What do you think?
Rate this book
La psicologia dell'inconscio
Alternative cover version of ISBN 9782253904427
176 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1912
781 people are currently reading
9453 people want to read
About the author
C.G. Jung
1,875 books11.5k followersCarl Gustav Jung (/jʊŋ/; German: [ˈkarl ˈɡʊstaf jʊŋ]), often referred to as C. G. Jung, was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist who founded analytical psychology. Jung proposed and developed the concepts of extraversion and introversion; archetypes, and the collective unconscious. His work has been influential in psychiatry and in the study of religion, philosophy, archeology, anthropology, literature, and related fields. He was a prolific writer, many of whose works were not published until after his death.
The central concept of analytical psychology is individuation—the psychological process of integrating the opposites, including the conscious with the unconscious, while still maintaining their relative autonomy. Jung considered individuation to be the central process of human development.
Jung created some of the best known psychological concepts, including the archetype, the collective unconscious, the complex, and synchronicity. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a popular psychometric instrument, has been developed from Jung's theory of psychological types.
Though he was a practising clinician and considered himself to be a scientist, much of his life's work was spent exploring tangential areas such as Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, and sociology, as well as literature and the arts. Jung's interest in philosophy and the occult led many to view him as a mystic, although his ambition was to be seen as a man of science. His influence on popular psychology, the "psychologization of religion", spirituality and the New Age movement has been immense.
The central concept of analytical psychology is individuation—the psychological process of integrating the opposites, including the conscious with the unconscious, while still maintaining their relative autonomy. Jung considered individuation to be the central process of human development.
Jung created some of the best known psychological concepts, including the archetype, the collective unconscious, the complex, and synchronicity. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a popular psychometric instrument, has been developed from Jung's theory of psychological types.
Though he was a practising clinician and considered himself to be a scientist, much of his life's work was spent exploring tangential areas such as Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, and sociology, as well as literature and the arts. Jung's interest in philosophy and the occult led many to view him as a mystic, although his ambition was to be seen as a man of science. His influence on popular psychology, the "psychologization of religion", spirituality and the New Age movement has been immense.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
August 22, 2025
First of all, can we just note that Psychology of the Unconscious is the most boring title imaginable? Literally every other psychology book ever written could be called the same thing. We can blame the translator, since the original – Wandlungen und Symbole der Libido, i.e. transformations and symbols of the libido – gives a much more intriguing idea of what's going on here.
The genesis for this book goes back to a patient Jung was interested in when he worked at the Burghölzli asylum in Zurich in the early 1900s. Emile Schwyzer thought he was God, and thought furthermore that he had to ejaculate as much as possible otherwise the world would perish. That's just another Tuesday if you work in an asylum. But Schwyzer had a unique delusion that fascinated Jung: he believed that he could control the weather, and when asked how, replied that the sun had an enormous penis hanging down from it, and if he half-closed his eyes and moved his head, he could move this solar phallus around and control the winds.
Jung didn't really know what to say to this. Who can blame him? But a couple of years later, he happened to read a book about early Mithraic cults which described ritual decorations showing the sun with a tube hanging down from it which generated the winds. His patient had been, Jung said, an uneducated man who could not have known anything about pre-Christian religion. So how come these ideas were so similar?
That's when Jung hit upon his big idea: that the delusions of the schizophrenics he was treating were, in their instinctive symbolism, very similar to the myths and legends that have come down from earlier phases of humanity. Perhaps ‘the unconscious of the present-day man coins its symbols as was done in the most remote past’, he theorised: and just as a patient's neurotic fantasies can tell us something about their state of mind, so mythology might tell us something about the state of mind of humanity in general.
Not unreasonable, on the face of it. This book examines the idea through a wide-ranging analysis of various myths and symbols from around the world, positing what they might say about our most fundamental fears and desires.
This is usually shelved under medicine or psychology, but really it struck me as less a piece of medical literature, and more like a midway point between Frazer's The Golden Bough and something like Robert Graves's The White Goddess. It reads much more like comparative mythology than psychoanalysis.
Like all such works, it's actually rather convincing in its broad strokes while seeming very speculative in the details. Despite Jung's colossal scholarship and breadth of reading (Greek and Latin authors are quoted in the original, so best of luck to you), lining up examples of castration myths or the maternal symbolism of trees is always going to seem dangerously selective, and that's before you start suggesting that they all have to do with our innate attempts to deflect infantile sexuality away from incest.
Ninety percent of his examples are drawn from Greek, Roman, Norse, Celtic or Indian myth – so it seems to me that a lot of these similarities could be explained just as well by some shared Indo-European mythological heritage than by human psychology in general. (Works like Calvert Watkins's How to Kill a Dragon come to mind.)
That stuff aside, though, I do find Jung's ideas quite plausible when he finally stops quoting Plautus long enough to spell them out. The reason he sees the incest taboo as so crucial is because he (unlike Freud) is not really speaking in literal sexual terms – rather, he's talking about that formative period of infancy when the child's love and attention turns away from the parents and out towards the external world. This period in childhood may correspond to a period of development in early humans.
As part of this process, the libido is redirected into a whole variety of other objects. If this redirection doesn't work, Jung calls it repression, and considers it the cause of various neuroses. If it does work, he calls it sublimation, and considers is the cause of…well, basically the entirety of human culture. This is why, while it's true in some sense that everything comes down to sex, he's keen to point out that this is only the distant first cause.
This is why the book's original title is so important; indeed, ‘the secret of the development of culture,’ Jung suggests, ‘lies in the mobility of the libido’.
Religion was one of the key drivers for this kind of sublimation, and indeed one of the most fascinating and unexpected parts of the book is its oblique argument for atheism. Jung treats Christianity as a mythological system like any other, whose doctrines ultimately have to do with tackling exactly the same primitive urges as all the other cults.
Jung's memoirs are pointedly spiritual, so it's a surprise here to see him arguing that ‘the gods are libido’ – ‘our own longing to which we pay divine honours’. In the final analysis, Christianity itself is
In the end, he says, ‘belief should be replaced by understanding’, a sentiment I heartily agree with and which is rarely argued from such an unusual direction.
All these arguments I find very interesting, and I only wish he had spent more time developing them with reference to actual case histories rather than the constant reams of mythology, literature and spurious etymology. Indeed the points I have picked out in the review here are gathered from many different parts of the book, Jung apparently preferring not to spell out his theories in one coherent argument but rather scatter them at confusing intervals.
‘I need hardly emphasise the fact that I, too, have sometimes been in doubt,’ he says at one point, and yes, there is quite a lot here that seems a bit tenuous at first glance. But the central thrust of his ideas is very, very powerful, and you can see why it had such an impact. Decades later, this would form the basis of his theory of a ‘collective unconscious’; but here, we simply see a rich and strange mind drawing very new, very productive connections whose reverberations are still being felt.
The genesis for this book goes back to a patient Jung was interested in when he worked at the Burghölzli asylum in Zurich in the early 1900s. Emile Schwyzer thought he was God, and thought furthermore that he had to ejaculate as much as possible otherwise the world would perish. That's just another Tuesday if you work in an asylum. But Schwyzer had a unique delusion that fascinated Jung: he believed that he could control the weather, and when asked how, replied that the sun had an enormous penis hanging down from it, and if he half-closed his eyes and moved his head, he could move this solar phallus around and control the winds.
Jung didn't really know what to say to this. Who can blame him? But a couple of years later, he happened to read a book about early Mithraic cults which described ritual decorations showing the sun with a tube hanging down from it which generated the winds. His patient had been, Jung said, an uneducated man who could not have known anything about pre-Christian religion. So how come these ideas were so similar?
That's when Jung hit upon his big idea: that the delusions of the schizophrenics he was treating were, in their instinctive symbolism, very similar to the myths and legends that have come down from earlier phases of humanity. Perhaps ‘the unconscious of the present-day man coins its symbols as was done in the most remote past’, he theorised: and just as a patient's neurotic fantasies can tell us something about their state of mind, so mythology might tell us something about the state of mind of humanity in general.
Not unreasonable, on the face of it. This book examines the idea through a wide-ranging analysis of various myths and symbols from around the world, positing what they might say about our most fundamental fears and desires.
This is usually shelved under medicine or psychology, but really it struck me as less a piece of medical literature, and more like a midway point between Frazer's The Golden Bough and something like Robert Graves's The White Goddess. It reads much more like comparative mythology than psychoanalysis.
Like all such works, it's actually rather convincing in its broad strokes while seeming very speculative in the details. Despite Jung's colossal scholarship and breadth of reading (Greek and Latin authors are quoted in the original, so best of luck to you), lining up examples of castration myths or the maternal symbolism of trees is always going to seem dangerously selective, and that's before you start suggesting that they all have to do with our innate attempts to deflect infantile sexuality away from incest.
Ninety percent of his examples are drawn from Greek, Roman, Norse, Celtic or Indian myth – so it seems to me that a lot of these similarities could be explained just as well by some shared Indo-European mythological heritage than by human psychology in general. (Works like Calvert Watkins's How to Kill a Dragon come to mind.)
That stuff aside, though, I do find Jung's ideas quite plausible when he finally stops quoting Plautus long enough to spell them out. The reason he sees the incest taboo as so crucial is because he (unlike Freud) is not really speaking in literal sexual terms – rather, he's talking about that formative period of infancy when the child's love and attention turns away from the parents and out towards the external world. This period in childhood may correspond to a period of development in early humans.
As part of this process, the libido is redirected into a whole variety of other objects. If this redirection doesn't work, Jung calls it repression, and considers it the cause of various neuroses. If it does work, he calls it sublimation, and considers is the cause of…well, basically the entirety of human culture. This is why, while it's true in some sense that everything comes down to sex, he's keen to point out that this is only the distant first cause.
A fleeting glance at the history of evolution is sufficient to teach us that countless complicated functions to which to-day must be denied any sexual character were originally pure derivations from the general impulse of propagation. […] Even if there can be no doubt about the sexual origin of music, still it would be a poor, unæsthetic generalisation if one were to include music in the category of sexuality. […] It can be a surprise only to those to whom the history of evolution is unknown to find how few things there are really in human life which can not be reduced in the last analysis to the instinct of procreation. It includes very nearly everything, I think, which is beloved and dear to us.
This is why the book's original title is so important; indeed, ‘the secret of the development of culture,’ Jung suggests, ‘lies in the mobility of the libido’.
Religion was one of the key drivers for this kind of sublimation, and indeed one of the most fascinating and unexpected parts of the book is its oblique argument for atheism. Jung treats Christianity as a mythological system like any other, whose doctrines ultimately have to do with tackling exactly the same primitive urges as all the other cults.
If one has once received an effectual impression of the sexual contents of the ancient cults, and if one realises oneself that the religious experience, that is, the union with the God of antiquity, was understood by antiquity as a more or less concrete coitus, then truly one can no longer fancy that the motor forces of a religion have suddenly become wholly different since the birth of Christ.
Jung's memoirs are pointedly spiritual, so it's a surprise here to see him arguing that ‘the gods are libido’ – ‘our own longing to which we pay divine honours’. In the final analysis, Christianity itself is
a positive creed which keeps us infantile and, therefore, ethically inferior. Although of the greatest significance from the cultural point of view and of imperishable beauty from the æsthetic standpoint, this delusion can no longer ethically suffice humanity striving after moral autonomy.
In the end, he says, ‘belief should be replaced by understanding’, a sentiment I heartily agree with and which is rarely argued from such an unusual direction.
All these arguments I find very interesting, and I only wish he had spent more time developing them with reference to actual case histories rather than the constant reams of mythology, literature and spurious etymology. Indeed the points I have picked out in the review here are gathered from many different parts of the book, Jung apparently preferring not to spell out his theories in one coherent argument but rather scatter them at confusing intervals.
‘I need hardly emphasise the fact that I, too, have sometimes been in doubt,’ he says at one point, and yes, there is quite a lot here that seems a bit tenuous at first glance. But the central thrust of his ideas is very, very powerful, and you can see why it had such an impact. Decades later, this would form the basis of his theory of a ‘collective unconscious’; but here, we simply see a rich and strange mind drawing very new, very productive connections whose reverberations are still being felt.
July 2, 2020
I've been reading Jung since I was a teenager. I was very early on taken by subjects like synchronicity, archetypes and the collective unconscious. In my view, the facticity of the preceding is evident for anyone who has studied mythology and dream symbolism. I've been aware of the mythological/religious content of my own dreams for as long as I can remember. It's in the elucidation of the language of the subconscious where Jung was a pioneer. I'm not always in agreement with him about everything. I'll mention some of the cases of disagreement below, but even my disagreements do not detract from how formative and pioneering Jung's thought was, for not just psychology, but for philosophy and for understanding the human subconscious in general.
I wanted to start reading Jung again because, after going through Schelling, it is apparent to me that Schelling's stance on mythology was probably influential for psychology in general, and for Jung in particular. Jung does in fact cite Schelling's Philosophy of Mythology once in this book. I found that interesting. This work actually marked the schism between Freud and Jung. Freud increasingly saw the libido as a sexual drive, whereas Jung saw the libido as more contextual. Jung variously described the libido as energy, drive, passion, motivation, etc. Jung saw the sex drive as only one of a number of possible applications of the libido. This difference with Freud ultimately drove a wedge between them. This book pretty much sealed the separation of the Freudian and Jungian schools of psychology. Obviously, I'm way more Jungian than Freudian. I give credit to Freud, but he became too dogmatic in his views. Jung was more open to letting his experience as a psychologist mold his thinking. That doesn't mean Jung wasn't prone to some of the ignorance and prejudice that was ubiquitous at the time. Jung's belief that there are "lower" races should be seen in the Jungian context, though. He saw certain peoples as functioning in a more primal (i.e. lower) state of human development. These peoples are analogous to the time of adolescence of a specific human being. I'm not sure he saw these so-called "lower" races as inherently inferior, because he also saw rightly that it is in these cultures that mythology and symbolism is often the richest. The communal collective unconscious of certain peoples may contain some of the richest mythology because of how recent the connection is to a more primitive civilization. Indeed, one of the major epiphanies of Jung was when a non-white patient attempted to show him the "phallus" of the sun. At the time, Jung thought that it was simply the ravings of a disturbed man until he was reading up on Mithraism and the same mythological descriptions of the sun occurred in a text published later. Jung mentioned in this book, and in a number of other places, how important this revelation of subconscious archetypes was for him. I concur that the odds of the same mythological description occurring in the Mithraic text and in the ravings of this man is almost nil if one appeals to coincidence. If Jung didn't see all humanity as interconnected, he would not have found this insight so universally applicable. I do not want to seem as if I am excusing Jung's prejudices, only clarifying the context that they occurred in. One should also note that this book is a very early work. He almost certainly did change his views on certain things. One example I can cite is that here, Jung equates introversion almost exclusively with psychosis. He sees introversion as incest inversion; a desire to return to the mother. Later on, Jung didn't see introversion as, ipso facto, a sign of a psychological complex. I'm an extreme introvert, so I take exception to the idea that my introversion is necessarily a mental illness. Not that I am not eccentric and slightly neurotic in my own way, but my introversion isn't an illness. There is a lot to suggest that Jung later changed his views on introversion. One can hope that he also changed some of his more prejudicial views on people.
Jung seemed to have been consumed with the visions of a certain "Miss Frank Miller" for pretty much the entirety of this book. Apparently, she was a poet given to visions and mania. Jung spends pretty much the whole of this book on her poetry and visions. He sees evidence of a psychosis in her visions and in her poetry. He notes the mythological and archetypal components in both, but he definitely saw evidence of a complex in both as well. I've being studying mysticism and religion for years, so I am not inclined to trivialize someone's visions and poetic imagination as the ravings of a disturbed mind necessarily. Jung's breakdown of the mythological aspects of Miss Miller's visions and poetry is interesting, even though I think he has a tendency to trivialize something that could've been spiritually significant for this woman. Not surprisingly, Jung also sees religion, and Christianity specifically, as containing unconscious projections of the libido. Once again, I've been studying religion too long to trivialize it as simply a matter of human psychological projection. Jung may have changed his views on the preceding later, but I know that his equating the shadow self with an evil that needed to be integrated is something I have always taken issue with. It's not that I deny the existence of the shadow. Indeed, Christianity never denied there was such a thing. I simply deny that it can be integrated as an evil. Evil can't function as a unity, so integrating it is a contradiction in terms. This is one thing I've always opposed Jung on.
There's some sections in here I consider interesting and I'd like to quote those. Thankfully, this book is in the public domain, so it won't be as difficult. The following is interesting because, while it still contains negative appraisals of Christianity, it also has some positive ones:
"The people of this age had grown ripe for identification with the Logos (word) "become flesh," for the founding of a new fellowship, united by one idea, in the name of which people could love each other and call each other brothers.... The meaning of those cults I speak of Christianity and Mithracism is clear; it is a moral restraint of animal impulses. The dynamic appearance of both religions betrays something of that enormous feeling of redemption which animated the first disciples and which we today scarcely know how to appreciate, for these old truths are empty to us. Most certainly we should still understand it, had our customs even a breath of ancient brutality, for we can hardly realize in this day the whirlwinds of the unchained libido which roared through the ancient Rome of the Caesars. The civilized man of the present day seems very far removed from that. He has become merely neurotic. So for us the necessities which brought forth Christianity have actually been lost, since we no longer understand their meaning. We do not know against what it had to protect us. For enlightened people, the so-called religiousness has already approached very close to a neurosis. In the past two thousand years Christianity has done its work and has erected barriers of repression, which protect us from the sight of our own " sinfulness." The elementary emotions of the libido have come to be unknown to us, for they are carried on in the unconscious; therefore, the belief which combats them has become hollow and empty. Let whoever does not believe that a mask covers our religion, obtain an impression for himself from the appearance of our modern churches, from which style and art have long since fled."
It's interesting that Jung notes poetry as containing inherently unconscious archetypal imagery. I would add that lyrics to songs also qualify in the same regard. While mining Miss Miller's poetry and visions for unconscious symbolism and signs of psychoses, Jung cited her recounting of one of her visions:
" After an evening of care and anxiety, I lay down to sleep at about half past eleven. I felt excited and unable to sleep, although I was very tired. There was no light in the room. I closed my eyes, and then I had the feeling that something was about to happen. The sensation of a general relaxation came over me, and I remained as passive as possible. Lines appeared before my eyes, sparks and shining spirals, followed by a kaleidoscopic review of recent trivial occurrences."
I found the details of the above vision fascinating because it reminds me of the lyrics of a song by New Order. After the suicide of Joy Division's frontman, Ian Curtis, the rest of the members of Joy Division went on to form New Order. Their first abum, Movement, was haunted by the death Ian Curtis. There are lyrics in the song The Him that remind me of the above vision:
"Small boy kneels humble in a great hall,
He pays penance to the air above him,
White circles, black lines surround me
Reborn, so plain my eyes see
This is the reason that I came here
To be so near to such a person.
I'm so tired. I'm so tired"
I always found the part about white circles and black lines interesting. The song obviously has a lot to do with Ian Curtis. I find it interesting that a similar vision was had by this woman: spirals, lines, and the reference to being tired is also interesting. It's entirely possible that Bernard Sumner, or whoever wrote the lyrics, had read this book and was influenced by it unconsciously, but I think it's doubtful.
This was a very interesting early work of Jung's. I certainly recommend it. This contains many of the elements that we associate with Jung, and the theories he would continue to develop the rest of his life. I give it around 4 stars. Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious is a superior work, but this is still very good
I wanted to start reading Jung again because, after going through Schelling, it is apparent to me that Schelling's stance on mythology was probably influential for psychology in general, and for Jung in particular. Jung does in fact cite Schelling's Philosophy of Mythology once in this book. I found that interesting. This work actually marked the schism between Freud and Jung. Freud increasingly saw the libido as a sexual drive, whereas Jung saw the libido as more contextual. Jung variously described the libido as energy, drive, passion, motivation, etc. Jung saw the sex drive as only one of a number of possible applications of the libido. This difference with Freud ultimately drove a wedge between them. This book pretty much sealed the separation of the Freudian and Jungian schools of psychology. Obviously, I'm way more Jungian than Freudian. I give credit to Freud, but he became too dogmatic in his views. Jung was more open to letting his experience as a psychologist mold his thinking. That doesn't mean Jung wasn't prone to some of the ignorance and prejudice that was ubiquitous at the time. Jung's belief that there are "lower" races should be seen in the Jungian context, though. He saw certain peoples as functioning in a more primal (i.e. lower) state of human development. These peoples are analogous to the time of adolescence of a specific human being. I'm not sure he saw these so-called "lower" races as inherently inferior, because he also saw rightly that it is in these cultures that mythology and symbolism is often the richest. The communal collective unconscious of certain peoples may contain some of the richest mythology because of how recent the connection is to a more primitive civilization. Indeed, one of the major epiphanies of Jung was when a non-white patient attempted to show him the "phallus" of the sun. At the time, Jung thought that it was simply the ravings of a disturbed man until he was reading up on Mithraism and the same mythological descriptions of the sun occurred in a text published later. Jung mentioned in this book, and in a number of other places, how important this revelation of subconscious archetypes was for him. I concur that the odds of the same mythological description occurring in the Mithraic text and in the ravings of this man is almost nil if one appeals to coincidence. If Jung didn't see all humanity as interconnected, he would not have found this insight so universally applicable. I do not want to seem as if I am excusing Jung's prejudices, only clarifying the context that they occurred in. One should also note that this book is a very early work. He almost certainly did change his views on certain things. One example I can cite is that here, Jung equates introversion almost exclusively with psychosis. He sees introversion as incest inversion; a desire to return to the mother. Later on, Jung didn't see introversion as, ipso facto, a sign of a psychological complex. I'm an extreme introvert, so I take exception to the idea that my introversion is necessarily a mental illness. Not that I am not eccentric and slightly neurotic in my own way, but my introversion isn't an illness. There is a lot to suggest that Jung later changed his views on introversion. One can hope that he also changed some of his more prejudicial views on people.
Jung seemed to have been consumed with the visions of a certain "Miss Frank Miller" for pretty much the entirety of this book. Apparently, she was a poet given to visions and mania. Jung spends pretty much the whole of this book on her poetry and visions. He sees evidence of a psychosis in her visions and in her poetry. He notes the mythological and archetypal components in both, but he definitely saw evidence of a complex in both as well. I've being studying mysticism and religion for years, so I am not inclined to trivialize someone's visions and poetic imagination as the ravings of a disturbed mind necessarily. Jung's breakdown of the mythological aspects of Miss Miller's visions and poetry is interesting, even though I think he has a tendency to trivialize something that could've been spiritually significant for this woman. Not surprisingly, Jung also sees religion, and Christianity specifically, as containing unconscious projections of the libido. Once again, I've been studying religion too long to trivialize it as simply a matter of human psychological projection. Jung may have changed his views on the preceding later, but I know that his equating the shadow self with an evil that needed to be integrated is something I have always taken issue with. It's not that I deny the existence of the shadow. Indeed, Christianity never denied there was such a thing. I simply deny that it can be integrated as an evil. Evil can't function as a unity, so integrating it is a contradiction in terms. This is one thing I've always opposed Jung on.
There's some sections in here I consider interesting and I'd like to quote those. Thankfully, this book is in the public domain, so it won't be as difficult. The following is interesting because, while it still contains negative appraisals of Christianity, it also has some positive ones:
"The people of this age had grown ripe for identification with the Logos (word) "become flesh," for the founding of a new fellowship, united by one idea, in the name of which people could love each other and call each other brothers.... The meaning of those cults I speak of Christianity and Mithracism is clear; it is a moral restraint of animal impulses. The dynamic appearance of both religions betrays something of that enormous feeling of redemption which animated the first disciples and which we today scarcely know how to appreciate, for these old truths are empty to us. Most certainly we should still understand it, had our customs even a breath of ancient brutality, for we can hardly realize in this day the whirlwinds of the unchained libido which roared through the ancient Rome of the Caesars. The civilized man of the present day seems very far removed from that. He has become merely neurotic. So for us the necessities which brought forth Christianity have actually been lost, since we no longer understand their meaning. We do not know against what it had to protect us. For enlightened people, the so-called religiousness has already approached very close to a neurosis. In the past two thousand years Christianity has done its work and has erected barriers of repression, which protect us from the sight of our own " sinfulness." The elementary emotions of the libido have come to be unknown to us, for they are carried on in the unconscious; therefore, the belief which combats them has become hollow and empty. Let whoever does not believe that a mask covers our religion, obtain an impression for himself from the appearance of our modern churches, from which style and art have long since fled."
It's interesting that Jung notes poetry as containing inherently unconscious archetypal imagery. I would add that lyrics to songs also qualify in the same regard. While mining Miss Miller's poetry and visions for unconscious symbolism and signs of psychoses, Jung cited her recounting of one of her visions:
" After an evening of care and anxiety, I lay down to sleep at about half past eleven. I felt excited and unable to sleep, although I was very tired. There was no light in the room. I closed my eyes, and then I had the feeling that something was about to happen. The sensation of a general relaxation came over me, and I remained as passive as possible. Lines appeared before my eyes, sparks and shining spirals, followed by a kaleidoscopic review of recent trivial occurrences."
I found the details of the above vision fascinating because it reminds me of the lyrics of a song by New Order. After the suicide of Joy Division's frontman, Ian Curtis, the rest of the members of Joy Division went on to form New Order. Their first abum, Movement, was haunted by the death Ian Curtis. There are lyrics in the song The Him that remind me of the above vision:
"Small boy kneels humble in a great hall,
He pays penance to the air above him,
White circles, black lines surround me
Reborn, so plain my eyes see
This is the reason that I came here
To be so near to such a person.
I'm so tired. I'm so tired"
I always found the part about white circles and black lines interesting. The song obviously has a lot to do with Ian Curtis. I find it interesting that a similar vision was had by this woman: spirals, lines, and the reference to being tired is also interesting. It's entirely possible that Bernard Sumner, or whoever wrote the lyrics, had read this book and was influenced by it unconsciously, but I think it's doubtful.
This was a very interesting early work of Jung's. I certainly recommend it. This contains many of the elements that we associate with Jung, and the theories he would continue to develop the rest of his life. I give it around 4 stars. Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious is a superior work, but this is still very good
December 25, 2014
This is a must read for anyone who wants a deeper understanding of Jung's theories. Here Jung examines dreams, mythology, and literature in order to shed light on the repressed aspects of the psyche held within the unconscious. This book focuses particularly upon the repression of the libido, the incest prohibition, and the problem of the libido tied up with the mother image. Here, libido is taken beyond just sexual energy into a broader understanding of psychic energy as a driving force. This is a very good read. I give this book 5 stars. Anyone seeking an understanding of Jung's theories should read this book.
February 3, 2024
Jung : One need not assume that there is a direct dependency between the Apocalypse and the Mithraic liturgy. The visionary images of both texts are developed from a source, not limited to one place, but found in the soul of many diverse people, because the symbols which arise from it are too typical for it to belong to one individual only. I put these images here to show how the primitive symbolism of light gradually developed, with the increasing depth of the vision, into the idea of the sun-hero, the "well-beloved." The development of the symbol of light is thoroughly typical. In addition to this, perhaps I might call to mind the fact that I have previously pointed out this course with numerous examples, and, therefore, I can spare myself the trouble of returning to this subject. These visionary occurrences are the psychological roots of the sun-coronations in the mysteries. Its rite is religious hallucination congealed into liturgical form, which, on account of its great regularity, could become a generally accepted outer form. After all this, it is easily understood how the ancient Christian Church, on one side, stood in an especial bond to Christ as “sol novus,” and, on the other side, had a certain difficulty in freeing itself from the earthly symbols of Christ. Indeed Philo of Alexandria saw in the sun the image of the divine logos or of the Deity especially (“De Somniis,” 1:85). In an Ambrosian hymn Christ is invoked by “O sol salutis,” and so on. At the time of Marcus Aurelius, Meliton, in his work, περὶ λούτρου, called Christ the Ἥλιος ἀνατολης ... μόνος ἥλιος οὗτος ἀνέτειλεν ἀπ’ οὐρανοῦ.
Still more important is a passage from Pseudo-Cyprian: “O quam præclara providentia ut illo die quo factus est sol, in ipso die nasceretur Christus, v. Kal. Apr. feria IV, et ideo de ipso ad plebem dicebat Malachias propheta: ‘Orietur vobis sol iustitiæ et curatio est in pennis ejus,’ hic est sol iustitiæ cuius in pennis curatio præostendebatur.”
In a work nominally attributed to John Chrysostomus, “De Solstitiis et Aequinoctiis,” occurs this passage: “Sed et dominus nascitur mense Decembri hiemis tempore, VIII. Kal. Januarias, quando oleæ maturæ præmuntur ut unctio, id est Chrisma, nascatur—sed et Invicti natalem appellant. Quis utique tam invictus nisi dominus noster qui mortem subactam devicit? Vel quod dicant Solis esse natalem, ipse est sol iustitiæ, de quo Malachias propheta dixit: ‘Dominus lucis ac noctis conditor et discretor qui a propheta Sol iustitiæ cognominatus est.’”
According to the testimony of Eusebius of Alexandria, the Christians also shared in the worship of the rising sun, which lasted into the fifth century:οὐαῖ τοῖς προσκυνοῦσι τὸν ἥλιον καὶ τὴν σελήνην καὶ τοὺς ἀστέρας. Πολλοὺς γὰρ οἶδα τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας καὶ εὐχομένους εἰς τὸν ἥλιον. Ἤδη γὰρ ἀνατείλαντος τοῦ ἡλίου, προσεύχονται καὶ λέγουσιν “Ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς” καὶ οὐ μόνον Ἡλιογνώσται καὶ αἱρετικοὶ τοῦτο ποιοῦσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ χριστιανοὶ καὶ ἀφέντες τὴν πίστιν τοῖς αἱρετικοῖς συναμίγνυνται.
Augustine preached emphatically to the Christians: “Non est Dominus Sol factus sed per quem Sol factus est—ne quis carnaliter sapiens Solem istum (Christum) intelligendum putaret.”
Art has preserved much of the remnants of sun-worship, thus the nimbus around the head of Christ and the halo of the saints in general. The Christian legends also attribute many fire and light symbols to the saints. The twelve apostles, for example, are likened to the twelve signs of the zodiac, and are represented, therefore, with a star over the head.
Freud : Ma'am, this is a Wendy's
Still more important is a passage from Pseudo-Cyprian: “O quam præclara providentia ut illo die quo factus est sol, in ipso die nasceretur Christus, v. Kal. Apr. feria IV, et ideo de ipso ad plebem dicebat Malachias propheta: ‘Orietur vobis sol iustitiæ et curatio est in pennis ejus,’ hic est sol iustitiæ cuius in pennis curatio præostendebatur.”
In a work nominally attributed to John Chrysostomus, “De Solstitiis et Aequinoctiis,” occurs this passage: “Sed et dominus nascitur mense Decembri hiemis tempore, VIII. Kal. Januarias, quando oleæ maturæ præmuntur ut unctio, id est Chrisma, nascatur—sed et Invicti natalem appellant. Quis utique tam invictus nisi dominus noster qui mortem subactam devicit? Vel quod dicant Solis esse natalem, ipse est sol iustitiæ, de quo Malachias propheta dixit: ‘Dominus lucis ac noctis conditor et discretor qui a propheta Sol iustitiæ cognominatus est.’”
According to the testimony of Eusebius of Alexandria, the Christians also shared in the worship of the rising sun, which lasted into the fifth century:οὐαῖ τοῖς προσκυνοῦσι τὸν ἥλιον καὶ τὴν σελήνην καὶ τοὺς ἀστέρας. Πολλοὺς γὰρ οἶδα τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας καὶ εὐχομένους εἰς τὸν ἥλιον. Ἤδη γὰρ ἀνατείλαντος τοῦ ἡλίου, προσεύχονται καὶ λέγουσιν “Ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς” καὶ οὐ μόνον Ἡλιογνώσται καὶ αἱρετικοὶ τοῦτο ποιοῦσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ χριστιανοὶ καὶ ἀφέντες τὴν πίστιν τοῖς αἱρετικοῖς συναμίγνυνται.
Augustine preached emphatically to the Christians: “Non est Dominus Sol factus sed per quem Sol factus est—ne quis carnaliter sapiens Solem istum (Christum) intelligendum putaret.”
Art has preserved much of the remnants of sun-worship, thus the nimbus around the head of Christ and the halo of the saints in general. The Christian legends also attribute many fire and light symbols to the saints. The twelve apostles, for example, are likened to the twelve signs of the zodiac, and are represented, therefore, with a star over the head.
Freud : Ma'am, this is a Wendy's
July 3, 2012
Jung analyses the autobiographic sketches of a young woman in order to expose the underlying stereotypical mythic imagery he deems universal for all psyches. As methodological help he turns to scholars dealing with the importance of myth for the creation of religions and collective habits. His terminology is highly based on Freud's findings for the interpretation of dreams. However while Freud insists on the sexually motivated nature of these dreams, Jung argues for a broader definition of the term Libido as a universal energetic driving force behind human action. This extension of Freud's thought is, in my opinion, one of the great achievement of this study.
The analysis itself is logically structured, yet partly loses itself in redundancies. This is something I find typical and annoying in Jung's writing in general. However, the original thoughts are clever, unique, and very employable for the analysis of people and literature both. Jung also exposes a wide knowledge of individual myths in order to expose their underlying universal structures which he attributes to shared mental capacities in all men. Especially his comparison between the Mythras cult and the advent of Christianity are very illuminating. Overall, a very recommendable book for everyone interested in the power of myth, fairy tale, and the origination of human imagination in general.
The analysis itself is logically structured, yet partly loses itself in redundancies. This is something I find typical and annoying in Jung's writing in general. However, the original thoughts are clever, unique, and very employable for the analysis of people and literature both. Jung also exposes a wide knowledge of individual myths in order to expose their underlying universal structures which he attributes to shared mental capacities in all men. Especially his comparison between the Mythras cult and the advent of Christianity are very illuminating. Overall, a very recommendable book for everyone interested in the power of myth, fairy tale, and the origination of human imagination in general.
January 24, 2015
Este libro recopila observaciones de innumerables mitos a través de la óptica del psicoanálisis de inicios del siglo XX.
La labor bibliográfica es impresionante. Jung recorre mitología grecoromana, sumeria, egipcia, judeocristiana, nórdica, y seguro que estoy olvidando un montón más.
Hace referencia a libros de Goethe y Nietsche que no he leído lamentablemente.
Me gustaría contrastar esto con una publicación muy reciente de la escuela gestalt.
La labor bibliográfica es impresionante. Jung recorre mitología grecoromana, sumeria, egipcia, judeocristiana, nórdica, y seguro que estoy olvidando un montón más.
Hace referencia a libros de Goethe y Nietsche que no he leído lamentablemente.
Me gustaría contrastar esto con una publicación muy reciente de la escuela gestalt.
January 24, 2024
gjorde det tydeligere hvor han skifter kurs fra freud. må si en del av drømmeanalysene gjør at jeg forstår hvorfor han har fått kritikk. men totalt sett er det forfriskende å lese om arketyper og kollektivt ubevisste, for det gir mening også, i lys av bl.a. fellestrekk i religiøse og spirituelle tradisjoner.
han gjør en beundringsverdig og søtt knep på slutten av boka hvor han sier noe sånt som «vitenskapen går ikke fremover uten menn som forplikter seg til å kunne gjøre feil». :-)
han gjør en beundringsverdig og søtt knep på slutten av boka hvor han sier noe sånt som «vitenskapen går ikke fremover uten menn som forplikter seg til å kunne gjøre feil». :-)
December 3, 2023
Carl Jung's "Psychology of the Unconscious" is an insightful exploration into the depths of the human psyche. Jung delves into the realm of the unconscious mind, elucidating its profound impact on human behavior, dreams, and personality. With a masterful blend of clinical observation, mythology, and personal introspection, Jung introduces the concept of archetypes and the collective unconscious, offering a pioneering perspective that transcends the boundaries of traditional psychoanalysis. His comprehensive examination of the unconscious mind's symbolic language and its manifestations in dreams provides readers with a captivating journey into the intricate workings of the human psyche.
Throughout the book, Jung's brilliance shines as he unravels the intricacies of the human mind, illuminating the interconnectedness between the individual's unconscious and the broader collective experiences. He invites readers into a world where dreams, symbols, and the unconscious intertwine, providing a compelling framework for understanding the depths of human nature and the universal aspects of the human psyche. Jung's "Psychology of the Unconscious" remains an indispensable cornerstone in the realm of psychology, offering profound insights that continue to resonate with scholars, clinicians, and anyone fascinated by the enigmatic workings of the mind.
Throughout the book, Jung's brilliance shines as he unravels the intricacies of the human mind, illuminating the interconnectedness between the individual's unconscious and the broader collective experiences. He invites readers into a world where dreams, symbols, and the unconscious intertwine, providing a compelling framework for understanding the depths of human nature and the universal aspects of the human psyche. Jung's "Psychology of the Unconscious" remains an indispensable cornerstone in the realm of psychology, offering profound insights that continue to resonate with scholars, clinicians, and anyone fascinated by the enigmatic workings of the mind.
April 4, 2024
A gorgeous tapestry of myths, poetry, religious stories, personal anecdotes, and psychiatric experience, all pulled together by Jung's incredible intellect. This isn't technically philosophy, but it's some of the best philosophy I've ever read.
Read
February 1, 2025Digger
Read
May 22, 2024«(…) løsningen ligger i å opprettholde de gamle sannheter samtidig som motsetningene aksepteres.»
Jaaa Jung er Flott💙💙💙💙💙
Jaaa Jung er Flott💙💙💙💙💙
May 29, 2015
چه شخصیت جالبیه یونگ ! بیشتر باید کاراشو خوند بعضی جاهای این کتاب نیاز به آشنایی قبلی زیادی با کارای یونگ و کلا روانکاوی داره .
January 29, 2025
Карл Ґустав Юнґ
"Психологія несвідомого"
Перше чим займається Юнґ - це швидким окресленням відкриттів Фройда, а також розбіжностей у поглядах на лібідо між ними двома. Фройдівське лібідо - це прихована, або явна сексуальна енергія, як така. Лібідо за Юнґом - це креативна (не тільки сексуальна) енергія.
Наступний великий розділ - це "аналіз аналізу". Юнґ розбирає інтерпретацію сну міс Франк Міллер, цей сон вона побачила під час подорожі і описала в роботі "Автосугестивні фантазії". Це багата на аналогії робота в якій переплетено ідеї Мілтона, По, Біблії, творення світу словом (Птах-Ягве), а також її еротичні фантазії стосовно молодого моряка, який співав під час нічної варти. Шлях Йова і шлях Фауста. Християнство і мітраїзм.
Далі Юнґ аналізує культи солярних богів підсумовуючи:
"В божестві людина вшановує своє власне лібідо."
За цим слідує аналіз фалічної символіки. Іфіфалічний Гермес. Оаннес, як фалічна риба.
В наступних розділах Юнґ аналізує такі табуйовані на той час (і подекуди й сьогодні) теми, як інцест, онанізм та копрофілію.
Онаністична регресія на прикладі шизофренічної пацієнтки. Ранній онанізм і повернення до нього після раптової стресової ситуації.
Перехід лібідо харчування до сексуальної функції (оральна фаза).
Добування вогню, як сакраментальний коїтус.
Перенесення, інтроверсія, сублімація.
Міс Міллер згадує сон де бачила Сфінкса і двох ацтекських богів. Юнґ інтерпретує їх як стадії психологічно-сексуального розвитку в дитини. Оральну, анальну та гонадну.
Попокатепетль і зв'язок цього слова з приставками "pop, poop", що означають зад і дефекацію.
Чіппентопель і сечовипускання. Слідкувати за ходом думок Юнґа - дуже заплюючий процес.
Пацієнтка в мріях уявляє свого вітця на унітазі. Сакралізація екскрементів авторитетів ( курйозний приклад лицарів, котрі перед боєм обмазувалис виділеннями пап і кардиналів). Детальний аналіз збочень із екскрементами, кал, як еквівалент грошей (це все вже було у Фройда). Девкаліон і Пірра і викидання каменів.
Цілий великий розділ присвячений аналізу символіки коня.
Сотні цитат з міфологічної літератури та священних текстів приводять Юнґа до висновку:
"Архаїчна уява в основному була сексуальним антропоморфізмом".
В підсумку, хоча це одна з найраніших праць Юнґа, але вона дуже насичена міфологією, особливо потішили посилання на Фрейзера. Книга доступна, бо в легкій формі подає полеміку з Фройдом, але звісно, що від сотень посилань та імен богів-героїв у недосвідченого читача може зараморочитися в голові.
"Психологія несвідомого"
Перше чим займається Юнґ - це швидким окресленням відкриттів Фройда, а також розбіжностей у поглядах на лібідо між ними двома. Фройдівське лібідо - це прихована, або явна сексуальна енергія, як така. Лібідо за Юнґом - це креативна (не тільки сексуальна) енергія.
Наступний великий розділ - це "аналіз аналізу". Юнґ розбирає інтерпретацію сну міс Франк Міллер, цей сон вона побачила під час подорожі і описала в роботі "Автосугестивні фантазії". Це багата на аналогії робота в якій переплетено ідеї Мілтона, По, Біблії, творення світу словом (Птах-Ягве), а також її еротичні фантазії стосовно молодого моряка, який співав під час нічної варти. Шлях Йова і шлях Фауста. Християнство і мітраїзм.
Далі Юнґ аналізує культи солярних богів підсумовуючи:
"В божестві людина вшановує своє власне лібідо."
За цим слідує аналіз фалічної символіки. Іфіфалічний Гермес. Оаннес, як фалічна риба.
В наступних розділах Юнґ аналізує такі табуйовані на той час (і подекуди й сьогодні) теми, як інцест, онанізм та копрофілію.
Онаністична регресія на прикладі шизофренічної пацієнтки. Ранній онанізм і повернення до нього після раптової стресової ситуації.
Перехід лібідо харчування до сексуальної функції (оральна фаза).
Добування вогню, як сакраментальний коїтус.
Перенесення, інтроверсія, сублімація.
Міс Міллер згадує сон де бачила Сфінкса і двох ацтекських богів. Юнґ інтерпретує їх як стадії психологічно-сексуального розвитку в дитини. Оральну, анальну та гонадну.
Попокатепетль і зв'язок цього слова з приставками "pop, poop", що означають зад і дефекацію.
Чіппентопель і сечовипускання. Слідкувати за ходом думок Юнґа - дуже заплюючий процес.
Пацієнтка в мріях уявляє свого вітця на унітазі. Сакралізація екскрементів авторитетів ( курйозний приклад лицарів, котрі перед боєм обмазувалис виділеннями пап і кардиналів). Детальний аналіз збочень із екскрементами, кал, як еквівалент грошей (це все вже було у Фройда). Девкаліон і Пірра і викидання каменів.
Цілий великий розділ присвячений аналізу символіки коня.
Сотні цитат з міфологічної літератури та священних текстів приводять Юнґа до висновку:
"Архаїчна уява в основному була сексуальним антропоморфізмом".
В підсумку, хоча це одна з найраніших праць Юнґа, але вона дуже насичена міфологією, особливо потішили посилання на Фрейзера. Книга доступна, бо в легкій формі подає полеміку з Фройдом, але звісно, що від сотень посилань та імен богів-героїв у недосвідченого читача може зараморочитися в голові.
December 9, 2025
First time reading a Jung work.....
definitely going to read more ( BTW the version i read is edited by Shaun Maley ...the afterwords of the traductor were verry intressting ..and show the his intrest)
definitely going to read more ( BTW the version i read is edited by Shaun Maley ...the afterwords of the traductor were verry intressting ..and show the his intrest)
December 26, 2021
I have a conflicted relationship with Swiss psychiatrist C. G. Jung: I got a lot out of reading his ”Man and His Symbols” back in high school, however around 2017-2019 I begun finding his ideas and advice absolutely harmful, then here in 2021 I got a more nuanced view of good old Carl Gustav. This time from the viewpoint of reading Jung to understand his influence on modern Western occultism. Today I find Jung's methods useful for solving the problems I have in life right now but I often find his explanations for why they work unsatisfying and his writing style rather clumsy. Furthermore, my mother owns quite a few books by Jung and his students such as Marie Louise von Franz, James Hillman, Erich Neumann etc which I have promptly started going through. After having plowed through ”The Portable Jung” and re-read ”Man and His Symbols” the time came to ”Psychology of the Unconscious” from 1912.
”Psychology of the Unconscious” is one of Jung's earlier books. Accordingly Jung spends much of it on pointing out what he thought his mentor Sigmund Freud got right and wrong. Here I feel left in the dark, since I haven't read enough Freud to know how much of Jung's criticism I agree with. Jung also spends quite a few pages on arguing against Alfred Adler, another student of Freud who started his own psychological system. Adler combined Freud's theories with Friedrich Nietzsche's ideas, specifically identifying the Freudian libido with the Nietzschean will-to-power. So ”Psychology of the Unconscious” contains a brief biography about Nietzsche for psychologists without an interest in philosophy, as well as Jung's own exegesis of the 'tache man's ideas. To be honest, I have to re-read Nietszche not just Freud in order to say how useful I find Jung's critique of those 2 thinkers in here.
One thing that is clear, however, is that Jung found Nietzsche, Freud and Adler's views of human psychological nature too simplistic in their reliance on one-size-fits-all explanations. This goes a long way to explaining why Jung's own system ended up being so much more complex than either Freud's or Adler's. In particular, Jung felt that none of the three above took religion seriously enough. Not surprising considering that Nietzsche and Freud were atheists, whereas Jung was a Lutheran. (”Aion” which I have yet to read reportedly contains some fairly scathing criticism of Roman Catholic ideas about good and evil)
This is where Jung starts heading into territory a 21st century reader like me finds more akin to occultism than psychology. For example, he goes into detail about how the magical power described by various religions is the same thing as psychic energy. Which in Jung's universe can very much mean psychic in the sense of telekinesis, telepathy, and so on mind you – he took parapsychology very seriously. In this model, deities become metaphorical focus patterns for this energy and "solar hero" myths represent the individual human learning to master this innate raw psychic energy. No wonder Jung is more influential on occultism than psychology nowadays! When Jung starts talking about this psychic energy manifesting in both harmful and beneficial ways, I am also instantly reminded of the talk about positive and negative energies that is a staple of present day popular spirituality.
For all the mysticism a good chunk of ”Psychology of the Unconscious” nonetheless still revolves around analysing a particular psychiatric case story. One of a young woman, whose dreams had clear undertones of repressed lesbianism on her part, and contained a particularly traumatising incident where a crayfish pulled her back into a river she was crossing. Jung argues extensively that this dream is one that his theories could explain in a satisfying manner, but neither Freud nor Adler could.
Anyway, what I got out of this book was finding out how Jung arrived at his particular theories and why he broke with Freud in the ways he did. Since I find Jung's therapeutic methods useful but I don't always agree with him on why they actually work, and I haven't read enough Freud to know whether I agree with Jung's criticisms of his work, this is of limited use to me outside the stuff about applied dream analysis. Maybe I would have gotten less out of the books by Jung I read after this, had I not read ”Psychology of the Unconscious”?
”Psychology of the Unconscious” is one of Jung's earlier books. Accordingly Jung spends much of it on pointing out what he thought his mentor Sigmund Freud got right and wrong. Here I feel left in the dark, since I haven't read enough Freud to know how much of Jung's criticism I agree with. Jung also spends quite a few pages on arguing against Alfred Adler, another student of Freud who started his own psychological system. Adler combined Freud's theories with Friedrich Nietzsche's ideas, specifically identifying the Freudian libido with the Nietzschean will-to-power. So ”Psychology of the Unconscious” contains a brief biography about Nietzsche for psychologists without an interest in philosophy, as well as Jung's own exegesis of the 'tache man's ideas. To be honest, I have to re-read Nietszche not just Freud in order to say how useful I find Jung's critique of those 2 thinkers in here.
One thing that is clear, however, is that Jung found Nietzsche, Freud and Adler's views of human psychological nature too simplistic in their reliance on one-size-fits-all explanations. This goes a long way to explaining why Jung's own system ended up being so much more complex than either Freud's or Adler's. In particular, Jung felt that none of the three above took religion seriously enough. Not surprising considering that Nietzsche and Freud were atheists, whereas Jung was a Lutheran. (”Aion” which I have yet to read reportedly contains some fairly scathing criticism of Roman Catholic ideas about good and evil)
This is where Jung starts heading into territory a 21st century reader like me finds more akin to occultism than psychology. For example, he goes into detail about how the magical power described by various religions is the same thing as psychic energy. Which in Jung's universe can very much mean psychic in the sense of telekinesis, telepathy, and so on mind you – he took parapsychology very seriously. In this model, deities become metaphorical focus patterns for this energy and "solar hero" myths represent the individual human learning to master this innate raw psychic energy. No wonder Jung is more influential on occultism than psychology nowadays! When Jung starts talking about this psychic energy manifesting in both harmful and beneficial ways, I am also instantly reminded of the talk about positive and negative energies that is a staple of present day popular spirituality.
For all the mysticism a good chunk of ”Psychology of the Unconscious” nonetheless still revolves around analysing a particular psychiatric case story. One of a young woman, whose dreams had clear undertones of repressed lesbianism on her part, and contained a particularly traumatising incident where a crayfish pulled her back into a river she was crossing. Jung argues extensively that this dream is one that his theories could explain in a satisfying manner, but neither Freud nor Adler could.
Anyway, what I got out of this book was finding out how Jung arrived at his particular theories and why he broke with Freud in the ways he did. Since I find Jung's therapeutic methods useful but I don't always agree with him on why they actually work, and I haven't read enough Freud to know whether I agree with Jung's criticisms of his work, this is of limited use to me outside the stuff about applied dream analysis. Maybe I would have gotten less out of the books by Jung I read after this, had I not read ”Psychology of the Unconscious”?
January 8, 2019
This book was like a gold mine- mostly dross, with some fool's gold and a tiny nugget of real, valuable material. Jung elevates the non-sequitor to an art form. He's a bloody genius, which can be frustrating because the connections between seemingly non-related material probably seemed obvious to him. German scholarly writing was deliberately obscurantist for a long time, and he seems to come on the tail end of that, but I sense that he's trying to be as clear as he can here.
His point is that you can connect individual psychology to group psychology- that the myth is to cultures as the dream is to individuals. There's something to that. He fleshes that out over the course of his career, and I hope to hop on board a bit downstream. He also makes the point that libido isn't just sexual- that there's more behind our Élan vital than just the pleasure principle. He points us to mythology from around the world to make the point. There's something to that, too.
This work left me exhausted. It's hard work to read this sort of thing.
That may be because the psychoanalysts were self-consciously trying to establish a new paradigm for understanding humanity, and so they spanned the Humanities- theology, philosophy, art, literature, and the natural sciences. If you don't know a bunch about all those subjects, you'll just drown. I clung to the driftwood of my BA in Philosophy and my classical high school education, but the waves were still high.
His point is that you can connect individual psychology to group psychology- that the myth is to cultures as the dream is to individuals. There's something to that. He fleshes that out over the course of his career, and I hope to hop on board a bit downstream. He also makes the point that libido isn't just sexual- that there's more behind our Élan vital than just the pleasure principle. He points us to mythology from around the world to make the point. There's something to that, too.
This work left me exhausted. It's hard work to read this sort of thing.
That may be because the psychoanalysts were self-consciously trying to establish a new paradigm for understanding humanity, and so they spanned the Humanities- theology, philosophy, art, literature, and the natural sciences. If you don't know a bunch about all those subjects, you'll just drown. I clung to the driftwood of my BA in Philosophy and my classical high school education, but the waves were still high.
June 19, 2015
Little did CG know that by 2015, his concepts would not require in-depth explanation because they are common parlance now. For an exhaustive review of his concepts of the Unconscious, which were changed as he grew older, this book is excellent. Can be tiresome for a 20th century person at times, so be patient.
March 14, 2014
Amazing read. One can't help but appreciate Jung's depth and breadth of knowledge of mythology and religion and how aptly he draws from their significance in exploring the importance of symbolism involved in transformation of the psyche. My favorite Jung book to date.
Read
November 9, 2008كتابي جالب راجع به لايه هاي پنهان روح ادمي
هرچند كه ايده ضمير نا خودآگاه از آن يونگ نيست اما با
به نظر من تعبير روياي او بهتر از نظرات فرويد توضيح دهنده ضمير ناخودآگاه است
هرچند كه ايده ضمير نا خودآگاه از آن يونگ نيست اما با
به نظر من تعبير روياي او بهتر از نظرات فرويد توضيح دهنده ضمير ناخودآگاه است
September 14, 2021
"Un oscuro presentimento ci dice che senza questo lato negativo siamo incompleti, che abbiamo un corpo il quale, come ogni corpo, getta inevitabilmente un'ombra, e che se rifiutiamo questo corpo non siamo tridimensionali, bensì piatti e inconsistenti. Ma questo corpo è una bestia con un'anima bestiale, vale a dire è un sistema vivente che obbedisce incondizionatamente all'istinto. Stabilire un'unità con quest'Ombra significa dire di sì all'istinto e perciò dire di sì anche a quella dinamica mostruosa che minaccia nel profondo."
July 7, 2024
Interesting food for thought. It’s not easy to follow his reasoning, especially with his interpretations of patients dreams, and while I do appreciate some of his theories, I feel like a lot of the time you just have to decide if you want to believe him or not (which in my perspective is not really a good sign).
January 12, 2021
A must read for the self-explorer. Carl g. Jung's thoughts on dream analysis and the unconscious is fascanating and can give you great insight in your own psyche and help you obtain self-knowledge. Very interesting read.
November 12, 2023
''where love reigns, there is no will to power; and where the will to power is paramount, love is lacking. the one is but the shadow of the other''
June 16, 2024
Important book to read, but a challenge to go through. One, I believe, that'll have to be read multiple times.
February 17, 2021
C.G. Jung orients this wide-ranging exploration of the sun-hero and his struggle against the mother-imago in light of the personal literary output of a patient of his, a Miss Miller. Using the source documents of this neurotic patient's literary output, Dr. Jung explores with great acuity and alacrity the various manifestations of the sun-hero in archaic religions (Attis, Gilgamesh, Isis, Osiris, Dionysus), the poetry of Longfellow ("Hiawatha"), the operas of Richard Wagner (Siegfried, Brunhilde, and Wotan), and, most importantly, in the lives and histories of the mentally and emotionally suffering patients that make up his clients. Jung's understanding and analysis of the mythological and psychological content of these cultural, religious, mythological, and personal stories is vast and all-encompassing; additionally, this erudition is tied to a theory of emotions that, to this reader, appears cogent and rational. Man (and women) are engaged in a constant battle with the mother-imago, with neurotics regressing into nihilistic pursuit of union with the pleasant feelings of infancy, when all needs were met in a grand circle of love; the history of the individual, as well as the culture and religion of all mankind, is the reflection of the working out of this conflict. And behind it all is the sun-hero, in love with both the mother-inspired libido and fearful of true engagement with life, for there is the possibility of death and defeat. All through this book, as encompassing and almost encyclopedic as it is, one is constantly held in thrall to the content, for the analysis and recounting of the theories, and their associated stories, entertains and instructs with the greatest of ease. The acuity of the perception is twinned with a smoothness of prose, making for a work that is truly a joy to peruse. A good book this is!
November 22, 2017
How big a heart do you have to swallow and stomach the immensity of this seminal work? How big a mind can you stretch to reimagine the size of the Jung's thorough and vast reach of lateral anthropological knowledge? Finally, how strong a faith do you have in your socio-cultural and cognitive structure to sustain the challenges that will hammer on your inherited systems once Jung connects it with the communal subconscious?
Even the Koran was not spared.
For me, it fortified my faith. Because I've always thought that if my faith in my particular religion has a smidge of credibility, then it would have to be connected with other cultures and societies. That the Khidir character can be connected with the nymphs of the Pacific ocean, the gods of Atlantis and the demons in South America, makes him more real, and closer to heart.
That the world's mythological languages and systems connect with each other makes it even more important to stop fussing what is ours and theirs, and celebrate instead what is common amongst man, across the generations and bibles.
Even the Koran was not spared.
For me, it fortified my faith. Because I've always thought that if my faith in my particular religion has a smidge of credibility, then it would have to be connected with other cultures and societies. That the Khidir character can be connected with the nymphs of the Pacific ocean, the gods of Atlantis and the demons in South America, makes him more real, and closer to heart.
That the world's mythological languages and systems connect with each other makes it even more important to stop fussing what is ours and theirs, and celebrate instead what is common amongst man, across the generations and bibles.
February 3, 2021
This book needs some serious editing. It reads like a collection of academic notes that have been randomly strung together. Wanting, I suppose, to walk in the footsteps of Nietzche, Jung makes little effort to explain anything he is attempting to teach in a manner the reader would neatly grasp without having to consult external resources that attempt to interpret his writings.
Thankfully, Jung will improve as a writer in the coming years, but sadly in this book he comes off as a raving mystic 99% of time, and I would be hard-pressed to recommend it to anyone.
And this is coming from someone who was really impressed by Psychological Types and rated it a solid 5 stars.
Thankfully, Jung will improve as a writer in the coming years, but sadly in this book he comes off as a raving mystic 99% of time, and I would be hard-pressed to recommend it to anyone.
And this is coming from someone who was really impressed by Psychological Types and rated it a solid 5 stars.
August 23, 2017
Perché due stelline? e' un libro appassionato, scritto in modo magnifico e con voli pindarici che mettono davvero i brividi per intensità, ma sul suo valore scientifico è meglio sorvolare. Alcuni passaggi fanno riflettere, ci si riflette senza alcun dubbio, ma che l'autore imponga il lettore a nutrire fiducia sui suoi postulati soltanto perché lui ne è convinto, beh: la scienza è lontana diverse galassie da qui. Libro bellissimo da leggere, ma se questo è uno dei grandi capolavori della psicologia, siamo davvero rovinati!
December 31, 2020
I struggled with this book. I thought it would be more theoretical like Freud’s works, where he takes a concept and kind of ruminates on it for a while, but instead he bases most of the book on another author’s work and develops symbolism from that work. Concepts do not seem fully formed or explained - examples are given without a base understanding of the symbol/concepts themselves. It was nice trying to read this, since he’s one of the fathers of modern psychology, but I ultimately just wasn’t that interested.
June 9, 2016
...how can a book be interesting and boring in the same time?... maybe later... or I'll stick to reading about Jung instead of actually reading Jung...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews