ESSAYS (INCLUDING HIS ‘DEMENTIA PRAECOX’ ESSAY) ON MENTAL CONDITIONS
The Editorial Note to this 1960 collection explains, “The importance of this volume of scientific papers for understanding Jung’s researches as a whole can scarcely be overrated, even though most of them are now mainly of historical interest or represent the reflections of his later years on a subject that never ceased to engage his active psychotherapeutic endeavors. ‘The Psychology of Dementia Praecox’ was the culmination of Jung’s early researches at the Burghölzli Hospital into the nature of the psychoses. It was the publication which established him once and for all as a psychiatric investigator of the first rank. It was the volume which engaged Freud’s interest and led to their meeting. It was the research which contained the seeds of his theoretical divergence from psychoanalysis.”
In the extended essay on Dementia Praecox, he states, “So far as I know, no real refutation of Freud’s views has yet been made. Hence I shall confine myself to asserting that dreams, which in any case have numerous analogies with the associative disturbances in dementia praecox, also show the special speech-condensations consisting of the contamination of whole sentences and situations.” (Pg. 26)
He observes, “Here we have an instance of displacement: the complex must under all circumstances assert itself. Since, for many people, the sexual complex cannot be acted out in a natural way, it makes use of by-ways. During puberty it takes the form of more or less abnormal sexual fantasies, frequently alternating with phases of religious enthusiasm (displacements). In men, sexuality, if not acted out directly, is frequently converted into a feverish professional activity or a passion for dangerous sports, etc., or into some learned hobby, such as a collecting mania. Women take up some kind of philanthropic work, which is usually determined by the special form of the complex. They devote themselves to nursing in hospitals … or they develop strange eccentricities… Artistic natures in particular are wont to benefit by such displacements.” (Pg. 49-50)
He explains, ‘We use the term ‘symbolical’ in contradistinction to ‘allegorical.’ Allegory, for us, is the intentional interpretation of a thought, reinforced by images, whereas symbols are only indistinct, subsidiary associations to a thought, which obscure it rather than clarify it.” (Pg. 65)
He summarizes, “In dementia praecox… we find one or more complexes which have become permanently fixed and could not, therefore, be overcome. But whereas in persons predisposed to hysteria there is an unmistakable causal connection between the complex and the illness, in dementia praecox it is not at all clear whether the complex caused or precipitated the illness in persons so predisposed, or whether at the moment of the outbreak, of the disease a definite complex was present which then determined the symptoms.” (Pg. 97)
In his later essay, ‘The Content of the Psychoses’ (1914), he explains, “45% of the patients [at the Burghölzli Mental Hospital] suffer from the authentic and common disease known as dementia praecox. The name is a very unhappy one, for the disease is not always precocious, nor in all cases is there dementia. Unfortunately this disease is too often incurable; even in the best cases, in recoveries where the layman would notice no abnormality, one always finds some defect in the patient’s emotional life.” (Pg. 161)
He admits, “Psychological analysis is far from being able to explain in a clear and illuminating fashion all cases of the disease with which we are concerned. On the contrary, the majority remain exceedingly obscure and difficult to understand, not least because only a fraction of the patients recover.” (Pg. 170-171)
He concludes the essay, “Though we are still far from being able to explain all the relationships in that obscure world, we can maintain with complete assurance that in dementia praecox there is no symptom which could be described as psychologically groundless and meaningless. Even the most absurd things are nothing other than symbols for thoughts which are not only understandable in human terms but dwell in every human breast. In insanity we do not discover anything new and unknown; we are looking at the foundations of our own being, the matrix of those vital problems on which we are all engaged.” (Pg. 178)
In another essay, he explains, “When we speak of a thing being ‘unconscious,’ we must not forget that from the standpoint of the functioning of the brain it may be unconscious to us in two ways---physiologically and psychologically. I shall discuss the subject only from the latter point of view. For our purpose we may define the unconscious as the sum of all those psychic events which are so apperceived, and so are unconscious.” (Pg. 203)
He observes, “we find it eminently characteristic of abnormal people that they refuse to recognize the compensating influence which comes from the unconscious and even continue to emphasize their one-sidedness in accordance with the well-known psychological fact that the worst enemy of the wolf is the wolf-hound… and the convert the greatest fanatic; for I become a fanatic when I attack outwardly a thing which inwardly I am obliged to concede is right.” (Pg. 207-208)
He states, ‘Since it is evident that the psychological factor plays a decisive role in the course of the dementia praecox, it is not unlikely that the first attack would be due to a psychological cause. It is known that many cases originate in a psychologically critical period or following a shock or violent moral conflict. The psychiatrist is inclined to regard such conditions rather as precipitating causes or auxiliary factors which bring a latent organic disease to the surface. He thinks that if psychic experiences were really efficient causes they should exercise a pathological effect in everybody. As this is obviously not the case, the psychic causes therefore have the significance only of auxiliary factors.” (Pg. 218)
In his essay on schizophrenia, he notes: “The question is: Is the sole and absolute cause of schizophrenia a psychological one or not? Over the whole field of medicine such a question is, as you know, more than embarrassing. Only in a few cases can it be answered positively. The usual aetiology consists in a competition between various conditions. It has therefore been urged that the word ‘causality’ or ‘cause’ should be expunged from the medical vocabulary and replaced by the word ‘conditionalism.’ I am absolutely in favor of such a measure, since it is well-nigh impossible to prove, even approximately, that schizophrenia is an organic disease to begin with. It is equally impossible to make its exclusively psychological origin evident.” (Pg. 245)
He notes, “Two facts have impressed themselves on me during my career as a psychiatrist and psychotherapist. One is the enormous change that the average mental hospital has undergone in my lifetime. That whole desperate crowd of utterly degenerate catatonics has practically disappeared, simply because they have been given something to do. The other fact that impressed me is the discovery I made when I began my psychotherapeutic practice: I was amazed at the number of schizophrenics whom we almost never see in psychiatric hospitals. These cases are partially camouflaged as obsessional neuroses, compulsions, phobias, and hysterias, and they are very careful never to go near an asylum. These patients insist upon treatment, and I found myself… trying my hand on cases we never would have dreamed of touching if we had had them in the clinic… I felt hopelessly unscientific in treating them at all---and after the treatment I was told that they never could have been schizophrenic in the first place.” (Pg. 247)
He explains, “It was this frequent reversion to archaic forms of association found in schizophrenia that first gave me the idea of an unconscious not consisting only of originally conscious contents that have got lost, but having a deeper layer of the same universal character as the mythological motifs which typify human fantasy in general. These motifs are not INVENTED so much as DISCOVERED; they are typical forms that appear spontaneously all over the world, independently of tradition, in myths, fairy-tales, fantasies, dreams, visions, and the delusional systems of the insane. On closer inspection they prove to be typical attitudes, models of action, thought-processes and impulses which must be regarded as constituting the instinctive behavior typical of the human species. The term in chose for this, ‘archetype,’ therefore coincides with the biological concept of the ‘pattern of behavior.’” (Pg. 261)
This book will be of great interest to those studying Jung’s work as a psychotherapist, and with various types of patients.