Depth Psychology and a New Ethic

by Erich Neumann

The modern world has witnessed a dramatic breakthrough of the dark, negative forces of human nature. The "old ethic," which pursued an illusory perfection by repressing the dark side, has lost its power to deal with contemporary problems. Erich Neumann was convinced that the deadliest peril now confronting humanity lay in the "scapegoat" psychology associated with the old ethic. We are in the grip of this psychology when we project our own dark shadow onto an individual or group identified as our "enemy," failing to see it in ourselves. The only effective alternative to this dangerous shadow projection is shadow recognition, acknowledgement, and integration into the totality of the self. Wholeness, not perfection, is the goal of the new ethic.

Genres: Psychology, Philosophy, Psychoanalysis, Nonfiction

168 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1963

About the author

Erich Neumann (Hebrew: אריך נוימן) was a psychologist, writer, and one of Carl Jung's most gifted students.
Neumann received his Ph.D. from the University of Berlin in 1927. He practiced analytical psychology in Tel Aviv from 1934 until his death in 1960. For many years, he regularly returned to Zürich, Switzerland to give lectures at the C. G. Jung Institute. He also lectured frequently in England, France and the Netherlands, and was a member of the International Association for Analytical Psychology and president of the Israel Association of Analytical Psychologists.
Erich Neumann contributed greatly to the field of developmental psychology and the psychology of consciousness and creativity. Neumann had a theoretical and philosophical approach to analysis, contrasting with the more clinical concern in England and the United States. His most valuable contribution to psychology was the empirical concept of "centroversion", a synthesis of extra- and introversion. However, he is best known for his theory of feminine development, a theory formulated in numerous publications, most notably The Great Mother. His works also elucidate the way mythology throughout history reveals aspects of the development of consciousness that are parallel in both the individual and society as a whole.

Reviews

[Pxan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really wanted to read this book...but there was (and still is) a problem.
I don't have the necessary background to read it. I have not read a single book by Jung and have read very little in the way of analytical psychology.

So I ventured and...nothing happened.
I except hyper-specialized language plus many references to other works that were absolutely needed to understand the text. I excepted a dense, impenetrable, indescribable, eldrich labyrinth.

What I got instead was a short down to earth book about ethics.

In order to understand this book, you have to a degree having lived it, or living it.
The problem of opposites, shadow and ego, good and evil, is something that is brought down from the heavens and down to earth. Is something that you experience daily.

I had this kind of insane struggle against my shadow, I didn't want to give in. I wanted to strive for that perfection...but every day the situation became worse. "For how much can I resist?" was frequent though "I have to give in, I have. This is a living hell."
And yet what would happen if I would give in? The same situation in reverse. Opposites can't be completely disintegrated. I would have to strive toward reaching my ego again.

This book explains why this reasoning is wrong. It gives you a third and more healthy way of living.

On a side note I read that some people have not understood what the book was saying about the shadow and in bringing it to reality; I quote the book directly.
"Man learns more than simply to live on tolerable terms with himself; he must actually learn to live with his sin-though this, of course, must not be misunderstood as meaning to live "in" his sin.

Great book I will read it again in the future; when I will be better read in this field of stud

[Chris · Rating 2 out of 5]

At the core of the argument is a claim: If we accept a psychoanalytic account of the unconscious (in this case a Jungian one), then both personal and social ethics need to address unconscious as well as conscious actions and their consequences. In itself, I find this claim provocative and worth considering. Unfortunately, Neumann's argument doesn't really do much to support it. His sketch of change in societies' ethics, which takes up much of the book, is far too general and occasionally really racist, which is especially unfortunate as this is so clearly a post-Holocaust book in many respects (written in Israel, but published in German, in 1949!) To make matters worse, his "new ethic" boils down to "wholeness rather than perfection", which isn't a terrible formulation, but the only examples he gives are why it's sometimes not just okay, but a positive good, to cheat on your wife. Oh dear.

[Inge Maes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Erich Neumann was een Duits-Israëlitisch psycholoog, psychoanalyticus en psychotherapeut. Hij leefde in de eerste helft van de 20ste eeuw en was één van de belangrijkste leerlingen van C. Jung.
De auteur beschrijft de ethiek, het kritisch nadenken over wat goed is om te doen, waarbij hij eerst de oude ethiek behandelt om uiteindelijk te komen tot een nieuwe ethiek.

Een eerste voorwoord is geschreven door C. Jung. Dit leest heel archaïsch en bijzonder abstract. Het vervolg, door Neumann, is, gelukkig, in een volledig andere schrijfstijl geschreven. Dit leest vlot en is zeker in het begin heel toegankelijk.

De oude Westerse ethiek kent vooral zijn oorsprong in de Joods-Christelijke en Griekse traditie. Daarbij wordt een bepaalde waarde of een bepaald idee als volmaaktheidsideaal gezien (vb. kuisheid, het volgen van de wet [en voor de huidige tijdsgeest wellicht het streven naar succes]. Om dat ideaal te bereiken is het belangrijk om bepaalde karaktertrekken uit te roeien. ‘De ontkenning van het negatieve’ vormt het grondbeginsel van deze oude ethiek.
Om hierin te kunnen slagen, bestaan er twee methodes: de onderdrukking en de verdringing. Neumann maakt een onderscheid tussen beide waarbij de onderdrukking aanwezig blijft in het bewustzijn, maar waarbij de verdringing naar het onbewuste niveau wordt verdreven, waardoor men zich niet langer bewust is van wat men verdrongen heeft. Discipline en ascese zijn de bekendste vormen van de onderdrukking.

De maatschappij waarin men leeft, bepaalt de collectieve norm (of het volmaaktheidsideaal). De sociale angst leidt er toe dat men naar die norm probeert te streven. De ene keer volgt men het oud-testamentische wereldbeeld, de andere keer het wetenschappelijke wereldbeeld. In de ene groepering streeft men pacifisme na, in een andere de agressiviteit. [Zelf voeg ik er graag het streven naar succes of het schoonheidsideaal aan toe.]
Elke innerlijke kracht die in tegenstrijd is met het collectief ideaal moet bestreden worden. Maar het bereiken van dat collectieve ideaal, wat dat ook moge zijn, zal altijd onhaalbaar zijn, omdat het niet overeenstemt met de werkelijkheid van de individuele mens.
Als gevolg van de onderdrukking of verdringing ontstaan er twee systemen in de persoonlijkheid: het onbewuste (dat in de schaduw blijft) en de schijnpersoonlijkheid of het masker waarbij men zich probeert aan te passen aan de samenleving van die tijd. Beide staan in schril contrast met het werkelijke individu.
Door de verdringing van het werkelijke zijn en de identificatie met de schijnpersoonlijkheid is men mogelijks in staat om te evolueren tot een houding van schijnheiligheid, huichelarij en leugen. Een veelvuldigheid van schijnheilig gedrag van enkelingen kan tot slot leiden tot collectieve hypocrisie. De steeds sterkere identificatie met de schijnpersoonlijkheid zorgt bovendien voor een bewustzijnsvernauwing waardoor men blind wordt voor essentiële aspecten van de werkelijkheid. De grenzen tussen het werkelijke ik en de schijnpersoonlijkheid vervagen verder waardoor men onmenselijk kan worden en zijn eigen ondergang in gang zet. Primitieve reacties kunnen een gevolg zijn.
Wanneer men het werkelijke individu niet volledig verdringt, maar slechts onderdrukt, dan ontstaat existentieel lijden waarbij men zichzelf splitst in twee delen: een deel dat onderdrukt wordt en een deel dat probeert te streven naar de collectieve waarden. Het lijden kan diverse vormen aannemen. De mens voert als het ware een innerlijke strijd tussen beide kampen. Het onderdrukte deel manifesteert zich als een (onbewust) schuldgevoel, dat men uiteindelijk zal proberen te projecteren in de buitenwereld (om het niet op zichzelf te moeten betrekken). Men gaat hierbij op zoek naar een zondebok.
Wie er niet in slaagt om zich redelijkerwijs aan te passen aan de schijnpersoonlijkheid, wordt uit de maatschappij uitgesloten (zoals zieken of psychopaten). De verdringing moet er telkens opnieuw voor zorgen dat het negatieve aspect van zichzelf onzichtbaar blijft. Naast de schuldgevoelens veroorzaakt de verdringing ook een innerlijke onzekerheid en uiteindelijk een onbewust minderwaardigheidsgevoel. Elk aspect probeert men te overcompenseren maar leidt toch tot een grotere verdringing.
De gemeenschap is zich echter niet meer bewust van het feit dat het collectief zèlf blaam treft in dit lijden door het bepalen van een volmaaktheidsideaal.

Na de beschrijving van de oude ethiek overloopt de auteur de verschillende stadia van de mensheid om tot een nieuwe ethiek te komen. Hoe eenvoudig enkele stadia ook moge lijken, hier komt het over als een bijzonder complex gegeven waar de logica, in mijn ogen, soms ver te zoeken is. Na het overlopen van de verschillende stadia, beschrijft de auteur de nieuwe ethiek.

Het doel van ieder individu bestaat er in zich los te maken van het collectief en haar waarden. Het vraagt een verantwoordelijkheid waarbij men die op het innerlijk betrekt en niet langer een oorzaak zoekt in de buitenwereld. Vaak vormt een conflict of een ziekte de aanleiding om op zoek te gaan naar een nieuwe ethiek.
De auteur onderscheidt meerdere fasen in de dieptepsychologie om tot die nieuwe ethiek te komen. De eerste fase is er één van desillusie. Daarna komt de confrontatie met het negatieve deel dat onderdrukt werd, wat vaak opstand oproept. Het blijkt noodzakelijk om die kwade kant in zichzelf te aanvaarden. Hier is het belangrijk om een onderscheid te maken tussen het eigen kwaad en het algemene kwaad, om zo los te komen van het collectief. Enkel zo kan men los komen van het streven naar een ideaalbeeld.
De mens is zich veelal onbewust van het feit dat hij afhankelijk is van de politiek en de economie die de basis vormen voor zijn existentiële onzekerheid. Het overwicht van het collectieve, van de massa, beroven de enkeling van de moed om het proces aan te vatten. Vanuit die weerstand en de onmogelijkheid om verder te evolueren, kunnen er twee reacties optreden waarbij beide proberen het probleem te ontlopen. De ene is er één waarbij de donkere zijde zich meer en meer manifesteert, wat uiteindelijk leidt tot een materialistische basisstructuur. De andere reactie bestaat uit de ontkenning van de volledige werkelijkheid, wat leidt tot een mystieke reactie, die het negatieve volledig ontkent. Er doen zich steeds meer mengvormen voor.

Ondertussen wordt steeds duidelijker dat het onbewuste veel vaker het leven van een mens bepaalt. De ‘goede wil’ volstaat niet meer. De nieuwe ethiek vereist de volledige persoonlijkheid als basis voor het ethische gedrag en niet langer alleen dat deel dat niet werd onderdrukt.
De aanvaarding van het volledige ik, dus ook het negatieve onderdrukte deel, betekent een vergroeiing met de eigen oergrond, wat leidt tot verlies van illusies maar wint aan verdieping, verworteling en stabiliteit. Het doel van de nieuwe ethiek is niet dat het individu ‘goed’ is maar dat het autonoom en psychisch gezond is.

Naarmate het boek vordert, nemen de complexe termen en begrippen in aantal toe. Aan de hand van de context wordt het wel duidelijk, maar het vraagt een grotere focus waardoor de leessnelheid vertraagt.
Het boek biedt een heel duidelijk inzicht in o.a. de zondebokpsychologie en de dieptepsychologie. Het verklaart eveneens de toenemende onrust in de moderne tijd.

[John B. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Valuable resource for understanding the underpinnings of our Western duality-based ethical system, which of course is problematic. The problem is the facility with which individuals and the collective can easily split their psyches into opposites (good-evil, light-dark, pleasure-pain, etc). What is the remedy? The Jungian system of coniunctio, or the integration of the opposites in the personality. Easier said than done, but Neumann brilliantly captures the theoretical talking points of this necessary shift.

[Eric Windhorst · Rating 5 out of 5]

This profound book speaks to the problem of the psychological shadow in human life. Neumann suggests that a new ethic is needed to address the problem of evil in the world. Rather than repressing our 'negative' sides (i.e., our shadows) and trying to be perfect, Neumann holds that we must become aware of our darker sides, integrate them, and move toward wholeness--not perfection. The consequences of not integrating our shadows is that we project them on to others, which results in devastation both in personal relationships and collective life (think, WWII).

As Christ suggested two thousand years ago, we must remove the log from our own eye before we can claim to understand the speck in our neighbor's. Neumann's book reflects this truth beautifully.

[Steve Ellerhoff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why it took me so long to come around to this book is beyond me, but here we are. It provides a profound argument for how and why individuation is necessary. Neumann and the world had gone through so much trauma and war when he wrote this, the background to the urgency found on every page. We live in a time of great confusion and incivility -- and of complacency -- and yet its urgency still rings true. The process of old systemic values dissolving offered a wish for something better in 1949 when this book was written -- nearly seventy-five years later, that new ethic has not coalesced, but for in those individuals who have committed themselves to "doing the work." I reckon this is one of the most important Jungian texts there is.

[Erik Graff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Now I would probably find this book sophomoric. At the time I first read it, however, I was impressed and suspect that many persons who haven't done much reading in ethics or depth psychology yet might be impressed as well.

[R. Saroja · Rating 5 out of 5]

I changed and grew as I read this book. One of the things I clutched on to as my beloved country was sinking into madness.

[John A · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've known about the concept of the shadow long before I began reading Jung through videos, online articles, and discussions. Honestly, I have never done anything classified as "shadow work," but relied on what Jung talks about in his 17th volume, "The Development of Personality." I related strongly with concepts of the daimon and inner voice, individual development, and inner vocation (even people in Jungian online discussions have a hard time digesting it, despite being my first book into Jung).

Humanity up to this point, has relied on religious functions to provide meaning, social cohesion, and order for his world and the development of his ethic. Today, especially in metro areas of the world, most of these past values have gone bankrupt and no longer provide a collective cohesion of social values beyond rationalism, egoism, and intellectualization. Insert Jungian psychology, and Neumann's new ethic and you now have individual responsibility for developing what works best for your inherent disposition and psychic slice of the pie of the collective human unconscious.

""Dealing with" a content is the popular expression for what we know as integration. Accepting, dealing with, digesting, working through, growing beyond-all these are formulations for this process of assimilation. They describe various stages in the effort made by the personality to make itself of a new content - alien and often hostile to the ego though this may be - without, however, defending itself, as the old ethic did, by the use of suppression and repression." - Pg. 104

My entire life, I've been unable to relate or comply with the world around me, their worldviews, and limitations imposed by their own lack of awareness and development of a personal ethic. It felt dry, empty, and soulless (whether religious figures, modern therapists, friends, family, educators, practically everyone). I've always felt a deeper inclination towards truth and deeper values and found myself becoming embedded in Jungian psychology by what felt like providence.

"Our growing insight into the limitations of the human condition must inevitably lead, in the course of the next few centuries, to an increasing sense of human solidarity and to a recognition of the fact that, despite all differences, the structure of human nature is everywhere, in essence, the same. The common rootedness of all religion and philosophy in the collective unconscious of the human race is beginning to become obvious." - Pg. 134

Going into occultism, has shown me, the true crackpot of humanity. However, using a Jungian lens and applying it all to the unconscious and psychological functions you can see just how aligned Jung's work is so rich and full of the greatest flavors and experiences mankind will ever be able to experience. As for my guiding figures, Ralph Waldo Emerson has an even more impact on me than Jung, while Jung helps me digest anything I come across, and the I Ching is something I perceive as offering the greatest alignment with my personal values and orientation with the Self (although I practically pick up everything and accumulate it into conscious awareness :D). Jung offers integration while the old times of mystical woo-woos get lost in the sauce (what a shock to learn Nazi Germany is one such example).

"The mortal peril which confronts modern man is that he may be collectivized by the pressure of mass events, become the plaything of the forces of the unconscious, and finally himself perish in the disintegration of his own consciousness. The analytical psychology of Jung counters this peril by teaching the principle of growth towards wholeness through the process of individuation. But this growth towards wholeness necessarily involves a creative relationship between the dark instinctual side of man's nature and the light side represented by the conscious mind... It is the paradoxical secret of transformation itself, since it is in fact in and through the shadow that the lead is transformed into the gold. It is only when man learns to experience himself as the creature of the creator who made light and darkness, good and evil, that he becomes aware of his own Self as a paradoxical totality in which the opposites are liked together as they are in the Godhead." - Pg. 147

[Aaron Michael · Rating 2 out of 5]

“We need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself.... We know nothing of man, far too little. His psyche should be studied, because we are the origin of all coming evil.”—C.G. Jung


“Self-elevation by denouncing others is so tempting and gratitying, and so universal, that no condemnation of apparent evil should be taken entirely at face value.
Psychologically, the only effective alternative to shadow projection with its attendant hazards and costs is its opposite: shadow recognition, acknowledgment, and integration. This is the subject of Erich Neumann's precious volume, made again available in this new edition. What Neumann calls the "old ethic"—the Western religious and psychological tradition that sets spiritual perfection as its standard and goal—requires that we own only the "good" part of our nature and sustain this inflated self-idealization by projecting the negative onto others. The insights of depth psychology, he believes, offer us permission and means to move beyond this practice to a "new ethic" in which, freed from the futile ambition and requirement of perfection, we can own and deal with all of our nature. In this orientation the highest value is no longer perfection, but wholeness and reality.”—James Yandell



Decline of the judeo-christian (old) ethic…

“Be perfect, as your Heavenly Father is perfect.”

So long as and so far as the sacrament of marriage exists, there will be no neuroses caused by the marriage problem, but only adultery and sin, punishment and pardon. The orientation remains valid even if the individual behaves invalidly….
…when the collective no longer possesses values, that is to say, when a crisis in values has occurred, the individual lacks a collective orientation. He falls sick because of a problem for which there is no longer a collective answer and a collective procedure for reaching a settlement. He then becomes involved in a conflict from which no institution is any longer in a position to set him free, but for which he must suffer and experience an individual solution in the living process of his personal destiny.


The larger a mass of people is, the lower, by a necessary law, must be the average level of consciousness, culture and morality.



The new ethic…

“Be whole; trying to be perfect will make you evil.”

The ego is obliged to step down from its pedestal and realise the state of individual, constitutional and historical imperfection which is its appointed fate.




The author does not tell us how we are to integrate our shadow-side. I’m not sure I’m on board for this integration. I agree awareness of the shadow is massively important for the individual and for the collective. Anyone who denies the existence of the shadow not only projects the shadow on others but ultimately becomes the shadow, or lets the shadow overtake them.

C.f. Anodos’ shadow in MacDonald’s Phantastes, Solzhenitsyn’s “line of good and evil goes down the center of every human heart,” Stevenson’s Jekyll/Hyde, doppelgängers, Jacob/Esau, Cain/Able, etc.

[ayleen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Para um livro publicado nos anos 60, esse livro parece bastante atual, e em 2026 sinto que poderíamos, enquanto coletivo, aprender algo sobre a Nova Ética.

Os fenômenos aqui descritos me remetem a coisas que observo diariamente, polarização, massificação e, principalmente, o que Neumann chama de "psicologia do bode expiatório". Essa definição me chamou bastante atenção e me fez pensar no que Butler, adaptando Kristeva, chama de "abjeção".

Grupos hiperidentificados com algo de positivo, em toda sua ingenuidade, como diz o próprio autor, precisam de um "lugar" para endereçar o Mal, que mora, cresce e se revigora em seus inconscientes, tanto individuais quanto coletivos.

Neumann fala desse "lugar" como as minorias com a sensibilidade de alguém que viveu isso na pele. Embora, infelizmente, isso não o imunize contra sugestões um tanto quanto eugênicas em um dado momento. Afinal, ele também tem a própria Sombra.

As instâncias coletiva/individual são um ponto de grande tensão na obra do Jung e eu gosto da forma como ele desenvolve a relação entre as duas. Ambos tem agência um sobre o outro, mas se o indivíduo quiser agir sobre o coletivo de forma a beneficiá-lo é preciso, antes, que adquira conhecimento de si. Autoconhecimento que Neumann vai chamar de "grandeza ética e não científica", e que Jung já percebia como fator protetivo frente à massificação.

Além disso, não é fácil definir "Bem" e "Mal" em cento e poucas páginas mas ele realiza essa tarefa ambiciosa e em termos bem junguianos. É bom o que conduz à totalidade, é mal o que conduz à unilateralidade. Dentro da Psicologia isso é praticamente incontestável, mas outras formas de pensamento, como o pensamento pós moderno, não concordariam.

Donna Haraway é uma das grandes advogadas contra a totalidade, ao dizer que totalidades flertam com imperialismos. Fico pensando se é possível deturpar a Nova Ética nessa direção. Mais ainda, fico pensando que, caso realmente ela fosse alcançada, não restaria tensão alguma, e o que seria da humanidade?

Talvez isso mesmo justifique a impossibilidade da totalidade. Não teria como ser diferente. Ela existe para ser um horizonte, e apenas isso.

[Piet Aukeman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such an ambitious scope in such a slim volume.

In it Neumann attempts an integration (wink wink) of Jung's pioneering work on depth psychology and analytic psychotherapy into a path forward for "modern man" out of the Old Ethic (Juedo-Christian dogmas and religion) into a New Ethic of the Inner Voice.

While the Old Ethic with its emphasis on spiritual perfection was necessary for the evolution of ego and the "light side of consciousness" out of the depths and grip of the unconscious, it projects all negative externally onto the "other" while disowning the inner reality of these evils. The New Ethic is what is needed now with its call for wholeness, integration of shadow, and responsibility for both our conscious and unconscious actions/externalities.

I found this bit in the Introduction to be personally inspiring and comforting —

"The individual (and his fate) is the prototype for the collective; he is the retort in which the poisons and antidotes of the collective are distilled. [...] The future of the collective lives in the present of the individual. [...] Not infrequently a sensitive person falls ill because of his incapacity to deal with a problem which is not recognized as such by the world in which he lives, but which is, in fact, a future problem of humanity which has confronted him and forced him to wrestle with it."

[Ricky · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book felt a bit dated in some areas, and its terminology. But there were some sound arguments to Erich Neumann depth psychology theories and approach. Knowing your own shadow is the approach to freedom, and making more conscious decisions from a place of wholeness, seemed to be the key. Neumann looked at the ethical problems raised by your unconscious. If we don’t work with our shadow, we project our shadow onto others. We see them as the enemy, not realising our own responsibility to know ourself better to make sound judgements towards others. Everything starts with us, we are the person that’s always in our all relationships. Working with our shadow lets us integrate more fully with our wholeness, and gives us a better perspective. After reading many books by James Hollis this book felt a beginning to understanding the shadow within and yourself better. James Hollis in his books expanded the important areas in the psyche, and gave you a fuller depth of your behaviours and wholeness, mind, body and spirit.

[Paulo Silva · Rating 2 out of 5]

A book that has not stood the test of time. Thought enlightening at times, most of the ideas proposed in this book are lackluster and highly questionable, with some very reprehensible proposals such as that the different ethnicities have different capacity for conscious thought (therefore justifying US segregation) and many unsavory opinions on women.

Would not recommend this book except for it's historical value.

[Ariane · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting theory but unclear in its specific recommendations, and he insists he can't give any case studies which would have been helpful. Strange to be so unspecific when his intro emphasizes how paranoid he was about being misunderstood. Be clearer then, man!

[Rens · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very engaging little book. It takes a look at the human ethos. What we intellectually inherited in the west and how we get in trouble by this way of (old) thinking. In my opinion still very accurate to this day.

[John Goldsworthy · Rating 5 out of 5]

The appendix on the shadow is worth the read alone. It’s a philosophical treatise on the implication of exploring or choosing not to ‘explore’ the collective unconscious. Suffice to say extremely relevant.

[Stelian F. · Rating 5 out of 5]

The conclusion of this book (the last four paragraphs) should be printed and distributed to everyone in this world.

[Marvin Haymaker]

Depth Psychology And A New Ethic is above my reading level, and it’s unhelpful that Neumann is self-referential.

[Adem · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's a good book.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

I do like reading about the shadow, but this book has dated quite a bit. Written just after the second world war by an Israeli, I imagine it was viisonary, even momentous at the time - a crucial explanation for the deep psychological causes of the holocaust and the conflagration around it. Much of the language was quite technical and I found it a bit inaccessible for this reason. I don't really know how significant Neumann has been for modern psychology. A Jungian analyst, many of his ideas about suppression, repression and projection seem to have maintained currency. I identify quite a bit with his explanations of the problems of the old ethic and the need for all peoples to take responsibility for adopting the new ethic which as I understand it, makes integrating the shadow, and accepting, rather than scapegoating onto others, our own flaws and the darker elements common to human nature. Not sure how profoundly I have comprehended Neumann's thesis. A difficult book, and not really a 'fun' read. I would only recommend for scholars of the Jungian Shadow or people seeking sophisticated (perhaps only historical) explanations for why the German people were so vulnerable to the mass hysteria of Facism.

[Kathy]

Keep an eye out for other titels of his that deal with archetypal development

[Jackson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Picked up Neumann's work as per Jordan Peterson's recommendation on a good introduction to ethics. I really read it.

Neumann describes the solution for the deepening moral crisis experienced by the individual and the collective. This is a response to the acts of evil in the 20th century. For Neumann, whose teacher is Jung, the total ethic is the new method of incorporating the deep layers of the psyche that are instinctual and ugly with the ego, the values which we consciously identify with. Many individuals dismiss the shadow and fail to incorporate it in their psyche. The unconscious, however does not lie dormant but is active and has a equal part in any behaviour just as consciousness does. The wars that permeated through the 20th century were because of an unwillingness to understand the parts that are ugly about one's own self. Total acceptance of the unconscious is the new ethic, as the old ethic associated with religion of suppression and repression, has lost its psychological efficacy and if practiced now, is useless and dangerous. The old ethic is continued by a malevolent desire to destroy all the values that we are not with. The old ethic was partial and fallible. The new ethic moves the centre from the ego and consciousness to the Self. A person who understands that he is corruptible and capable of destruction, is eminently immune to the inundation of the primitive, instinctual, destructive materials. To understand that one is not special, allows a compassion for other members of the collective. Both the individual and collectiveness rid themselves of sickness and they both thrive.

Neumann seriously takes up Nietzsche and Jung. On my second read, I thought it better to get straight to Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, and Jung's work on Individuation. Neumann repeats himself tirelessly. The originality of the ideas is contained to the first two paragraphs. The rest of the book is a reiteration using different words. He is aware of the limitation of the essay, and often advises the reader to turn to Jung for a more comprehensive exploration of individuation. What he adds is suspiciously weak as he readily suggests reading Jung. It reeks of cop-outs.

It was a great introduction to Depth Psychology, Moral Psychology, albeit seriously repetitive. To accomplish more than an introduction, it fails and is unimpressive. I would have jumped straight to Jung's Individuation, Becker's Denial of Death, Nietzsche's BGE.