« 上一頁繼續 »
apogee of self-consciousness. He begins a poem called Walt Whitman
in this way:
“I celebrate myself;
And what I assume you shall assume;
Stop this day and night with me, and you shall possess the origin of all poems; You shall possess the good of the earth and sun (there are millions of suns left); You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look through the
eyes of the dead, nor feed on spectres in books; You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me: You shall listen to all sides, and filter them from yourself.”
It is characteristic of the subconscious types that they find great difficulty in adapting themselves to the demands of society. They are impatient of responsibility, and perpetually come to grief over such matters as money and marriage. They find fetters where other men find incentives. This perhaps accounts for the necessity such a poetphilosopher as Walt Whitman feels to stress the object; he says: “I will go to the bank by the wood, and become undisguised and naked;
I am mad for it to be in contact with me.” As if his intuition needs that contact with passion to attain a sense of reality. Again he says: “Welcome is every organ and attribute of me, and of any man hearty and clean; Not an inch, nor a particle of an inch, is vile, and none shall be less familiar than
the rest." Unredeemed, these types are unstable in their human relations, because in so far as they are orientated to the unconscious, they are cut off from being understood or from understanding the rational types. The primordial images and instincts comprised in the collective unconscious are more valid for them than the external world, and form the scarcely corrected basis of their impulsive ideas and actions.
For the sensational type the instinct side of the unconscious forms the object. Unless they are under the sway of some passionate emotion they hardly feel themselves to be alive. Unless their contact with others is productive of sensational effect they hardly realise the fact of the other's existence. Perhaps these people express themselves most happily in the histrionic arts and dancing. Under this denomination cases of extreme sadism and masochism belong, and here also we may expect to find those patients whose physical sensations play the chief rôle-such, for instance, as a hypochondriac whose life is dominated by a disgusting taste in the mouth, or a subjective odour. A psychotic patient of mine
recently refused to take food because directly she swallowed it she felt it creeping about under her skin, and passing down her arms and legs. In this class the mental conflict is expressed in bodily sensations.
Imperative and impulsive thoughts belong more especially to the intuitional type, because they are influenced by the primordial images which, if uncorrected by reality, produce obsessions of the mind. These instinct-forms of thought enter the mind with terrible power, and are accepted without judgment or evaluation. A certain patient has a phobia of murder germs. She claims to have been infected by buying clothing from a shop where a murder was committed. She has burnt hundreds of pounds' worth of clothes because they came from this place, or have been touched by infected things. The mere utterance of the word 'murder'infects the environment. Anything that touches a newspaper is contaminated if the word is there. She counteracts the effect of the murder germs by countless rituals, and is actuated by the principles of totem and taboo.
Short of a compulsion neurosis, which is the typical neurosis for this type, there is a great tendency to form identification. Adaptation to the external world by means of identification with a parent or a friend, or a teacher, is fairly common. Such persons are driven to express their emotions in others and in the collective because they have found no channel of individual expression in the objective world. They act as the parent acts, feel as the friend or husband feels, and get on pretty well till something disturbs the adaptation. By an unconscious pose the reactions of another personality may be successfully followed. The subjective types appear to be exquisitely sympathetic owing to their ability to project or introject. This is productive of perfect harmony so long as the relation lasts. But en separation befalls through the occurrence of conflicting interests or unforeseen circumstances, the pulling apart is a painful affair. The one being orientated to the conscious, the other to the unconscious, or both being related to different aspects of the unconscious, reconciliation becomes very difficult because they are always talking about the same thing from a different angle. The separation is as complete as the former identification was complete.
We get a picture of an individual of the intuitive type from the able pen of Mr Clutton Brock in his book Shelley the Man and the Poet. He writes as follows: “Shelley was scarcely aware of imperfection in himself; and when he found it in others and in external circumstances it seemed to him to be inexplicable evil, which ought to be, not improved, but abolished. Thus there is some excuse for those admirers who think
him perfect, and some for those of his contemporaries who thought him a fiend incarnate. There was, or appeared to be, no conflict between different parts of his nature, but only a conflict between his nature and the world outside him? He saw that such a conflict existed, but thought it was produced altogether by some external tyranny, or some inexplicable perversity in man. There seemed to be a perfect harmony in himself, so he thought perfect harmony was possible in the world if it would only get rid of those inhibitions which express men's consciousness of an existing discord.... He never in the course of his short life attained to a full consciousness of himself....He loved people, not for themselves, but for what he thought of them. He was like those artists who paint the ideal of their own imaginations, not the excellence and promise of the real things.”
Difficulties for this type arise in another way also, viz. from the animation of the pairs of opposites. As an example: an artist friend of mine had a good deal of success as an academic painter. This success made him feel cheap. He thought himself not to be following his highest feeling for art, whereupon he relinquished the academic style for a less popular one. He was soon reduced to poverty. Now the value of money naturally assumed great importance because it was, in a manner of speaking, in the unconscious, whereupon he indicts society which ought to endow him and allow him a few hundreds a year, in order that he might repay
it with works of art. Lo and behold, a modicum of success came to him! Whereupon he declared himself hampered by it. He needs must once more burn his boats and go to a new country where he had to begin all over again. To the onlooker this conduct is completely irrational, but with this type the accent of value always moves to the pole which is in the unconscious. They are animated by the pairs of opposites, but without the morbid effects that one sees in the neurotic, in whom the pairs of opposites are more or less violently torn asunder, and in whom regression of the libido to the unconscious is a pathological condition. Incidentally we owe things of great value to this type. They are of more value to us than they are to themselves. They interpret our hidden selves to us, and enlarge our perceptions. They have the run of the unconscious, but as a gift, and not by personal differentiation. One has only to instance Shelley's work to recognise that on the creative side the type needs no apologist. It is perhaps what might be called a feminine type, not that it really belongs more to woman than man, but it contains tendencies that are somewhat arbitrarily called feminine.
1 The italics are mine.
Some of us who study the types? come to the conclusion that people are even more unlike in their mental or emotional reactions on account of type than on account of sex. Speaking from the standpointof an analyst one can reckon more certainly on the way a person of marked type will behave than on the way he will behave because he is a man. There are necessarily certain conventional reactions he adopts on account of sex which do not really belong to his individual character at all.
Philosophers like Bergson and Kidd lay enormous stress upon intuition. Indeed intuition often finds a way where every other psychological function fails to find one, the reason being that there are times when a completely new adaptation is needed, when the primordial images mixed into the other functions give a value to the idea which fits the unique occasion. Kidd says in his Science of Power, “It is the mind of woman that is destined to take the lead in the future of civilization as the principal instrument of Power.” Personally I think he is mistaken in thinking that the future redemption of the world is with woman quâ woman. It is rather with the feminine principle, the fructifying power of those who will nourish the seed of the future in patience, who will submit to the burdens of to-day in order that the new era shall arise. Schopenhauer's indictment of woman that “The race is always more to her than the individual,” shows the hostility of the rational intellectual thinker against the super-validity, on many occasions, of the intuitive perceptions which reach beyond the present. The psychological bisexuality of the human being permits each person to carry within himself a male and female partner, an intellectual v. an intuitive function, a conscious rational v. an unconscious non-rational judgment. There is a radical hostility between the two, they are pairs of opposites. The hostility is constantly projected into consciousness, as in Schopenhauer's case. He makes an image of woman-which has many of the characteristics of the Terrible Mother of mythology. The same is true of Otto Weininger. Just as this conflict between the sexes has to be resolved in the process of individuation, so the opposing psychological functions have to be united in a new harmony. Our present-day civilization is tormented with problems for which there appears to be no rational solution. Perhaps it is to the more primitive function of
1 Following in a discussion with G. Stanley Hall, Ph.D. on “Points of difference between Men and Women,” Dr Beatrice Hinkle said: “It is a very large and intimate analytical experience of the lives of men and women that has forced me away from thinking of people according to sex, and led me to the substitution of types instead. When an individual consults me my collective classification is not sexual, but is determined by the answer to my mental question, 'To what type does he or she belong?'”
intuition that we must return, with the added wisdom that centuries of scientific thinking have given us.
The study of the Primitive has become of immense importance to us, perhaps because we dimly feel we have lost as well as gained something in the process of evolution and we half realise in him the prototype of our own subconscious man, a being for whom the unknown is full of magic, who can be withered by the evil eye, or stricken dead by fear. Dr Riversl said in the inaugural address of this Section: “There is a general agreement that in neurosis and psychosis there is in action a process of regression to primitive and infantile states.... In so far as the thought and behaviour of savage man are primitive, they furnish material which helps us to understand and to deal with regressive states exhibited by sufferers from disorder of mental functions." He went on to say that medicine standing alone and ethnology standing alone are helpless, but bases wide hopes upon the union of these lines of research. It seems to me that the union will be found in a closer and deeper study applied to the unconscious mind itself through personal experience of it, but only when we can detach ourselves from the idea that we have yet learnt all its laws, or even that we have followed to their conclusion those we begin to understand. We certainly need a wider conception of the unconscious than that which believes it to be only the result of repression. In the view of the unconscious that I follow it would be impossible to acquiesce in Dr Jones's statement that “only what is repressed is symbolised; only what is repressed needs to be symbolised 2.” This is a necessary correlate of the Freudian view of the unconscious. Jung's view of the unconscious is different.
Dr Jung dealt at some length with his formulation of the Collective and Personal Unconscious at the Symposium on “Instinct and the Unconscious" held in London last Summer (1919). As the foregoing ideas about the necessity of adaptation to the inner as well as the outer are related to this conception of the unconscious you will perhaps forgive me if I remind you of his views? Jung's formulation is a conception of the collective psyche as that which embraces collective thought or collective mind, and collective feeling or herd soul. All these contents are universal and impersonal, they are inherited and potentially present in everyone. It is the unconditioned, undifferentiated basis of all, the “mother foundation” which is constantly represented symbolically in myth and dream as the Great Mother with her double aspect as Destroyer
1 British Journal of Psychology, March, 1920. 2 Papers on Psycho-Analysis, p. 158. 3 Analytical Psychology, Ch. xv.; British Journal of Psychology, Nov. 1919.