering:
151
“Do I exist? If so, where has gone that sensation of myself being whole which
previously I invariably had at such moments of self-studying and self-remembering…”
(G. Gurdjieff)
Marcel Proust who died in 1922 could hardly read unpublished works by
Ouspensky or Gurdjieff but he conceived the same idea of a subject knowing that he
possesses himself and perfectly understanding himself as he is, existing separately from
that which he is not. As M. Mamardashvili writes of him, waking up in the morning
Marcel is seeking for some time a person who has woken until he remembers that it is
him. All his life Marcel has to gather himself after having been scattered over the
surrounding space of various impressions and to make an effort trying to hold it all in
continuity. Something has fallen out of the continuity, has died for me (according to
Mamardashvili, death is the fullest expression of parting with oneself). Dying of ‘I’ is a
prerequisite of continuous living. Attachment to one’s favourite object, one’s ‘I’,
inexorably entails actual death of its owner, i.e., fixates the transformation of the living
into the rigid and invariably false ‘I’.
Therefore, death of the Ego is a precondition of transformation and of transition
into a new, living capacity of ‘I’. Is it not just what we are told about in myths
returning again and again to the theme of death and rebirth?
Analysis of the unconscious in situations
observed in organizations.1
An object is disarmed. It is a mere pod. Only a heap is armed.
(D. Harms)
An organization is a place where people coexist coordinating their individual goals and
values with those of the given community. Any organization is a complex mixture of
order and chaos but usually analysis can isolate a rational component in such a way as
though it represented the entire organization. All that is rational in an organization has
as a rule impersonal conventional character and is in accordance with the logic of
common sense: organizations are created for people so that they could satisfy mutually
their needs. The purpose of an organization created on irrational principles would be to
gather people so that they could communicate with each other and understand
1
An excerpt from: О. В. Лаврова. Любовь в эпоху постмодерна. Ad hoc коучинг о людях «До
востребования». М.: «ДиС», 2010. 447 с.
152
better both the World and themselves. But reduction to needs and motives for the
search of the meaning presents people only as consumers and does not take into
account the principal human property, production. Efficient production is a creative
process that is the basic necessity of a man. Having produced something once, he
inevitably wants to repeat it.
Production and consumption are two sides of social life, and it is important what
is the proportion between them and what exactly is meant by these terms in each
case. Psychological consulting and coaching in organizations usually deals with
relations in the business process of producing Products and Services that belong mostly
to the World of Things and consuming concrete and spatially extended Things as well as
relations corresponding to conventional social matrix. However, besides this obvious
level of organization there exists the most important and primary one, the level of
production of meanings and Ideas objectified in the Events of everyday life. At a
certain stage of man’s development understanding of “what” and “who” of the world
cannot satisfy him any more. He needs to find answers to the questions “why?”, “what
for?” and “what does this have to do with me?”.
The basic form of meaning production in private and social life are narratives:
mythological narratives (about a given organization, its chief and its future, about good
and evil, relations between the management and the personnel, and so on), object
narratives (technologies, working algorithms, etc.), logical narratives (organizational
structures, information flows, formal models of business processes, etc.) and symbolical
narratives (ordinary and higher values, brands and their association with the
Transcendental). Narratives are created and spread in the process of communication
among the employees of given organization and at their meetings with people working
in other places. Moving along communication channels, narratives may mutate or stay
intact.
A manager heading a company in the 21st century is bound to take into
account unconscious irrational processes going on in the organization and strongly
affecting some of the employees. Mankind has ascertained through its representatives,
the outstanding thinkers Freud and Jung, that there exists, along with individual and
mass consciousness, individual and collective unconscious. However, it is not so simple
because the ontological status of the unconscious was doubtful from the very
beginning due to the fact that consciousness is completely unaware of it. Not knowing
153
anything about something, consciousness cannot admit the existence of this unknown
something.
Proceeding from Heidegger’s idea that consciousness is always something
represented, or, in other words, the process of cognition implies visual representation,
M.
Henry
states
that
being
is
almost
completely
excluded
from
available
representation, hence from consciousness. According to Henry, everything represented
beyond the conscious sphere maintains the form of pre-assumed being. Though it is
excluded from available being, being in that “arch-world” maintaining the form of the
world is, as Henry believes, the unconscious having ontological status, i.e., really existing.
Heidegger
postulated
that
transcendental
consciousness
is
unconscious
because everything that presents itself (that is, changes from incomprehensible to
apprehensible) achieves the state of an object, and consciousness regards it as a
phenomenon. According to Heidegger, any possible presence is registered as the
presence of an object. A subject does not know the process he possesses – in other
words, consciousness has no idea of the product it receives, which means that an
unconscious process is taking place along with the conscious one.
A. Schopenhauer who put forward the idea of “will to live” taken up later on by
F. Nietzsche and M. Mamardashvili considered unconscious as inconceivable
(undirected desire) and thus supplemented “ideological” dimension of consciousness
with affective aspiration which is necessarily associated with conscious representation.
Terminologically, the unconscious is an antonym for the conscious while
ontologically it is associated with notions that are beyond the conscious, are not
subject to conscious control and observation but can be observed from outside.
Therefore, the unconscious must have not only qualities differing from those of the
conscious but also the ones homologous to them. Both the first and the second are
present in any unconscious phenomena. Among unconscious factors homologous to
conscious ones are such phenomena as unconscious behaviour regulators and activity
stimulators (motives, attitudes, automatisms). Subliminal perception and repressed
ambiguous content of conscious Ego may be also considered as homologous to
consciousness while archetypal and superconscious phenomena are more distant from
conscious ones.
Freud believed that indvidual unconscious exists in the interspaces, the breaks in
continuous self-sufficient conscious processes. He was the first who discovered the
unconscious, objectified it and revealed before the world its low and dark contents.
154
Freud
relegated
unconscious
phenomena
to
primary
processes
that
are
noncontradictory, tend to displace the outer reality with the inner one, have a mobile
cathexis (libido’s “elctric charge”) and are regulated according to the pleasure
principle.
Freud subdivded primary, unconscious processes into descriptive, or latent
unconscious (preconscious) and repressed unconscious (contained in memories and
fantasies). Secondary, conscious processes are governed by the reality principle
(reason, deliberation, morality) and by logic that reconciles contradictions, have firm
spatial and temporal structure and are characterized by bound cathexis (directivity of
the subject’s libido to the object). The word in psychoanalysis is that “container” of
consciousness which takes in the energy of cathexis from the unconscious. The main
function of secondary processes is testing reality with the aim to bring into accord the
desired with the real.
Acording to Freud, essential “energies” of the unconscious are instinctive forces
of libido (life instinct) and mortido (death instinct). They are, of course, crushingly
omnipotent, primitive and inescapable. All his life one has to tame the wild natural
libidinous energy and learn to use it for one’s own conscious and realistic purposes.
Such is the most general description of the unconscious phenomenology as conceived
by Freud.
Freud's idea that the language of the unconscious is akin to that of myth-making
was taken up and energetically pushed forward by C. Jung, E. Neumann, J. Campbell
and C. Naranjo representing various trends of contemporary psychotherapy.
Individual unconscious may be considered to be that part of the psyche which
the subject has not familiarized with. In spite of its being unrecognized and subjectless, it
manifets itself fully and objectively in unprompted feelings, spontaneous and irrational,
semantically vague but having a well-defined structure and observable by other
subjects.
Ontically (beyond observation of a conscious subject) the unconscious belongs
to the real subject. Bur real unconscious is unable to identify itself with any particular
host. The unconscious has no time dimension but does have spatial forms which,
however, do not show the opposition “the external – the internal (the object – the
subject)”. The order in unconscious material is established in unified formative process in
the course of which simple forms become more complex and each of them undergoes
155
a complicated differentiation resulting in still other organized structures. The psychic
content of these structures (desires, feelings, impressions, experience, communication,
thoughts) may be activated, by a conscious effort of the subject, both in external and
internal plane. In archetypal transformations, the formative process, so eloquently
described by Jung, goes on without any subjective efforts; the leading role, that of the
source of this order, is played here by a transcendental factor, the Self.
Individual unconscious of employees in an organization is expressed in their
instinctive behaviour when they fall ill, come into conflicts with one another without any
reason or build air-castles. People are unaware of their unconscious but their unjustified
emotions and actions, spontaneous and irrational, are seen to others. Management of
people is accompanied by various processes – constructive and destructive, creative
and disastrous. Unconscious life of an organization is symbolic, irrational and subjectless.
It is no-man’s life and at the same time it involves everyone; it is a presence of
something unknown, an invisible part of collective psychology that keeps the
organization going.
Jung who proposed the concept of collective unconscious discerned in it
archetypal structures that are common to all people independent of their background,
views and whereabouts. Archetypes are ontic structures, mental forms containing all
possible meanings and predicates of a given cultural matrix.
The key archetype in Jung’s theory is the Self, “God within us” possessing light
and dark aspects of the Spirit, “the subject of one’s totality” that plays the leading role
in reconciling contradictions and has a great potential for psychic integration. The Self
regulates chaotic psychic states and other archetypes, it is the starting point of
psychological development and the aim of the endless process of individuation. In an
organization, the Self reveals itself in solidarity or dissociation of the staff, in synchronizing
events inside the organization with those occurring at the interface with the outworld, in
numinous group experiences and in the process of company identity development. If
an organization that is, say, a tree by birth wants for some reason to be, say, a cat it
means that it has not recognized its Self and so is doomed to perish. Organizations that
focus their activities around the Self live and prosper. Everything has its place in the sun,
trees and cats alike.
The Self is closely associated with the centre of consciousness, the Ego archetype
which contains largely conscious experience of ‘I’ and introjected systems of
relatioships. The Ego creates the archetype of the Persona through which it interacts
156
with the world sending it its messages, so the Persona is a sort of compromise between
them. What counts is the agreement of the Ego and Persona with the Self. The extent of
this agreement is a criterion allowing to discriminate between a true phenomenon and
an illusion. All true things grow from their centre, from within outward, building up
meanings and increasingly manifesting itself in the outworld. Everything false originates
outside and ends outside, it is not what it pretends to be. The Ego and the Persona of
an organization are manifested in inside and outside attempts to make image, namely,
in the company’s documentation, in its advertising, in the character of communication
and in corporal notions about the company.
Psychopomps mediating transcendental connection between the Self and the
Ego are the Anima and the Animus, the archetypes of the feminine and the masculine.
In individual woman’s psyche the Anima resides in the realm of consciousness while the
Animus is in her unconscious, in man’s psyche it is vice versa. In organizations, the Anima
and the Animus appear as Eros and Logos whose interrelations are quaintly
complicated: now they cooperate with each other, now take mutually exclusive
positions. If one of the “partners” from that inseparable couple is forced out, it retires
into the depths of the unconscious, the Shadow, and engages in underground battle.
The balance between the Anima and the Animus in organizations depends upon the
personnel interrelations and upon the proportion of men and women in the staff. In
Russia, organizations with the predominance of men in the staff are found mostly in top
echelons of power, in the army, in the securities market and at enterprises of oil industry,
automotive industry, shipbuilding, and the like. The majority of Russian companies are
“female”, so they are oriented to the conscious while living by the law of feelings. Less
numerous “male” companies, on the contrary, attach primary importance to reason
and common sense and need to sort out and contain their feelings.
Another archetype guarding the back door of the unconscious and collecting
everything that the Ego tries to reject (though not very successfully) is the Shadow. The
Ego is not alone who supplies it with some material. The Self, the Anima and the Animus
also have their Shadow sides. But along with psychic content unacceptable to the
society or the individual the Shadow keeps unclaimed resources and qualities that are
most necessary for psychological development. It often happens in organizations that
the Shadow of the boss looks for scapegoats that are, to his opinion, of no use, so he
throws them off. It is a universal fallacy of managers who look for causes of all
misfortunes only outside. Such “Shadow” leaders are met in all organizations, and it
matters what they do and what they apply their destructive energy to. If they guard the
157
boundaries of the organization, their work is useful, but if they scheme and try to build
up an opposition to the management, they do harm. In dysfunctional organizations,
people are sometimes confronted with shadowy projections of some groups that cast
their Shadow on some of the company employees. As a result, a hyporealistic
collective myth about this “Enemy” may be created that makes all kinds of unjustified
sinister suppositions, from his harbouring criminal designs to being of unconventional
sexual orientation. Such dysfunctional organizations often project their Shadow onto an
external Enemy – a retired employee, a competing organization or another country.
Unfortunately (or, indeed, fortunately), nobody can get rid of his Shadow by projecting
it onto the Other. The Shadow stands on its dignity and demands to be accepted by
way of self-criticism.
In organizations where top managers idealize themselves and their activity their
Shadow inevitably falls onto those who are below them, they undervalue their
subordinates. It may provoke two kinds of responses in the people suffering from
external Shadow: either an aggression upon the owner of the Shadow and his
destruction
or
autoaggression,
self-destruction.
Neither
of
these
responses
is
constructive. To develop, the organization has to assume responsibility for its Shadow
and place it under supervision of the employees giving impetus to the work. In this way,
it will benefit by creating the atmosphere of open relationships among the staff. There
are no ideal managers and
leaders, there are those who know the limits of their
competence and do not trespass them. The Shadow, by the way, is not unlike a bullterrier for it is easily trained and defends desperately when something threatens the
integrity of the Ego and the Self.
Particular attention should be given to cases when an organization is in the
power of the Shadow but is not aware of it. It may happen if it is ruled by an imitation
leader, a woolf in sheep’s clothing, or a Trickster. The Trickster is a special kind of
shadowy archetype that has taken a distinctive position in the postmodern epoch
when mimicry has reached epidemic proportions: “If you want to be the best, just
declare yourself one.” The Trickster leader is a peculiar phenomenon; there are two
polar varieties of
these leaders, though in reality a Trickster is always a mixture of them.
The first (variant) is “The White Trickster” (a dodger, a gambler, a clown) who
pretends to act out of best intentions but in reality, impersonating an insider, works, like
158
obersturmbannführer Stierlitz,1 for another company. He looks out for himself and
receives dividends from both sides. Whether it is true for Stierlitz or not, it is undoubtedly
true for our impersonators at home. Of the same jolly company are all modern cheats:
“magicians”, thimbleriggers and casino gamblers. However, they steal your cash but
not your personality, so it’s nothing, isn’t it? The White Trickster is not so ungodly and
even useful in some respects because he is an ignorant imitator of a fallen angel. The
latter, meanwhile, aims at the soul of the novice Trickster, white as yet.
Money and power are only the beginning for him.
“The Black Trickster” unconsciously identifies himself with destructive impulses of
collective unconscious. Though he makes solemn and challenging declarations and at
first sight is engaged in creative work, his results always turn out to be ruinous. The Black
Trickster wants to be God, to have unlimited power and unrestricted authority. Almost
all prominent Soviet politicians “leading Soviet people along the bright prospects to
communism” were such absurd parodies of Gods. Proclaiming their aim to be
happiness of the entire mankind, they made the cult of their own personalities. To Black
Tricksters belong also contemporary terrorists pretending to dig a grave to racism on our
planet but being slaves in fact struggling for global domination. In organizations, the
role of the Black Trickster is usually played by the finance director who is called behind
his back a “grey eminence” or, in the postmodern
style, “Little Zaches”.
A Trickster may be useful for an organization if his interests coincide with the goals
and interests of the group but if he is too dexterous in his trickstering, it is advisable to
get rid of him as of a contagious disease. Having recovered from it, the company
becomes healthier and stronger while keeping this virus and allowing it to
propagate it exposes itself to the danger of a disastrous epidemic.
The unconscious of an organization ideally corresponds to the notion of
organizational culture that has not been explained in rational terms as yet being by
nature an irrational phenomenon of collective origin.
Adhocracy is not necessarily associated with corporate organization. Corporate
culture may develop in organizations where relationships are founded on exploitation
and “we-oriented” identification fastened in a totalitarian manner to corporate values.
In adhocrative culture they develop an ‘I’-oriented team style of management based
1
A popular figure from a film about a Russian spy in German administration during World War II. (A note of the
translator.)
159
on recognition of spiritual values and collaboration of equal professionals that grow in
their business together achieving better results than they would achieve single-handed.
J. Collins found that “great” companies tend to renew their policy but not the
staff. They cultivate the culture of discipline instead of enforced discipline and choose
RIGHT people for their working team instead of gathering a thousand chore boys
around a genius. These companies are managed by competent leaders, not extremely
ambitious but strong-minded and able to understand
their subordinates. Great
companies do not differ cardinally from ordinary good companies in their business
strategies and technologies, they do not concentrate their efforts on administrative
duties and disciplinary actions, their distinguishing feature is the confidence of success,
all difficulties and hardships notwithstanding. Speaking about “great” companies,
Collins does not mention adhocracy, nevertheless, the adhocratic culture of the smallscale “blue ocean” of contemporary market preserves stability and orderliness most
probably thanks to its humane intention to adopt ad hoc attitude to life, realize true
design, create something meaningful and promote solidarity of people in the chaotic,
unstable, senseless and dissociative postmodern world.
A space is a formation having boundaries and at the same time a boundless
container to be filled. Being in a space, individual consciousness dissects it into THE
UPPER and THE LOWER, THE LEFT and THE RIGHT, THE FRONT and THE BACK relative to
itself and to other objects in the space. Any object in the three-dimensional world may
be characterized so, but it has also the fourth dimension, the inner subjective space.
The space of the Being external in relation to people and to the psyche is mapped fully
enough, the movement in states and cities is organized according to strict rules while
the inner space of human Soul as well as the collective Soul of the World fill these
external spaces with something invisible though sometimes experienced.
A LOCATION is a topos extended in space, though not endless, and linked with
other toposes. Both outer and inner toposes are archetypal in structure. Usually, a topos
has a NAME that conveys the meaning, the idea and generates a sort of identity
between the idea and the reality of the location.
For example, a new underground station named “Trubnaya” 1 has been opened
lately in Moscow, and in St. Petersburg they called the latest station “Parnassus”.
To convey the meaning of this paragraph, the names of some streets and stations must be translated or
explained. Thus, “Trubnaya” station may be translated as “Tube station”, it may be an allusion to the
Russian idiom “delo truba” (“bad job”); “Blagodatnaya street” = “Blissful street”; the family name
1
160
Comparing maps of underground lines in these cities reveals their arcane secrets.
Moscow is ring-structured, and one can get from any station to any other via
underground orbital. In St. Petersburg, lines intersect in pairs forming a complex
underground net, and it is not always easy to fathom how to get to your destination.
One of the organizations is situated on the Palace embankment and its director lives in
the Blagodatnaya street; the director of another organization situated in the
Nalichnaya street, resides in the Barmaleyev street. The organizations are named,
respectively, “Eden” and “Edenic Garden” (in the neon sign with the latter name the
first letter of the word “Garden” often flickers out at night).
Analysis of the topos of an organization reveals many unexpected facts of its
corporate life that are explained by the working of the unconscious. For example,
headquarters of some organization, with all top managers there, is located in one of
the prestigious streets in downtown while its subdivisions where middle managers and
operational staff work are scattered all over the city, the less significant the subdivision
is, the farther it is from the centre. Clearly, distant divisions bring the least income, and
the reason is not unfavourable marketing conditions that are often better on the
outskirts but synchronistic law of intraorganizational relations. Such spatial disposition of
the organization demonstrates the unconscious tendency of the management to
employ authoritarian and even totalitarian methods. Proclaiming democracy, they
exploit and undervalue their employees, especially the operational staff that is, by the
way, the mainstay of the organization.
In another organization top managers are called to get together for discussing
various matters in a roomy conference hall on the upper floor of the building with plenty
of windows and light. Conferences with participation of employees of lower standing
and applicants for vacant positions are held in the hall without any windows on the
ground floor; on the door of a nearby lavatory there is a notice: “DON’T THROW PAPER
into the bowl! If you choke it up, the lav will be closed for several days.” No wonder that
the management of this organization applies to a psychological counsellor with the
complaint about “dissatisfactory conduct of employees in the divisions”. The reason of
“dissatisfaction” is paranoiac attitude of the management to their subordinates calling
for protests of professionals and lowering self-rating of freshmen.
Barmaleyev coincides with the name of a wickid evil-maker from a children’s fairy-tale; “Nalichnaya
street” = “Cash street”; “Edenic Garden” is translated into Russian “Raiski Sad” and when the letter “S” in
the last word flickers out, it leaves the name “Raiski Ad” which means “Edenic Hell”. (A note of the
translator.)
161
If an organization occupying a territory comparable with a large airport presents
itself as personnel-oriented but the staff office numbering three half-trained employees
is a small room near the lodge, then you need not interview the entire staff to
understand the real situation. Another organization wants to raise skills of the personnel
and starts a Refresher Course. The training centre is fit up with the newest equipment
but the walls are made of glass and security patrols are walking between them to and
fro as survivals from Soviet as some survived specimens of “Homo Sovieticus”. Spatial
information is perceived usually subconsciously but it reflects true relationships between
subdivisions and employees in a company.
The architectural splendor of the Central Savings Bank of Russian Federation, as
well as of the governmental buildings in the capital and provincial towns, boggles
imagination. They resemble exquisite tsars’ residences in old Russia. Meanwhile schools
and hospitals for commonalty and especially lavatories in them provoke other feelings
altogether. It is hardly surprising that any boss in Russia unconsciously imitates the
attitude of the supreme power toward “the masses”, he just does not know any better.
The space is responsive. It synchronizes events in accordance with true
meanings produced in its territory. Events are, so to say, symbols of space. Synchronism
results from coincidence of meanings of events which may be achieved by making an
ontological effort, a mechanism of Being.
When an effort is made to suppress the Other, to force him act in accordance
with the wish of some subject in power, this suppression itself creates deadly meanings
producing the emptiness and faulty being which clones inside itself the emptiness as
well as events that sustain it and re-create the existence outside time, in NOTHINGNESS
and as NOBODY.
If one sees the Other as the subject having the right to choose what to apply his
efforts to, when to exist in emptiness and when to fill it, then the synchronism of viable
meanings and events appears and it becomes possible to experience the acquired
time and influence on the space. In a living process of making efforts there is place for
emptiness and uncertainty, for mistakes and negative feelings. If you find the one and
only true meaning in them, you can fill the space with certainty and positive feelings.
Declarations of the management that they have found the way to get rid of
uncertainty, mistakes, emptiness and negative factors forever lead only to the triumph
of everything they want to get rid of. But when they are reflective enough and
understand the inevitability of fluctuation between emptiness and fullness, when they
162
can rule a company conscientiously, without pretensions to unsurpassed cleverness
and professionalism, and are ready for mutual openness and acceptance, then the
inner semantic space of the company will be synchronized with really significant coincidences.
I anticipate the reaction of worldly-wise administrators who will resent the idea of
narrowing all problems of an organization down to the responsibility of the
management and will cry: “Have you ever seen a reflecting manager?” and “Try to
imagine what will happen if everyone is free to do as he sees fit!” It would be interesting
to retort with the question: “Wouldn’t you like to work in such an organization?” I am
sure that most of them would like it very much. Why then do we have organizations
where we work only to earn our living and not because it is good to be and live there?
Even Russian fairy tales begin with the words “Once there were, there lived…” To be is
not so easy. If we wish to live instead of comforting ourselves with imitation of Being,
then we must grow out of a habit of making eye-catching but empty imitations of all
living things. Of course, people addicted to imitation will not change their mode of
working too quickly but some of them will, and they might like it. Gathering in one
place, such people can live together with open eyes and clean hands if they really
want it and if they are confident of their foothold and prospects.
I know a man who owns and runs an industrial company. He complains that
people in the village where his production space is located are idlers and alcoholics
who steal produce and equipment. He is sure that they may be ruled only by
authoritarian methods, although it goes against his grain, and that he is ready to suffer
damage from them. I think there are other ways out of this situation. He can sell out the
business that does not size up to his expectations and start a new one (in his case,
something intellectualized would be preferable). Or he can continue the business but
fire out idlers and alcoholics and employ instead members of those Russian families that
have been forced to leave the countries formerly comprising the USSR and being
friendly. This decision demands extra efforts to organize and reorganize the business,
but one must have positive attitude for that while this man’s mind is catastropheoriented. He sees nothing positive either at present or in future. Meanwhile, the
synchronism of the events explicitly indicates him bright prospects.
Just as M. Proust was writing, in fact, one book all his life, so our life is one event
taking various forms. It begins, according to J. Deleuze, from an empty space of an event
163
of all events where ‘I’ makes a choice between joining in and adding to the eternity or
“multiplying narcissism of death”, as O. Kernberg puts it.
Being and Non-being are two ontic spheres of wholesome existence of the subject
in himself and in the world, this existence being independent of the awareness of the
subject. To stay in the sphere of Being, the subject must repeatedly make efforts to pull
himself out of Non-being. Without these ontological efforts Being will transform into Nonbeing.
Non-being and Being are two opposite forms of one entity. Non-being is lost
Being that is absent «here and now”. It was once, so now it may be absent. M.
Heidegger called Being “the presence” (thus his term “Dasein” may be translated). By
analogy, Non-being may be called “absence”. He who has been present just now, is
already absent.
This “he” is none other than the subject himself. The absence is “somethig” but
not “somebody”, it is the subject in the state of an object. This state appears due to the
interruption of the ontic connection of the subject with himself and is experienced by
him as interrupted connection with the world.
Heidegger wrote that God is looking at us through the eyes of an icon. The icon
is a visual image expressing the correlation between the sameness and non-sameness
of sacral space, an accessible form of conscious representation of the world and of the
unconscious, a symbolic image of another dimension BEYOND the limits of ignorant
world.
The ontic Transcendental entity itself differs from its visual image, and the image
that ‘I’ is able to see and actualize in itself is not the Transcendental entity. However,
the Transcendental entity cannot see ‘I’ if its consciousness is not able to see its inner
“icons”. In this case, filling up the gap between visible, non-esoteric and filled sacral
form of ‘I’ that is meant to reproduce the sacral and invisible esoteric sacral
Transcendental forms becomes impossible. If ‘I’ buries itself in everyday fuss and worries
of the profane world, it will cease to exist both for itself and for God, and even regular
visits to church and peering into icons won’t help.