Initial commit of ebook 77864 filesHEADmain

1 files changed, 1541 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/77864-0.txt b/77864-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a71a3fe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/77864-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1541 @@
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 77864 ***
+
+
+
+
+LITTLE BLUE BOOK NO. 978 Edited by E. Haldeman-Julius
+
+The Psychology of Jung
+
+James Oppenheim
+
+
+HALDEMAN-JULIUS COMPANY GIRARD, KANSAS
+
+
+
+
+Copyright, 1925, Haldeman-Julius Company
+
+PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
+
+
+
+
+THE PSYCHOLOGY OF JUNG.
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+
+ Chapter                                Page
+    I. The Psychology of the Future        5
+   II. The Sexual Theory                   8
+  III. Will-To-Power                      18
+   IV. The Break Between Freud and Jung   22
+    V. The Introvert vs. the Extravert    33
+   VI. Types                              45
+  VII. The Conflict and Its Solution      53
+ VIII. Note                               61
+
+
+
+
+THE PSYCHOLOGY OF JUNG.
+
+
+
+
+I.
+
+THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE FUTURE.
+
+
+The origin of the new psychology, with its technic universally known as
+psycho-analysis, lies in the effort which man has always made to cure
+those ills “not of the body.” When we speak of the ills of the “soul,”
+we do not, however, mean that the mind is not a part of the body. We
+merely mean that there is a difference, for instance, between the
+illness that might arise from receiving bad news, and that which was
+caused, say, by being knocked down by a motor car. The first we call a
+mental ill, a spiritual malady, the second a physical.
+
+The old shaman of the savage tribe did not only attempt to cure
+gangrene and malaria and sore throat; he also treated people who were
+“possessed by demons” or had “lost their souls”; he treated people who
+had lost hope, who were despairing, who wanted a charm to conquer the
+object of love or hate, who desired success, who heard voices, saw
+visions and were afraid to live.
+
+From the beginning, therefore, man has attempted to bring a healing to
+the mind. Every religion has been such an attempt.
+
+The trouble with this, however, from our modern standpoint, is that a
+religion demands faith, not only in the natural, but the supernatural;
+and not only, let it be added, in the supernatural, but a very definite
+and dogmatic supernatural, some set of stories and brand of divinities.
+There are Gods, Devils and ghosts to which we must submit. But modern
+science, which has steadfastly discredited mythology and sought to
+explain life and its phenomena by natural causes, or laws of nature,
+has seriously undermined the old religions, and we see them beginning
+to topple in all places of the earth.
+
+However, the science of medicine, which sought to discover the causes
+of sickness, reached a limit beyond which it could not pass. If there
+is no medicine for a broken heart, there is also none for a man with a
+fixed idea or one with a sense of utter inferiority. The insane cannot
+be cured by drugs or by operations, except in those rare curable cases
+which have an indubitable physical origin. The thousands creeping and
+stumbling around the world, victims of neurosis, cannot be reached by
+serums or diets.
+
+It was therefore necessary for medicine to go beyond itself, to invade
+the wide and dark realm of religion and preempt the creeds, by applying
+the technic of science to what had hitherto been understood darkly
+through intuition, guess-work and “revelation.”
+
+It is not my intention to give a history of the origin and rise of
+psycho-analysis. That, in itself, is a book. It is merely necessary
+to say that the first genius in this field was Sigmund Freud, that
+Freud made the first great discoveries, that he traced the first chart
+of the unconscious mind, and that he originated the first technic of
+psycho-analysis.
+
+If Freud, however, was the pioneer, it remained for two of his pupils
+to carry the work forward to the point where it has become one of the
+vital contributions to the race. The work of Adler, the first of these,
+came as a revolt against Freud and gave rise to a rival theory. The
+work of Jung, however, not only brought a synthesis of the work of
+Adler and Freud, but went beyond both. It is for this reason, then,
+that I call his work “the psychology of the future.”
+
+In order to come to a clear understanding of Jung, it will be
+necessary first to summarize the theories of both Freud and Adler. We
+can then see how Jung, accepting both, has transcended both, and laid
+out the first tracings of a complete psychology.
+
+
+
+
+II.
+
+THE SEXUAL THEORY.
+
+
+Freud sees life as a great and never-ending conflict between
+civilization, or organized society, and the individual. The individual
+is born with certain instincts, desires, wishes. Many of these are
+in conflict with the law and moral code of society. Hence, they are
+suppressed.
+
+This suppression works, however, in a curious way. Not only are the
+unlawful and “sinful” impulses shut out of the mind; they are also
+forgotten. And because they are forgotten, we actually have the
+spectacle of pious men and women who can solemnly swear that they are
+quite free of murderous, lustful, lecherous, dangerous thoughts and
+wishes; that they are “good” people; that they have nothing in common
+with the criminal and the debased.
+
+As a matter of fact, however, no instinct, no function in man can be
+abolished by cutting it off from consciousness. It is merely repressed,
+and forms what Dr. Jung later denoted as a _complex_; that is to say, a
+group of ideas, emotions, wishes that all go together and become a sort
+of mental family living off by itself, in exile.
+
+It is, in reality, a part of consciousness of which we are
+unconscious: a part of the mind shut out by the barrier of our will and
+our forgetfulness. And since there are many things that we repress,
+a goodly area of the mind is so cut off. Hence, all that part of the
+mind which is repressed, and of whose existence we are not aware, Freud
+calls _the unconscious mind_.
+
+But since the unconscious is living, not dead; since every impulse in
+man seeks constantly for expression; the unconscious is continually
+active, like a volcano. Only, instead of sending up its fire and lava
+and steam in their native state, it is sending them up in a camouflaged
+form. The bottled up energy seeking ever an outlet, loads itself into
+some part of the body, and becomes a symptom. It may appear as a
+paralysis of some muscle, as deafness or blindness, heart trouble or
+stomach trouble, etc. Naturally, these symptoms are not organic; it is
+not a real blindness, a real paralysis. Which explains why there can
+be miracles when believers touch saint’s bones or repeat the dogmas of
+the Christian Scientists. The reason is, that being mental in origin,
+these symptoms can also be cured in a mental way. But since faith
+healing does not probe to the secret source of the symptom, which is
+in the unconscious, such healing is usually followed by the outbreak
+of another symptom, in a different place, perhaps, and of a different
+nature.
+
+However, the repressed complex does not only express itself in bodily
+symptoms. It may appear in the conscious mind. But since the conscious
+mind resists the invasion, it appears in a masked form. It may become
+apparent as a fixed idea, for instance, the idea that one must go to
+some street corner and preach the Gospel, an idea which, in spite of
+its absurdity and irrationality, the patient cannot dislodge, and which
+is therefore fixed. Or it may appear as a fear, a fear of dogs, or of
+the dark, of closed places, going outdoors, etc.
+
+Nor is this all. Where there is a marked repression of a large part of
+oneself, the repressed material may become what is called a secondary
+personality, and every so often preempt the conscious mind, so that
+at one time the personality may be timid, pious, good, and at another
+bold, wicked and evil. It is, in a way, the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr.
+Hyde.
+
+Finally, the unconscious appears in consciousness in the form of
+dreams. It is really this great discovery which led to the development
+of the technic of psycho-analysis, and opened up the path which has led
+to all the other discoveries.
+
+A dream takes place when we are asleep; that is to say, when the
+conscious mind is completely relaxed, when all the bars are let down.
+What more natural than that the repressed portion of the mind may now
+flare up, just as the stars become visible when the sun is withdrawn
+from the sky? But dreams usually have something absurd about them. We
+walk in seven league boots, we cut off a hand and sew it on again,
+animals talk; we are in the land of make-believe and of the fairies and
+the bad spirits.
+
+Why does the unconscious speak such a fantastic language? Why doesn’t
+it express itself in simple English? According to Freud, this is
+because the conscious mind has refused to face the evil which it
+has repressed, and the unconscious therefore ever seeks a masked or
+camouflaged expression, whether in the form of a physical symptom, a
+fixed idea, a phobia, or a dream.
+
+Dreams, in short, are symbolic. Everything in a dream stands for
+something else. But these symbols are not haphazard; what they stand
+for are definitely expressed by the symbol. It is not haphazard for
+instance that a dove has always symbolized the holy spirit, or that a
+spear has stood for the masculine organ, or that a vessel has stood for
+the womb. There is a certain likeness between symbol and fact.
+
+It is nothing new to invest dreams with meaning. The human race has
+always done so. Man has always intuitively known that these strange
+manifestations of the night held a hidden meaning for him, a meaning
+that must be searched out by interpretation and analysis. So we
+read in the Bible of Joseph interpreting the dreams of Pharaoh; in
+Euripides’ play, Iphigenia, the action begins with a dream of the
+heroine, which she herself interprets, though somewhat mistakenly. So
+too we have the well-authenticated dream of Lincoln (ten days before
+he was assassinated) that he heard a noise of lamentation and sobbing
+downstairs in the White House and took a candle and went down. Around a
+catafalque moved a crowd of weeping people. He asked who was dead, and
+was informed that it was the President, who had been killed.
+
+Such dreams are of the prophetic order, and will be dealt with later
+on. The last dream, also, was straightforward. It was not symbolic. But
+such dreams are outside the usual run; they are the exceptions to the
+rule.
+
+The way then to find out the meaning of a dream is to treat the images
+in it as symbols and try to discover what the symbols stand for. And
+the quickest way to do this is to ask the dreamer himself.
+
+You dream, for instance, to use a simple illustration, that you are
+involved in a fight between a cat and a dog. Well, what do you think of
+cats and dogs? What are your associations?
+
+You begin to tell all the thoughts that come into your mind when you
+think of these two animals. You may drag in personal stories of a pet
+cat you once had, of a dog it fought with, etc. When all you have said
+is boiled down it may amount to this: that cats and dogs appear to be
+opposites, that cats are aloof, “selfish,” withdrawn, asking much and
+giving little, whereas dogs are loving, affectionate, very sociable,
+and may even give their lives for their masters. Symbolically then, the
+cat stands for the ego-impulses, the dog for the social impulses. It
+is natural that they should fight each other every so often; there are
+times when we are in great conflict between our wish to serve others
+and our desire to gratify or satisfy ourselves.
+
+What Freud discovered was that the repression came to light through
+the dream; that the dream material, if analyzed, showed exactly why
+the patient was ill, why he had his phobia or his physical symptom.
+For instance, the man might have a strain of sexual perversion in him.
+He himself is not aware of it. But the dream immediately brings it to
+light and he is forced to recognize it.
+
+Naturally it is difficult to get a patient to accept the repressed
+material. If he repressed it because of a great moral revulsion, he can
+only be led by a process of re-education to accept it. When he first
+comes for treatment, therefore, he merely tells the analyst all that
+he remembers about his past, his family and personal history, etc.
+Gradually he acquires confidence in the analyst. This unburdening is
+like a confession. The analyst hears things that the patient has never
+before mentioned to anyone else. The analyst, because of his knowledge
+of psychology, also shows an understanding of the patient that quite
+startles the latter. The analyst, in short, becomes more than a father
+to him, more than a mother. There is a feeling of gratitude, of trust,
+which approaches the border of love. This feeling, this attitude,
+is called the _transference_. The patient has transferred himself,
+his burden, to the analyst. And no cure can take place until this is
+achieved.
+
+For when the transference is made, the patient is now ready to go
+along with the analyst in his re-education. He gains a new standpoint.
+He discovers that the ugly and evil things which he suppressed are not
+his personal property, his private depravity, but are public property,
+that every one who is a human being has the same impulses, the same
+shameful lusts, the same wicked wishes; and that there can be no
+genuine health until one allows these impulses in consciousness and
+accepts them in their nakedest aspect.
+
+The patient then is ready to face squarely and truthfully the
+divulgences of his dreams.
+
+And what is the cure? Sometimes, happily, it is a simple matter. The
+man who has suppressed his sexuality altogether, for instance, may now
+marry and gain a good direct expression for his need. But what of those
+who find strong perverted wishes, what shall we do with them?
+
+At this point Freud erects the theory of _sublimation_. It is not a new
+theory. The youth in college is admonished to go into athletics that
+he may channel off and use up the energy which otherwise would provide
+him with a sexual problem. It is the substitution of a “higher” thing
+for a “lower.” Only, of course, the higher thing must stand in some
+natural relation to the lower, that the instinctive craving may have
+some genuine satisfaction.
+
+The classic example is that of surgery. A man is sadistic. That is,
+he desires to practice cruelty on the object of his love. Turn this
+upside-down from something destructive to something creative, and you
+let him dig his knife into the human body, but now it is to help and
+heal another, not to hurt him. Hence, the surgeon is sublimating his
+sadistic tendencies.
+
+Another example, according to Freud, is the artist. His wicked and
+criminal impulses, we will say, would indicate a long list of murders
+if he lived them out. He does not live them out, he writes them out. He
+becomes known as a writer of crime and detective stories, and in this
+form he releases his evil energy and spends it utterly.
+
+Or take the actor. As a child he wanted constantly to exhibit himself,
+to go naked before others. This strong strain of exhibitionism can be
+satisfied finally by acting, by showing himself off before audiences.
+
+Hence, the Freudian cure for those impulses we cannot live, is, first,
+to recognize and accept them, and secondly, to sublimate them.
+
+The Freudian psychology, however, does not rest at this point. It has a
+theory which underlies all the others; it is the theory connected with
+the Oedipus complex.
+
+Oedipus was the man, celebrated in Greek drama, who, by a fluke of
+fate, married his own mother, had children by her, and later had to
+expiate his crime by blinding himself and wandering poor and helpless
+about the world. For his crime is the one crime which mankind has
+usually found absolutely taboo. In practically all the savage tribes,
+and in every civilized code, incest, or intermarriage between child and
+parent, brother and sister, has been strictly forbidden.
+
+Why is this so? Freud believes that there is a natural sexual
+attraction within the family group itself, that the child begins its
+sexual life very early, that the boy gains satisfactions through his
+mother’s caresses; and that hence the whole beginnings of sexuality
+are wrapped up in the incestuous wish. Naturally, however, for the son
+there is a great rival. It is his father. His father would fight him
+off just as he would any other male rival. This is one of the reasons
+for the universal taboo.
+
+But if the origins and beginnings of sexuality are entwined in the
+incestuous wish, and incest is taboo, we have an immediate cause of
+trouble in human nature. We are all bound to repress. And indeed if we
+look upon man, we see that he is afflicted with much sickness, that he
+is born to trouble as the sparks fly upward.
+
+If, however, this is the nuclear complex, this Oedipus complex, how
+can we account for the other sexual difficulties, the perversions?
+They originate, according to Freud, in the Oedipus complex itself. The
+child’s first act is suckling, this involves the mouth; he then learns
+to suck his finger when he cannot get at the nipple, this involves
+mouth and hand; he then begins to use his hand rubbing himself and this
+leads to rubbing the sexual organ (auto-erotism); he now takes pleasure
+in his own body and in bodies like his own (homosexual interest), and
+finally he becomes interested in bodies unlike his own (normal sexual
+wish). He may find, however, that he cannot cross the last bridge and
+get to normal sexuality. The repressed incest wish stands in the way
+and makes him fear the woman who would, unconsciously, be used as a
+substitute for the mother. Hence, he remains fixed at some infantile
+stage; mouth-erotism, auto-erotism, homosexuality, etc. Often in
+analysis, when he discovers this, according to Freud, he can learn
+to renounce the infantile fixation, or perversion, and learn to take
+pleasure in normal sexuality.
+
+Such, in brief, and with, alas, much omitted, is an outline of the
+Freudian theory. It is a sexual theory. The psychological troubles
+of mankind, with all their symptoms, either physical or mental, are
+traced back to a disturbance in sexuality, to taboos which bring the
+individual into conflict with society and so cause these unnatural
+repressions. Freud, however, does not use the word sexuality in a
+narrow sense; he makes it synonymous with love-life, though the purely
+sexual element is, on close examination, always present.
+
+However, recently, Freud, now an old man, has advanced a new theory to
+supplement the sexual theory. He believes, though he is very cautious
+in his statement, that beside the sexual impulse, the will-to-live, to
+create and procreate, there is an opposite impulse, a will-to-death, a
+wish to have done. In this, he pays an unconscious tribute to some of
+the theories of Jung, which will be discussed later on.
+
+
+
+
+III.
+
+WILL-TO-POWER.
+
+
+Alfred Adler was a pupil of Freud. In the course of his psycho-analytic
+practice he stumbled across a discovery which led to a break with Freud
+and the enunciation of a new theory. In contradistinction to the sexual
+theory it may be called the power-theory.
+
+What Adler noticed in every neurotic was a marked feeling of
+inferiority, a feeling, as he put it, of being _under_, and a
+consequent incessant striving to be _over_ or on top. To use a simple,
+concrete case: If a man felt inferior to the woman he loved, and this
+was a symptom of inferiority he had always had toward the women he
+loved, he would strive by every means to put the woman down and himself
+up. He might put her down by economic pressure, by intellectual attack;
+or he might put her down in the sexual way, for instance through
+cruelty (sadism).
+
+In the latter case, Freud would say that the problem was sexual.
+But Adler would say, what the man is striving for is not sexual
+satisfaction, but power. If he could put the woman down through
+money-pressure, that would satisfy him, or if he could put her down
+sexually, that would be satisfactory. What he was seeking was mastery.
+
+Take the well-known case of the Don Juan who has one love-affair
+after another, who wins a woman only to tire of her and pass on to the
+next. Such men will admit, as a rule, that the greatest pleasure is in
+conquest, and that when a woman has been conquered she is no longer
+interesting. They look upon love-affairs as a series of battles, and
+the aim is not love or sexuality, so much as triumph.
+
+What becomes then of the Oedipus complex, the incestuous longing of
+the son for the mother? According to Adler this, too, is a problem of
+power. The father is the head of the house, the master, the king in the
+realm of the family, and possesses the mother. The son is under the
+father, but would depose this king and take his place. In short, he
+would be the head and possess the mother. But actually, what the child
+is seeking, is not really to possess the mother, but to have power in
+the manner of his father.
+
+The cause, then, of mental disorders and spiritual maladies, Adler
+traces to an excessive feeling of inferiority which leads to a marked
+will-to-power. But whence arises this feeling of inferiority? Adler at
+this point is sure that the origin is to be sought not in something
+psychic but in something physical. His theory is that the feeling of
+inferiority is due to some _actual organic inferiority_.
+
+In other words, he believes that a child who has a club foot, like
+Byron, or one subject to epileptic fits, like Dostoyevski, or one with
+an impediment which causes stammering, like Demosthenes, or one with
+a chronic tendency to constipation like Lincoln (the cases of great
+men could be multiplied endlessly), that such a child feels himself
+inferior to normal children; he feels that there is something the
+matter with him, that he has less chance of success, etc. This is the
+feeling of inferiority, the feeling of being under. And the deeper this
+feeling, the greater the reaction to it, the greater the striving to
+change the position about, so that instead of being under his fellows
+he is over them. Out of such defects, then, arise the great ambitions,
+or as Adler puts it, the “guiding fiction.” By this he means a phantasy
+of some great goal which the child dreams about and sets out to reach.
+
+A classical case is that of Demosthenes. Because he stammered, because
+he was inferior in speech to other children, an ambition awoke not
+merely to be able to talk in the normal manner, but something far
+greater: namely, to be the greatest of orators, an ambition he actually
+achieved. But suppose he could not have achieved such a victory,
+suppose conditions had been such that it was impossible for him to
+be an orator? Then his incessant striving would prove futile, the
+feeling of inferiority would increase, and there would be a breakdown.
+The breakdown would be a neurosis, and he would be ready for a
+psycho-analyst.
+
+Why did Napoleon set out to conquer Europe? His inordinate
+will-to-power could be traced back to a painful feeling of inferiority
+in his youth, which showed itself in the military school, where he was
+put to shame by his fellows. They, he must have felt, would become in
+time great generals and leaders in the army; hence, he must be even
+more than they, the general of generals.
+
+As to the feeling of inferiority itself, Adler denotes it as the
+feeling of being _feminine_. Woman, he believes, has the psychology of
+being under, man that of being over, as shown in the sexual act itself.
+Besides, man is physically stronger than woman. Hence, if a man has an
+organic inferiority, he feels that he is not a man, and hence, that he
+is in some way feminine. All his striving therefore is to be masculine,
+and indeed, super-masculine. This striving Adler calls _the masculine
+protest_. One finds it in women also; a marked feeling of inferiority
+in a woman leading her to strive to be like a man, and a refusal to
+accept her own psychology.
+
+Such, in brief, is the Adler theory. It owes many things to Nietzsche,
+who, in his “Thus Spake Zarathustra” teaches will-to-power as the
+guiding principle of life, who relegates woman to a lesser, man to a
+greater sphere, and who finds in the striving of the ego the dominant
+impulse of life.
+
+
+
+
+IV.
+
+THE BREAK BETWEEN FREUD AND JUNG.
+
+
+At the time that Dr. Freud was making his discoveries in Vienna, Dr.
+Carl Jung, a young psychiatrist, was conducting certain experiments
+in Zurich, Switzerland. These were of a dry technical nature which
+need not be given here, but they led to a tentative theory of an
+unconscious mind. It was while he was engaged on these experiments that
+Jung first read the work of Freud. He knew at once that he had found
+his master and hastened to become Freud’s pupil and colleague. He did
+more than that. At that period Freud was the laughing stock of Vienna,
+and wherever his work penetrated. He was jeered and ridiculed for his
+fantastic notions, and was suffering the bitter fate of all pioneers.
+Jung was in a powerful position at Zurich, and at once proceeded to
+enlarge and deepen the fight for Freud. He became the most powerful
+exponent of the Freudian psychology, and helped to bring the new
+knowledge and new technic into its first acceptance by the world.
+
+Freud looked upon Jung as upon a favorite son. They fought
+shoulder-to-shoulder, the work spread, and they were invited to
+this country to give lectures. In Switzerland, Austria, England and
+America the psycho-analyst made his appearance, and the world of the
+intelligentsia awoke with a shock to the sexual theory. Among the
+cultured everywhere there was discussion of the Oedipus complex, the
+repressions, the sexual perversions, the idea that much that we had
+thought purely spiritual, like art and religion, were merely masks for
+sexual complexes. The psycho-analytic movement, held firmly together by
+two great men, was forging ahead.
+
+However, Jung, from his continued analysis of patients, and from his
+own experiences, was beginning to form doubts in his own mind. There
+was something, he began to think, inadequate in Freud’s theory. He
+hardly dared, at this time, to make any formal criticism; but finally,
+after a great conflict, he was moved, even inspired, to write his first
+great book. This book is entitled “The Psychology of the Unconscious.”
+
+He has said of it that it was a voyage of discovery. He himself, when
+he started it, hardly knew to what depths it would lead him, to what
+conclusions it would force him. But when he was finished, he knew that
+he could no longer withhold his own point of view and that this would
+inevitably lead to a break with Freud.
+
+It proved to be so. Freud was shocked and appalled. He sent the
+manuscript back with a letter in which their relationship was ended. He
+said that Jung had betrayed the psycho-analytic movement, that he had
+ventured out beyond the bounds of science, and that he was seeking to
+destroy the greatest values in the new psychology.
+
+Of course such a break was inevitable, and in the end it proved
+fortunate. It set Jung free. He could now go on, without hindrance, in
+his great task, which led finally to the greatest contributions thus
+far made.
+
+The break itself may be traced to a divergence between two theories of
+the unconscious. As will be remembered, Freud’s theory would define the
+unconscious as something which is produced after we are born, and when
+the repressions begin. All that is anti-social, that flies in the face
+of conventional morality and the law of the land, everything that is
+taboo, gets walled off from the conscious mind, and is henceforth the
+unconscious mind. The unconscious then is a storehouse of the evil, the
+thwarted, the unconventional, the instinctive.
+
+Jung does not deny that a _part_ of the unconscious is exactly of this
+nature. But in “The Psychology of the Unconscious” he proceeds to
+prove, by a wealth of material and a sureness of analysis, that the
+unconscious is something far deeper and greater than merely a personal
+bag of discards.
+
+He finds in numerous typical dreams and phantasies of his patients
+that they reproduce symbols and stories as old as the human race. He
+shows that the human mind everywhere, among the most widely scattered
+peoples, and in different ages, produces the same typical myths, the
+same figures of deities and demons; and that the patient of today gives
+forth, in analysis, a similar mythology; and very often something which
+he, the patient, has been utterly ignorant of and which is beyond his
+understanding.
+
+He finds further that man has always had what might be called a typical
+psychological fate; that the story of man’s inner life and development
+has always taken a certain form, embodied in the figure of the hero.
+The hero, in the myth, is always he who goes forth to conquer greatly,
+who overcomes dragons and supernatural powers, but who finally loses
+his power, is subjugated and dies an inner death. But out of this death
+he is reborn and appears with a new life, often magical, by which he
+goes on to his greater achievements.
+
+Such a death and rebirth is pictured in the story of the crucifixion
+of Jesus. It appears in a modern work, in “Jean-Christophe,” where
+the hero suffers a spiritual disintegration and can no longer compose
+music, but with the first breath of Spring, feels the new tides of life
+pouring into him and rises to the greatest heights of his creative
+power. Such, too, is doubtless the inner story of our greatest American
+poet, Walt Whitman. When he was about 35, and after suffering some deep
+personal reverse, he secluded himself on Long Island beside the sea for
+some weeks, and had a spiritual experience which led to his awakening
+as a poet and the beginning of “Leaves of Grass.”
+
+What is this typical myth? It is known as the sun-myth, for the savage
+doubtless based it on the strange fact that the sun, after setting in
+the west, rose again the following morning in the east. This sun-myth,
+boiled down to its essentials, is somewhat as follows: The sun is the
+hero. He is born of the mother, the sea, in the east. He rises in his
+splendor and reaches the zenith. But now his strange descent begins,
+and when he reaches the west, he must re-descend into the waters of the
+sea, die again and re-enter the mother’s womb. Actually he is pictured
+as being devoured by a sea monster. In the belly of this monster he
+rides in the sea under the earth back toward the east. At first he lies
+supine; but finally, plucking up courage he begins to battle with the
+monster. Finally he kills him, and the body of the great fish floats to
+shore, where the hero, the sun, steps out reborn, and rises again in
+the east.
+
+This story, based on something seen in nature, is found to be typical
+of man’s soul. And Jung discovered that wherever an analysis was
+carried far enough, this typical myth appeared in various forms in
+the dreams of the patient, and the patient went through an experience
+analogous to the myth.
+
+What is this experience? A man has reached a high point of development
+and achievements. There comes upon him now a sense of deadness and
+futility, a period of disillusionment and turning away from the world,
+the experience which is described in the beginning of Goethe’s “Faust.”
+This inner death proceeds until he is lost in himself, until he is,
+in the language of the myth, devoured by the monster; and now he goes
+through a long period of inner suffering and groping until the time
+comes when a new life awakens and he goes back to the world of men with
+a greater energy, a new vision, and perhaps a new life-task. So, in the
+beginning of Nietzsche’s “Thus Spake Zarathustra,” we see the hero step
+forth after his years of preparation in the wilderness to bring his
+message to the world of men.
+
+This then is the typical experience of those who carry their
+development to any height. What is its meaning psychologically?
+
+There is no understanding of it, says Jung, unless we broaden the
+conception of the unconscious. And with this he introduces his theory
+of the _collective unconscious_.
+
+The human body is the product of millions of years of evolution, and in
+it is written the history of life. It is not a sudden creation. If this
+is true of the body, how can it be anything but true of the mind, which
+is a function of the body? The mind, too, is a product of millions of
+years of evolution, and just as the history of life is written in the
+flesh, so too the history of man’s spirit, his adventure, is summed
+up in the mind. In other words, the new born babe does not present a
+mind like a blank sheet of paper on which his personal experience will
+begin to write; he is born with the great inheritance of the race, the
+collective unconscious, in which is stored the wisdom of the ages as
+well as the great instincts, and what Jung calls “the residues of our
+animal ancestry.”
+
+How do we know this? Because the mind of a man today, a man even
+ignorant and unread, will, on certain occasions, produce the same
+myths, the same supernatural figures, the same psychic phenomena as
+those produced thousands of years ago, and the same in every part of
+the earth among the most widely separated nations and races.
+
+In short, the unconscious contains typical _images_ and typical
+_stories_. And whence did these arise? It is quite natural that the
+presence in our own unconscious of a wisdom greater than ours and at
+the same time of animal instincts sometimes overwhelming in their
+destructiveness, should give the savage, for instance, a sense of the
+nearness of supernatural powers of good and evil, of some supernatural
+wisdom that helped him (in the form of revelation or inspiration) and
+of some demonic lust or passion, which, if it swept over him, led
+to the orgy, the murder or insanity. Hence, these experiences would
+be pictured as the work of beings like those he knew, only greater.
+Wisdom was a Great Mother or a Great Father, a God, in short; evil was
+a Devil, a Demon, like a bad man, only greater and worse. And certain
+experiences would be pictured in the form of monsters, great strange
+animals, sometimes animals part human and part beast.
+
+Thus we see an explanation for the origin of the many religions on
+earth, all of which have certain things in common. Some sensitive
+man experienced his own unconscious in the form of dreams and
+hallucinations. Moses for instance heard the voice of God and saw
+the burning bush. Psychologically, this would mean that what Moses
+thought was outside himself, came from within himself, came from the
+unconscious and was, in the technical language, _projected_, the
+vision of fire upon the bush, the voice into the air. He heard and saw
+something out of his own depths.
+
+Every religion makes this projection. Heaven is up in the sky, hell
+under the earth; the Gods are on high, the Devils below. It has
+remained for modern psychology not only to locate these phenomena
+as in the brain itself, but also to divest them of their miraculous
+coating, and to explain them as something having a direct meaning in
+the patient’s life.
+
+According to Jung, the collective unconscious is more or less dormant
+in all of us, except under certain circumstances or after certain
+experiences. The average man goes on unaware of his own demonic and
+divine attributes. But in a lynching-bee or in battle the devil will
+suddenly awake and transform him from something human into something
+monstrous. On the other hand, the youth falling headlong in love,
+the man who sustains the death of his loved one and similar great
+experiences of life, will encounter the presence of ineffable wisdom
+and power, so that he feels he is visited by something beyond the human.
+
+But the process of analysis also leads to the experience of the
+collective unconscious. Psycho-analysis is self-discovery. One goes
+deeper and deeper into oneself. One goes back on the track of the
+years to one’s childhood. One exhausts in the process one’s personal
+memories. One goes down, as it were, beyond the personal layers of the
+unconscious, to the impersonal. At this point the manifestations of
+the collective unconscious begin, and the dreams are now loaded with
+mythological conceptions, and images of the supernatural.
+
+This deep entering into oneself Jung defines as _introversion_, a self
+descent, and a means of development, a discipline not only in the
+wisdom of all time, but in overcoming the undeveloped tendencies in
+oneself. It is at this point that the hero is devoured by the monster,
+the unconscious, and makes that voyage that leads to his rebirth.
+
+Dante depicts this in his Divine Comedy. The hero, Dante, is led
+by Virgil, down through the depth of Inferno (the evil side of the
+unconscious), up the mount of Purgatory (the overcoming) and finally
+reaches Paradise, where he finds Beatrice, an image of his soul, and a
+new wisdom, a new life are his.
+
+Naturally one cannot do justice to so deep a conception within
+the space allotted. But we can see at a glance that much that is
+otherwise inexplicable, save on the ground of something miraculous
+and supernatural, is now given a more natural explanation. We
+can understand the genius as one who has the gift of tapping his
+unconscious and bringing forth works which are impossible to the run
+of men. We can understand why man has always needed a religion. We can
+understand those intuitions which lead to new discoveries in science.
+Man has a storehouse of wisdom in himself.
+
+We can also understand the strange aberrations of insanity, of those
+unfortunates who are caught, as it were, in the collective unconscious,
+and live only in a world of demons and divinities and uncanny myths.
+We can understand too the demonic outbreaks in war, and the cause of
+many crimes. I know of the case of a man who was a clergyman, and who,
+each time he had finished an impassioned sermon which passed through
+the audience like a rousing electricity, immediately went to a brothel
+and indulged in an orgy of drink and sexuality. He was a man under the
+complete dominance of the collective unconscious. First the divine side
+appeared, with its marvelous inspirations; then the demonic, dragging
+him in the mud.
+
+It must not be thought, from the foregoing, that Jung rejected
+the sexual theory of Freud. What he did was to modify this theory,
+holding that not all cases of neurosis registered sexual repression
+or maladjustment. He fully agreed however, that the Oedipus complex
+appears as one of the great problems, but instead of interpreting
+dreams of this nature to mean that the son actually had incestuous
+longings for the mother, he took such dreams, like all others, to be
+symbolic. If a man dreams that a monster devours him, it does not mean
+that he is literally eaten by a large animal. It means that he has
+made a deep introversion. So too a dream of incest means that the son
+has reunited himself with the mother. But what does the mother mean?
+She may symbolize that period of his life when he actually was united
+with her spiritually, the time of early childhood, a time when he was
+irresponsible, taken care of, sheltered, helped. His dream may mean
+then that he longs to be like a child again; he longs to escape from
+the hardships of adaptation and his present problems.
+
+On the other hand the mother may have a deeper meaning. She may appear
+with a supernatural air about her, and stand for the collective
+unconscious itself, which is the source (or mother) of our conscious
+life. The longing of the son for the mother, from this standpoint,
+is the longing for descent into self, for deep introversion. It has
+the meaning of the sun-myth where the setting sun is devoured by the
+monster and starts on his journey toward rebirth.
+
+Since there is great danger in the withdrawal from life, in an
+introversion that in a way shuts one in oneself, whether one
+does this as an escape from responsibility or from a longing for
+self-development, it is natural that the myth should represent this
+incest-longing as taboo, as forbidden, just as real incest is, and that
+it is only the hero who can overcome this taboo and make that great
+descent which Dante pictures in his Inferno, and which in Faust is
+shown as the perilous descent to the Mothers.
+
+
+
+
+V.
+
+THE INTROVERT VS. THE EXTRAVERT.
+
+
+If the reader has compared Freud’s sexual theory with Adler’s power
+theory, he must have been struck by the fact that _both theories sound
+plausible_. It is certainly true that the conventional morality of
+civilization causes us to suppress certain instinctive desires. If
+a man is by nature polygamous, and is taught the ideal of monogamy
+in such a way as to believe that even the thought of illicit love is
+a sin, it is reasonable to think that he may repress his polygamous
+tendencies, thus paving the way for an unconscious conflict and a
+neurosis.
+
+But, on the other hand, who has not, at least at times, had the painful
+feeling of inferiority and not been stirred by an ambition to get on
+top? What seems more natural than that the stammerer, Demosthenes,
+should strive to achieve greatness as an orator, or that a club-footed
+Byron should attempt to make himself a conqueror of women and a famous
+poet? Certainly the struggle for power is as widespread and clearly
+discernible in life as the instinctive drive for sexuality and a full
+love-life.
+
+It is at this point that the greatness of Jung emerges. He had, in
+the course of his investigations, come upon a startling divergence
+of reaction among his patients, so that he was forced to conclude
+that there were two kinds of human being, as different, if not more
+different, from each other, than the two sexes. These two types he
+named the _extravert_ and the _introvert_.
+
+He next discovered that these two types had long been noted by men of
+genius under such designations as objective and subjective, romantic
+and classical, realistic and idealistic, materialistic and spiritual.
+William James called them the tough-minded and the tender-minded.
+William Blake, the English poet, said of them:
+
+“There are two classes of men: the _prolific_ and the _devouring_.
+Religion is an endeavor to reconcile the two.”
+
+Jung interprets prolific here to mean, “the fruitful, who brings forth
+out of himself”; and “the devouring, as the man who swallows up and
+takes into himself.”
+
+Needless to say the prolific type, which has appeared under the
+designations of the objective, romantic, realistic, materialistic
+and tough-minded, is, more exactly defined, the extravert, and the
+devouring type which was also called the subjective, classical,
+idealistic, spiritual and tender-minded, is the introvert.
+
+What characterizes the extravert is that _his interest is normally
+centered on things outside himself_. An excellent example was our
+own Theodore Roosevelt. He was thoroughly extraverted, with instant
+response to the world about him. His attention was given wholeheartedly
+to anything that caught it. He was a man with an immense diversity of
+interests, from birds and flowers, to simplified spelling, from a local
+political fight to an international war; poetry, Greek coins, history,
+hunting, sports, finance,--the list was almost endless. And into
+each of these interests he could throw himself full force, and with
+astonishing power. He was as interested in men as in things, and his
+friends included people from every walk of life. He was well adapted
+to life, and made himself at home almost anywhere. What characterized
+him chiefly was that he gave himself without stint, went into action
+at a moment’s notice, had a tendency to practicality and common sense
+which kept him from being an extremist; was, in short, an excellent
+opportunist, knowing, very often, just when to strike, just what to
+say, with a decisiveness that won through. He was the fighting man, the
+man of action, the man of his own time, his own age, his own country.
+
+He was, in other words, a man “orientated by the object.” That is to
+say, his life was determined by things and thoughts and ideas coming to
+him from the _outside_, in the main. If an enemy showed his head, he
+struck; if a friend, he clasped hands; if a popular movement appeared,
+he led it; if there was a war he wanted to be in it; if someone else
+originated a good idea (not too radical) he took it over and made it
+his.
+
+It will be seen from this that the extravert is normally a man who
+is a harmonious part of the world _as it is_. This does not mean, of
+course, that he will be merely a conservative; for the world is in
+constant change, and an intelligent extravert will be one-to-one with
+the forward tide. But since he is, to a large extent, bound up in the
+things outside himself, he is, mainly, a reflection of the world. He
+could almost say of himself, “I am--what I love.”
+
+His shortcomings are obvious. He covers a lot of ground, but
+necessarily in a shallow way. He cannot be deep, because depth implies
+a certain slowness, a certain amount of meditation and constant
+study, a brooding and solitude. He originates but little, for it is
+the thoughts and ideas of others which interest him. He is an enemy
+to anything really new, anything pregnant with the future, because
+it collides with the world as it is, which is the world he loves.
+Finally, he lacks an inner life, the more creative and profound life;
+a fact which the keen-sighted Roosevelt knew very well, for he said of
+himself, “My danger is that I forget I have a soul.”
+
+Such is a brief sketch of the extravert as he appears in a pronounced,
+perhaps an extreme form. The value of using an extreme case is, of
+course, that he covers the whole territory, and we can see in him the
+various sides of the type. Hence, it will be valuable to consider an
+extreme introvert, the direct opposite of Roosevelt, so that we may
+come to an understanding of the contrasting type.
+
+If the extravert is characterized by the fact that his interest
+is normally centered in things outside himself, the introvert is
+characterized by the fact that his interest is normally centered on
+things _inside_ himself. From the extravert’s standpoint this would
+mean that the introvert was a man who thought of nothing but himself,
+was consumed with his own aches and pains, his own fears and hopes, and
+perhaps certain erratic and absurd or dangerous ideas. For everything
+that the extravert holds most dear, as action, fitting in, being a
+“good fellow,” getting on, the introvert looks upon as rather shallow
+and cheap, and vice versa, everything most valuable to the introvert
+seems foolish, absurd, ridiculous, dangerous to the extravert.
+
+Naturally, to be interested in the things inside oneself need not be
+anything trivial. Within oneself is the world of thought and ideas, the
+world of imagination, the world out of which every art, every religion,
+every philosophy, every invention, every fresh discovery of science,
+every new idea for the advancement and development of the race has
+sprung. Kant, oblivious of the world, sat and brooded, until out of
+himself sprang a great philosophy which wrought a change in the mind of
+Europe. A Jesus from his solitary brooding brings forth a new religion.
+A Michaelangelo in his isolation gives birth to colossal art.
+
+We find in Friedrich Nietzsche an example of the extreme introvert.
+His life, like those of most introverts who were extreme, was devoid of
+action and hence without history. There is very little to say about it,
+for the real drama took place within him. He served for a short time
+in a war, but was discharged because of sickness. He taught philology
+for a time in a university. But finally, on a small income, he retired,
+and led a secluded life, producing his works, until, while still in
+the prime of life, he became insane. He did not marry; he had but few
+friends; he was a solitary.
+
+Where Roosevelt presents the picture of a man at home in the world,
+Nietzsche is seen as a stranger in it, an alien. Where Roosevelt
+went straight out and acted, Nietzsche withdrew into his shell.
+Where Roosevelt forgot himself in others, in causes, in the glamour
+and absorption of _things_, Nietzsche remained in a state of _acute
+self-consciousness_. A Roosevelt glories in the world and thinks it is
+good and the people in it excellent and interesting; a Nietzsche sees
+it as full of horrible and terrible things and is filled with revulsion
+at the sight of human cowardice, slothfulness and depravity. Where
+a Roosevelt spreads himself all over, interested in a multitude of
+objects, a Nietzsche concentrates more and more on a few things, a few
+ideas, a life which shuts out as much as possible anything that will
+disturb his predetermined path.
+
+This is the normal attitude of the introvert. He is ill adapted to
+the outer world, because he is absorbed in the inner world. And this
+absorption leads, in the case of a Nietzsche, to great discoveries and
+great works.
+
+If we remember Jung’s conception of the collective unconscious as the
+summation of the past, the storehouse of wisdom, the creative source,
+we may readily understand that the collective unconscious is the
+psychic stream of life itself and that it not only bears the past in
+it, but also the budding future. That which is to be lies creatively
+within it, and is revealed to the great artist, the great thinker in
+majestic symbols and so-called visions. That is why we say that great
+art and great thought are always ahead of the world. For the extreme
+introvert, absorbed in himself, lives in that world of imagination
+where the products of the collective unconscious become known to
+him. He has deep intuitions, he actually may have symbols and ideas
+presented to him in dream and phantasy, even in hallucination. The
+English mystic, Blake, actually saw the forms and shapes which he drew,
+and claimed, also, that some of his poems were dictated to him by a
+voice. I have already spoken of Moses’ experience with the burning bush
+and the voice of God.
+
+It was quite natural therefore that Nietzsche should have been a
+forerunner. Out of his years of solitude there came at last an eruption
+from the unconscious which was nothing short of amazing. Each part of
+Thus Spake Zarathustra, and each part is about a hundred pages long,
+was written in ten days. The thoughts and words came so fast that
+Nietzsche could not keep up with them. If he was walking, he had to
+write on scraps of paper. The experience was so overwhelming that he
+compared it with that of the Biblical prophets, and said that not in
+two thousand years had there been another such case of inspiration.
+
+What is Thus Spake Zarathustra? It is an incomparable picture of the
+collective unconscious, as Jung points out, and foreshadows the new
+psychology, which by the slow, painfully cumulative method of science
+has come to some of the same discoveries that Nietzsche grasped
+intuitively. It also is an indictment of Christian civilization and
+foreshadows its breaking up by the erection of a new principle, the
+Anti-Christ, the principle of power.
+
+It is, therefore, a revolutionary document, so far in advance of the
+time when it was written that Nietzsche dared to show it only to
+seven people, most of whom rejected it. He felt that he was in utter
+isolation, a “voice crying in the wilderness.”
+
+What Nietzsche celebrates (as shown in the section on Adler) is
+_will-to-power_. The doctrine of Christianity is love, and the rule of
+love has certain implications. It means that everyone is included, for
+in the eyes of love the object is always valuable. To a loving mother
+the child who is an idiot is as precious (if not more so) than his more
+normal brothers and sisters. She loves him: that gives him value. Hence
+the rule of love means equality, fraternity, democracy. It leads to the
+idea of the greatest good for the greatest number. It leads, in short,
+to the idea of numbers; the rule of the many.
+
+Its dangers are obvious. Everything new, original, different is
+pulled down to the common level. It breeds the spirit of conformity,
+and finally eventuates in the Babbitts, the ideals of Main Street, the
+formation of Ku Klux Klans. Such are the final fruits of a rampant rule
+of love. If your neighbors are as valuable (really more valuable) than
+yourself (for love always places the object above oneself) then you
+should submit to your neighbors, live and do as they live and do, and
+give up your own individual path, your own way, and anything original
+or new that may be created by you.
+
+It is against this that Nietzsche comes with a voice which is far
+deeper than a personal voice. It is the protest of the collective
+unconscious itself; it is a deep racial movement against a violation
+of man’s own future. Hence, Nietzsche sets the individual against
+the race; he raises an aristocratic ideal against the democratic;
+he celebrates new values, original things, the exceptional and the
+different. As against love, he rears the doctrine of power. And by
+power he means the setting of oneself against the race, and the triumph
+of oneself, for in this triumph, the new is born, the new art, new
+idea, new thinking, and the race is forced into new paths of greatness.
+
+But, seen in another light, the meaning of Zarathustra is the _revolt
+of the introvert against the extravert_.
+
+Western civilization is the civilization of the extravert. A
+civilization built up on the principle of love is one which puts the
+accent on others, on things outside ourself. As the saying goes, it
+takes two to love; there is always the other, and that other is more
+important than oneself, if it is really love. Hence, love is the root
+of the extraverted attitude. As I said of Roosevelt, he might have put
+it of himself: “I am--what I love.”
+
+Such a civilization, therefore, tends toward action, democracy, the
+rule of the many, invention, business (the exchange between people),
+and since the power of a civilization over the individual is almost
+overwhelming, it means that a Christian civilization has thwarted,
+twisted, deformed all those whose natures were not in accord with it.
+Christianity has been a violation of the introvert.
+
+For, naturally, what Nietzsche depicts in his superman and his
+will-to-power, is himself. He depicts the psychology of the introvert.
+The introvert is governed by the power principle. Where the extravert
+finds relief, and only functions happily, by losing himself in others,
+by giving himself to the world outside him; the introvert finds relief
+only by remembering himself, by refusing to allow others to absorb
+him, by withdrawing from the outer world. The introvert is constantly
+striving to preserve the integrity of his ego. He seeks an inner
+freedom. He feels bound by the demands of others. Action takes him away
+from the stream of his ideas, his inner brooding, and he will not have
+much of it. Serving others often seems to him a shallow thing, a waste
+of time, compared with the great discovery he is tracking, or the art
+he is aiming to achieve.
+
+Power vs. love--introvert vs. extravert.
+
+And how is it that two such dissimilar human beings appear in the
+same world? We have only to go back to the root-instincts in man
+to come to some sort of understanding. As we know, the two great
+instincts are that of self-preservation and that of race-preservation.
+Self-preservation leads us to think of ourselves, to turn the eye
+inward. It is selfish, hence, it is power, not love. Race-preservation
+leads us to think of others, of wife and family, of neighbors, of the
+world, to turn the eye outward. It concerns interest in others; hence,
+it is more love than power.
+
+The symbol of self-preservation is eating, devouring (we eat just for
+ourselves); the symbol of race-preservation is sexuality (the motive in
+sexuality is, unconsciously, to beget offspring).
+
+One sees now how this discovery of the types by Jung settles the
+question as to the puzzling opposition between the theories of Freud
+and Adler.
+
+Freud’s theory is the sexual, Adler’s the will-to-power. In other
+words, as Jung has pointed out, Freud is an extravert, and his theory
+reflects himself; Adler is an introvert, and his theory is typical of
+his type.
+
+Both theories are, in a sense, true; only we must never apply the
+Freudian theory to an introvert, nor the Adler theory to an extravert.
+
+It will be seen now how the theory of the collective unconscious
+includes both the theory of Freud and the theory of Adler and
+transcends them both. In the collective unconscious are both the
+summed up wisdom of the race with its creative forward push and also
+the instincts. The roots of both ego and sex are to be found there,
+flowering in one individual more along the ego path, in another more
+along the sex path.
+
+The trouble with both Freud and Adler, according to Jung, is that
+they stop at this point. Their theories are _reductive_. The one
+reduces human nature back to sex, the other to power. We are _nothing
+but_--this or that. But, actually, we are also all we have experienced,
+and not only that, but also all the race has experienced. We are also
+creative. We cannot explain man only in terms of the past, in the
+things from which he originated (finally, the instincts), we must also
+explain him in terms of the future, his possibilities, the new life he
+is seeking, the greatness which is to be.
+
+In short, we cannot cure a neurosis merely by explaining to a man that
+he has an Oedipus complex or a homosexual tendency; neither can we cure
+him by showing him that he has an inferiority complex and hence an
+abnormal will-to-power. We can only cure him by giving him a future to
+live; he must go out and feel that he has something to live for.
+
+Just how psycho-analysis arrives at such a result must be reserved for
+a later chapter.
+
+
+
+
+VI.
+
+TYPES.
+
+
+In picturing Roosevelt as an extravert and Nietzsche as an introvert,
+I did not mean to imply, of course, that either lacked the opposite
+mechanism. All of us are born with both the sexual-instinct and the
+ego-instinct, the gift of love and the will-to-power. However, because
+we are loaded more one way than the other, the one tendency tends to
+suppress the other, and the other remains therefore, not erased, but
+relatively undeveloped, and shows itself in inadequate and perhaps
+twisted expression.
+
+There was, of course, an extravert in Nietzsche. But that extravert
+lived a shadowy life beside the great introvert, and showed himself in
+a clumsy relationship with others, an inadequate response to the world,
+an inability to get along. So too was there an introvert in Roosevelt,
+but he was a poor one, with doubtless strange ideas sometimes breaking
+forth into impulsive and wrong-headed action.
+
+All that we can say is that life forces us to accept one side more than
+the other, until we become, as it were, specialists along the side of
+extraversion or of introversion.
+
+This specialization, of course, makes us one-sided, and this
+one-sidedness reaches an even greater narrowness through a still
+further specialization, which is that of _function_.
+
+According to Jung, the human psyche is composed of four functions.
+These are _thinking_, _feeling_, _intuition_ and _sensation_.
+
+I do not intend to burden the reader with explanations of these terms,
+for we would go far afield in a maze of technicalities. I will merely
+try to give a hint of their meaning.
+
+_Thinking_ is readily recognizable. It is, in its pure form, an act of
+will, and it may begin with an idea, which it proceeds to illustrate
+and to prove, or it may begin with many separated facts and proceeds to
+bind them together into a theory or idea.
+
+_Feeling_ is a reaction of like or dislike to an object. It must not
+be confused with _emotion_. Both thinking and feeling, according to
+Jung, are adapted functions; that is, functions which have developed
+through the discipline of life, and which did not exist in their pure
+forms when we were born. _Emotion_, however, is something allied to
+our instinctive life and something we share with the animals. It is
+psychologically what Jung calls a feeling-sensation; that is to say,
+it is partly physical and partly mental. We see this clearly when we
+find an emotion of shame bringing a blush to the cheek, or one of fear
+setting the heart pounding, or one of joy making the pulses leap. In
+each case we were aware of something mental, sense of joy, fear, etc.,
+and something physical, heart pounding, cheeks blushing, etc.
+
+Feeling is separated from sensation and developed into something by
+itself. The feeling person is one who has a highly developed sense of
+the values of things registered through reactions of like and dislike.
+His immediate liking is not accidental, but due to a high sensitiveness
+to the really good qualities of the object; his disliking is equally a
+deep and a true thing.
+
+If thinking and feeling are conscious functions, that is, more or less
+under the direction of the will (one makes oneself think, one learns to
+like and dislike), intuition and sensation are unconscious functions.
+There is no control of them. They simply happen.
+
+_Intuition_ is a sort of instant insight. It has something of the
+lightning flash in it. It is a seeing-into. And this seeing-into may
+be of something near or of something far. A man may have a hunch
+that a certain horse is going to win a race; a woman may have an
+intuition that her husband, in spite of his protests, has been untrue
+to her. Intuitions may also be of a deeper sort. The intuition of the
+painter leads him to paint the soul, the inner life of the sitter. The
+intuition of the inventor by a blinding flash reveals the solution of
+the problem.
+
+_Sensation_, according to Jung, is sensing, a function which transmits
+a physical stimulus to perception. We see, hear, feel (contact), etc.
+It is our conscious sensing of the world about us through images,
+sounds, etc., just as intuition is an unconscious sensing of the world
+about us. Hence, sensation relates more closely to the physical life,
+the body, than any of the other functions.
+
+Now what Jung maintains, and amply proves in his great work on
+Psychological Types, is that each of us is not only either an introvert
+or an extravert, but also that each of us _develops one of these four
+functions at the expense of the others_. There are therefore thinking
+types, feeling types, intuitive types and sensational types, and since
+any of these types is also either extraverted or introverted we have
+eight types.
+
+I will merely give a few examples to show what the types are like:
+
+_Extraverted thinking type._ A good example is Darwin. He was a slow,
+patient thinker; thinking was most obviously his most highly developed
+function; but this function was extraverted. That is to say, like all
+extraverts his attention and interest was in outer things and the ideas
+of others. Hence he was one who built up a theory on observed data,
+whether this was a direct study of plants and animals or in reading the
+works of others. His thoughts proceeded from the outside in.
+
+_Introverted thinking type._ Kant is a good example. He was a great
+philosopher. Instead of proceeding from facts to theory, he proceeded
+from ideas to facts. That is to say, through his introversion, he
+received ideas from the unconscious, great ideas of a timeless nature,
+conceptions of time, space, etc., and these he proceeded to elaborate
+and prove.
+
+_Extraverted feeling type._ A good example of this type is Mary
+Pickford. It is obvious that she is not a thinker; neither is she one
+of those intuitive persons who see into others and know life deeply.
+She feels others. She responds by like and dislike; and by the fitness
+of things. She is well extraverted and well adapted.
+
+_Introverted feeling type._ Eleanore Duse is an example. She was a
+great actress; but one felt her to be one of those silent women whose
+feelings are all within, who nurse deep moods, who cannot express their
+personal selves, who have great difficulty in their relationships and
+tend, as a rule, to shun the world and live in seclusion.
+
+According to Jung thinking is more a masculine function; both
+extraverted and introverted it is found more in men than in women;
+feeling is more feminine, and is usually found in women.
+
+_Extraverted intuitive type._ Lloyd George, of England, is of this
+type. A friend of mine who met him during the war said that as soon as
+Lloyd George looked at him, he felt he was completely understood, that
+the statesman saw through him. His gift has been to see the tide even
+before it turned, to see the possibilities in the people about them,
+to leap to his conclusions with a sure agility. If the thinking and
+feeling types are more or less steady, pursuing a definite and logical
+course, the intuitive type (and sensational) is changeable, erratic,
+swift, fickle. This is due to the fact that wherever they see a new
+possibility, they leap to it, forgetting what they hitherto pursued.
+
+_Introverted intuitive type._ An excellent example is that given
+in the last chapter, that of Nietzsche. His intuitions were of the
+introverted kind. He saw inwardly, into the unconscious. This type
+is usually very badly adapted to the world. It is close to the
+unconscious, and its great intuitions of change, disaster and the new
+order of the future put it at variance with society to such an extent
+as to make life very difficult. Undoubtedly such men have always been
+the great mystics, the great prophets, as Jung quotes, “the voice of
+one crying in the wilderness.”
+
+_Extraverted sensation type._ We see examples of this type very often
+among actors, dancers, circus people. They are people of a very
+sensuous nature, depending more on the sharp stimulus of sensation than
+on any other function. We also see examples among men who are epicures
+at eating, spend much of their time on fine dressing, and who seek
+sensation for its own sake, sensuous surroundings, the more sybaritic
+forms of sexuality, etc. Among women we see an inordinate love of
+luxury, a theatrical exhibitionism, and self-indulgence in many forms.
+Since this type is the least noble (as the intuitive is the most noble)
+examples need not be given.
+
+_Introverted sensation type._ This is a type extremely hard to
+define. I will merely suggest it. It is probable that the poet Poe
+was of this type. He was certainly introverted, but his work is not
+marked specifically by deep thought, by feeling or by intuition.
+If we consider his poetry we see that he gives us strange pictures
+of a No Man’s Land of the imagination; and that he senses these
+imaginative realms of the dead and the ghostly. We feel a reality in
+these dark pictures. But they have no meaning in the way of giving us
+to understand life more deeply or leading us to great ideas or high
+flights of feeling. What they do give us is a sense of “out of space,
+out of time,” as he himself put it. Introverted sensation gives us just
+that. It is a sensing of the eternal images of the unconscious.
+
+Such, by a series of swift strokes, are the eight types. I cannot, of
+course, in this space, do full justice to them. They are included in
+this survey because they represent an important element in Jung’s work
+and serve to show how dark and deep are the psychological problems of
+the race. With eight types (possibly more) living in the world about
+us, there is indeed much room for misunderstanding and for human
+conflict.
+
+It is also obvious that Nietzsche was psychologically correct when
+he said that he saw only fragments of human beings about him, and
+nowhere a man. Here he saw an arm, there a leg, there an eye and here
+an ear, there a mouth and here a breast. In short, he saw a world of
+specialization, where one man becomes, like Darwin, a good thinker, but
+also is callous to art and to the beauty and joy of life; and where
+another develops neither his thinking nor his insight, but spends his
+existence in a vain round of the senses.
+
+It is no wonder, then, that there is so much mental sickness. Too
+great a one-sidedness is a violation of man’s nature, which is full of
+various needs and must, if it develops freely, live a rounded life.
+Hence, according to Jung, the basis of the neurosis is not merely a
+sexual problem or a problem of power; it is due to the conflict between
+the developed and the undeveloped functions. There comes a time for the
+thinker, for instance, when his outraged feeling life must manifest
+itself. It is at such a moment that the neurosis begins.
+
+
+
+
+VII.
+
+THE CONFLICT AND ITS SOLUTION.
+
+
+If we want to put the matter in its broadest sense, we can say that
+the great conflict of this age is between the extraverted attitude and
+the introverted, between Christ and Anti-Christ, between Christianity
+with its democracy, its insistence on good works, its life of activity
+and service, its concentration, actually, on business, machinery and
+getting on, and on the other hand, the claims of the individual and the
+demands of the inner life for an enhancement of art, of research, of
+philosophy, of spiritual development, of freedom.
+
+It is a conflict between the principle of love and the principle of
+power, and naturally, it is not only an external thing, but something
+that takes place in every individual who has made any sort of high
+development. For it is a psychic law that if we carry anything to an
+extreme, we meet the opposite.
+
+This is clearly illustrated in Goethe’s Faust. The hero, Faust, has
+carried his introverted side to a very high development; indeed, so
+far, that everything he studied and all that he knows now appears
+lifeless and uninteresting. He is sick of himself, sick of life. It
+is all nothing. His search for knowledge has led nowhere. In the end
+all that we know is--that we cannot know. What a pity then that he has
+squandered his youth on study and meditation and medicine. A kind of
+death comes over him; which means, psychologically, that he has reached
+the end of one line of development, and is preparing himself to change
+over to another and new line.
+
+This soon appears, in the form of a poodle dog who soon shows himself
+as the Devil. Both these symbols are inevitable. A dog, as shown
+before, relates to our more extraverted side, and it is this side for
+which Faust now longs. He has reached the end of his development (for
+the time being) as an introvert; the longing that now is awakened is
+for _life_--that is, for youth, activity, sexuality, love, ardent
+adventure, etc. Hence, the symbol of the dog as representing the side
+of himself he has not developed. But this really is also the Devil.
+That is to say that which is undeveloped is still in a primitive state,
+and through its long repression, bears the aspect of something ugly
+and evil. In order, therefore, to reach the “other side,” in order to
+begin to live out the unlived possibilities of his nature, he must sell
+himself to the Devil.
+
+That is to say, that when the undeveloped side shows itself and takes
+command, it cannot be lived unless one is willing to go a path which
+may often appear evil and which is in direct defiance to what one has
+previously lived and thought good.
+
+This selling out to the Devil appears as a great danger. It means
+that he will never be “saved,” never go to heaven. But actually in
+the prologue of the play, God allows the Devil to make this compact
+with Faust because the Devil is “a part of that power which wills the
+bad, but somehow works the good.” That is to say, if one is willing to
+step over into the undeveloped side, and live it in spite of its evil
+beginnings, one can only develop oneself and finally come to a higher
+good.
+
+Such the drama shows. By magic Faust gains wealth and power. He seduces
+Gretchen, and her end is insanity, infanticide and a death that
+narrowly escapes the gallows. But Faust goes on, and the whole play
+shows how, by following the Devil, he brings the neglected side up to
+the developed side of himself, so that in the end the Devil is defeated
+and Faust gains that heaven where the two sides of his nature may now
+be united in harmony.
+
+If Faust outlines the problem, another great work, the “Prometheus and
+Epimetheus” of Spitteler, shows its solution. Jung is at great pains to
+analyze this long poem in his book on Psychological Types. Prometheus
+and Epimetheus stand respectively for introvert and extravert.
+Prometheus is the idealist who withdraws from the world into himself to
+love and serve his soul; but Epimetheus is the man of the world, who
+has common sense, who obeys the conventions and who becomes a king.
+Epimetheus cannot wean his foolish brother from his obviously perverted
+way of living. A conflict arises between them, which drives Prometheus
+all the deeper in himself. Thus a great sickness falls not only upon
+him, but upon his God (the collective unconscious). His soul then
+brings him a jewel, a thing of magic, a wonder-child, which will save
+the world. But this jewel is rejected by the king and by the world, and
+as a result there is destruction, the king losing his throne.
+
+“The final extinction of Good is prevented by the intervention of
+Prometheus. He rescues Messias, the last of the sons of God, out
+of the power of his enemy. Messias becomes the heir to the Divine
+Kingdom, while Prometheus and Epimetheus, the personifications of the
+severed opposites, become united in the seclusion of their native
+valley.... Which means, extraversion and introversion cease to dominate
+as one-sided lines of direction.... In their stead, a new function
+appears, symbolically represented by a child named Messias. He is the
+mediator, the symbol of the new attitude that shall reconcile the
+opposites.”
+
+What is the exact meaning of this? To begin with, Prometheus and
+Epimetheus must be thought of, not as two men, but as the two sides of
+one man, the conflict, in short, between introversion and extraversion.
+In the normal course of development, like Faust, one develops first one
+side, then the other. Naturally the time must come when the conflict
+breaks out in full force: shall one follow the principle of power,
+of introversion, or that of love, of extraversion? This conflict
+produces a deadlock, and in this deadlock, a solution is offered by the
+unconscious in the form of a symbol (the jewel, the wonder-child.) But
+this is not understood, and there is a breakdown and collapse. However,
+now a new path is found which leads out.
+
+This path Jung calls the _transcendent function_; this indeed is the
+Messias of the poem. It is part of the analytic process, and emerges
+only at the end of a deep analysis. What it amounts to is an _inner
+guidance_.
+
+I have already shown that the collective unconscious is creative, that
+it is ahead of the race, and projects at times, through geniuses, a
+vision of what is to be, what is becoming. Just as it does this for the
+race, it also to a certain extent, and at certain times, is prospective
+for the individual, laying out the next step he is to take, and
+forecasting the next phase of his development.
+
+This prospective quality is rarely found in the dream, though sometimes
+it appears there. It is usually found in the _phantasy_. The phantasy
+is a product analogous to the dream, but whereas when we dream we are
+fully asleep, and hence, unconscious, the phantasy appears between
+waking and sleeping, when we are really half-asleep. It appears as a
+sort of dream, sometimes as a clear plastic image, and we know, when we
+apprehend it, that we are not asleep.
+
+As Jung works out in great detail, the phantasy has a greater
+value than the dream, for the dream is merely the product of the
+unconscious, whereas the phantasy is the product of both the conscious
+and unconscious minds working simultaneously at that moment when we
+are half-conscious, or between the two. Hence, it contains in symbolic
+form, our deepest insight, our deepest wish, our clearest foreknowledge
+of what to do, being in this respect also superior to our conscious
+working out of the problem.
+
+It is by following the insight gained from our phantasies that we
+work out the problem of the deep conflict; for if we follow these
+phantasies, we take the next necessary step and so learn gradually to
+reconcile the claims of extraversion with those of introversion.
+
+In the great religion of the Hindoos, and in fact, in a religion of
+the Chinese, we hear much of a Middle Path. The problem as set forth
+by those religions is that life consists of a pair of opposites; such
+for instance as spirituality vs. materialism, feminine vs. masculine,
+love vs. power, divine vs. demonic, etc., and they see clearly that
+neither extreme can bring peace. If we live one extreme then soon we
+thirst and hunger for the other, and this brings discord and conflict.
+The true wisdom of life then is to find a Middle Path, a way between
+the opposites. This way is not something that can be thought out
+and entered by violence. It is something found gradually through
+development in religious ritual.
+
+It is this great thought, this truth which emerges again in modern
+psychology. But it comes now with a difference. Psycho-analysis is a
+highly specialized scientific technic. It does not deal with ritual
+and dogma, it does not lay down general laws to the individual. It
+recognizes that his problem is different from that of all other
+individuals, and seeks to guide him, not from without, but from within.
+From the material which rises naturally from his own psyche, from dream
+and phantasy and intuition, he gains the insight which he must follow.
+
+Hence, religion ceases to be a mass-matter, but becomes an individual
+matter. As Jung puts it, every creed attempts to make us all live the
+phantasies of the founder of the religion. His phantasies may have been
+very great and very deep; but they were, in the main, his own. Every
+human being is constantly producing phantasies, and in these lies his
+own path, and not in those of someone’s else.
+
+What is the goal then of this immense struggle in the human being,
+this psychic conflict which sometimes goes on to a point of shattering
+the individual, this inner division that cries out for healing, and
+which goads us forward to our development? The word that Jung gives
+us is _individuation_. We aim, he says, to be individuals in the true
+sense of the word. Certainly, however, the fragments that Nietzsche
+saw are not individuals, for an individual is one who contains the
+many-sidedness of human nature in a state of inner harmony. If then
+this one-sidedness precludes individuality, the psyche must be
+constantly urging us on to develop that which has been neglected in
+order that the undeveloped side may rise level to the developed side,
+and so that in the end one may be a complete, rounded, harmonious human
+being.
+
+This is the light which the new psychology offers to the race at
+a moment of its greatest darkness. It has just fought the bloodiest
+and most devastating war of all history; it has fought that war
+in the twilight of the Gods. Its old Gods are disintegrating and
+vanishing. Everywhere we see the harsh conflict going on, and at the
+very moment when man has reached his highest point of extraversion,
+with his machines, his radios and phonographs and aeroplanes, his
+automobiles and newspapers and movies, his triumph over nature, we see
+everywhere the sadness and suffering of humanity, the breakdown of
+white civilization in Europe, the restless stirrings of the East, and
+an immense increase in neurosis and insanity. A great change is due;
+a new light has come. This new light however, is not a religion, it
+is nothing to broadcast and apply _en masse_. It is a technic which
+must reach individual by individual, making him known to himself,
+discovering for him his type with its needs and limitation, showing him
+his possibilities, directing him to the path of his own development.
+Naturally such development will be different for each individual.
+There are not many, as Jung shows, who must go to the painful lengths
+depicted in the story of Prometheus and Epimetheus, or even in the
+story of Faust. For the majority, a deeper self-understanding,
+a knowledge of the types, an ability to understand some of the
+products of the unconscious, a lifting off of the repressions, a full
+recognition of one’s own needs and desires, will be enough to bring
+about a more harmonious, a more fruitful life. But for the few, a
+higher, deeper suffering is necessary, possibly because of their gifts,
+which may thus be developed and become a heritage for the race.
+
+
+
+
+VIII.
+
+NOTE.
+
+
+This booklet has aimed to give a glimpse of a vast territory, merely
+enough to set the reader toward the complete works on the subject.
+It has been necessary to condense and suggest, where a deeper
+understanding would be reached by elaboration and numerous examples.
+For those who care to study the matter more deeply it is suggested
+that they begin Jung by reading the second edition of his Papers in
+Analytical Psychology. This is a difficult book because it contains a
+series of articles which show his growth, step by step toward a new
+insight. Much that he writes there he has since discarded. However, it
+is well to read whatever of it one finds interesting.
+
+The next step is to read The Psychology of the Unconscious, which
+uncovers the theory of the collective unconscious; and finally Jung’s
+master-work up to this time, his Psychological Types.
+
+If I have stimulated the reader to the point where he desires to go on
+to these works, then the purpose with which I wrote this little book is
+fulfilled.
+
+
+
+
+Transcriber’s Note
+
+
+Italicized text is surrounded by underscores: _italics_.
+
+Erroneously placed or missing quotation marks or punctuation have been
+silently corrected.
+
+The following printer errors or inconsistencies have been changed:
+
+p. 5: “bads” changed to “bad” (receiving bad news)
+
+p. 16: “homo-sexual” changed to “homosexual” (homosexual interest)
+
+p. 18: “psychoanalytic” changed to “psycho-analytic” (In the course of
+his psycho-analytic practice)
+
+p. 56: “Epitheus” changed to “Epimetheus” (while Prometheus and
+Epimetheus, the personifications)
+
+p. 57: “analagous” changed to “analogous” (The phantasy is a product
+analogous to the dream)
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 77864 ***