JUNGThe Quest for Integration

THE QUEST FOR INTEGRATION Jung believed we needed to go through

personality integration

Personality integration is embracing the things that are hidden or blocking our growth and turning those weaknesses into strengths

He believed that a human being is inwardly whole, but that most of us have lost touch with important parts of our selves

Through listening to the messages of our dreams (and of our creative imagination) we can reach the lost or neglected parts of our selves and reintegrate them

INDIVIDUATION According to Jung, this integration is the

goal of life

He called it individuation: the process by which individuals integrate the conscious and unconscious parts of their personality, through the acceptance of the various archetypes into the conscious mind

JUNG’S LIBIDO In order to explain the process of

individuation we need to understand Jung’s concept of the libido

Jung viewed the libido as the source of psychic energy.

If its flow was interrupted neurosis would result

The rejection of the sexual basis of the libido constitutes Jung’s greatest split from Freud

WHAT DO YOU THINK? What is your opinion on Jung’s concept

of the libido?

Is it better than Freud’s?

INDIVIDUATION To maintain health all the features of the personality

need to be integrated

There needs to be a balance between the conscious mind and the unconscious

There also needs to be a balance among the different archetypes

It is the failure to maintain this balance this balance that is the main cause of mental disorder and neurotic disorder

For example, someone who has an excess of mental energy concentrated on the unconscious will appear disconnected from their surroundings, since they will be chiefly aware of the images generated by the unconscious

HOW WE DEVELOP Jung argued that whereas the first part of a

person’s life involves a coming to terms with the outer environment and its challenges – through work, friendships and relationships – the emphasis on the second part, from middle age onwards, is to come to terms with one’s own personality

Faced with declining opportunities, energies and possibly health, the individual must find new purpose and meaning in life through components. Although ultimately beneficial, it can be difficult, because it involves accepting parts of one’s personality which one may prefer to leave undiscovered

INDIVIDUATION AND RELIGION First, individuation as an innate process is one which is

governed by the archetype known as the self. More precisely, the self is the innate disposition to become whole. According to Jung’s understanding of religious experience, any process or attitude that is governed by archetypes must be termed religious – on this basis individuation must be a religious process

Second, Jung argued that the self aids the process of individuation by generating images of wholeness. An example of this is the religious images of God. Jung claimed that the images created by the God-archetype are one and the same as the images created by the self-archetype. It makes sense therefore to say that it is through religious images that the personality achieves its goal of integration

As a result of this, Jung said that the religious images are used by the mind to individuate the personality

The value of religion now becomes clear for if one rejects religion, one is at the same time rejecting a substantial part of the individuation mechanism

Those who reject religion are less likely to individuate successfully and therefore more likely to experience neurosis as a result of the remaining psychological tension

For this reason Jung concluded that religion is a valuable entity

WHAT DO YOU THINK? What is your opinion of this theory?

CRITIQUE OF JUNG Although Jung’s theories are less

sensational than those of Freud, they have nonetheless been criticised, and not merely by supporters of Freud.

The criticism has centred upon four main areas:1. Jung’s methodology2. The theory of archetypes3. Jung’s concept of religious experience4. The role of religion within individuation

CRITICISMS OF JUNG’S METHODOLOGY Jung has been criticised for his view that we can

never know whether God exists

This view rests upon his assumption that nothing csn be known of any entity outside the psychic world. For example, we can never know wheteher a religious experience is real or merely created by the mind

This assumption has been questioned – scientists, for example, base their conclusions on empirical evidence, without worrying that their data are just figaments of their imagination. It can be argued that a religious experience should be treated in the same way, and that if there is empirical evidence to support it we should accept it as genuine

How damaging do you think this criticism is to Jung’s theory?

CRITICISMS OF JUNG’S THEORY OF ARCHETYPES It is argued that this theory is simply not required to explain

the ‘evidence’ – namely, the common tendency to construct uniform images

For example, Geza Roheim states that since all humans share broadly the same experiences, it is hardly surprising that we develop myths along similar lines

It has also been pointed out that many religious myths, such as the Mesopotamian legends, respond to the social concerns of a particular community, makes it hard to accept that they come from an impulse that is common to the whole of mankind

On these grounds it is argued that Jung is not justified in postulating an archetypal ‘instinct for God’ from the evidence that people believe in God

A further point which rendered Jung’s concept of the archetypes less acceptable is the fact that many people do not believe in God

Jung’s answer to this criticism was that atheism itself is a form of religion

However, again we see Jung’s reluctance to allow empirical evidence to count against his theory; faced with the simple fact that many people are not religious, he twists this to his advantage. By manipulating any unfavourable evidence in his favour, he effectively makes his theory unfalsifiable. It becomes a necessary truth, but without justification.

What are your opinions on this criticism?

JUNG’S CONCEPT OF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE Jung’s theory of religious experience is often criticised

Martin Buber is not convinced that an experience which stems from the mind, and as such is in no way external to the subject, can properly be termed religious

In particular, Jung’s argument that any archetypal image may be described as religious has come under fire

The problem is that if a vision of being trapped in armour is as reliigous as a vision of God, Jung failed to explain why this type of experience is so distinctive in the mind of the subject

What effect does this criticism have on Jung’s theory?

CRITICISM OF INDIVIDUATION for the same reason as religious experience, the definition

of individuation as a religious process may be questioned

If it is governed by the Self-archetype, then it may be argued that it has nothing to do with God

The image of Christ, for example, is only significant for Jung inasmuch as it is a symbol of wholeness which can help balance our minds.

Religious believers, however, would argue that Christ is more than just a symbol for something else, but rather is important in his own right, as a historical person and the Son of God.

Again then, there is an extra dimension in religious practice which Jung fails to explain