Assagioli says that Jung’s psychology is the closest to psychosynthesis. In this article, he draws out the difference between analytical psychology and psychosynthesis and gives many examples of what characterizes psychosynthesis therapy.
By Roberto Assagioli, MD Translation Kirsten Hansen
Introduction
C.G. Jung
Among psychotherapists, Jung is one of those who comes closest and is most closely related to the concepts and practice of psychosynthesis. But the scope of his work is so vast, and his subjects cover so many different areas, that a complete study of them would require a book of considerable size. I must therefore limit myself to a comparative study of some of the areas more directly concerned with psychosynthesis; i.e., the structure of the human psyche; the dynamics of psychic energies; the methods used in psychological therapy and in teaching.
The comparative approach is very rewarding because it highlights the respective positions in terms of where there is agreement or divergence. But comparison does not imply judgment or criticism; and I will try to be as objective as possible, to stick to the facts and leave it to the reader to draw his own conclusions.
Carl Gustav Jung was a keen researcher and a skilled therapist, who carried out and developed his work with a mind free from prejudice and academic ties. His life contained no unusual features or dramatic events; he was born in Switzerland and lived mainly in Küsnacht with his family in a comfortable but not luxurious house, which was attractively situated on the shores of Lake Zurich. In the latter part of his life, however, he travelled and spent considerable periods abroad (in India, Africa and America), where he studied the customs of the people and the characteristics of ancient civilizations. The stream of visitors from all countries found a friendly reception with him, and I have vivid memories of pleasant and lively conversations with him in his book-filled study filled with strange exotic objects.
He had great and versatile talents: he possessed a deep human empathy, an insatiable thirst for knowledge, an admirable integrity and intellectual modesty combined with a genuine recognition of his own limitations, but also those of others. In The Psychology of the Unconscious, he does not hesitate to admit:
“The work in this field is pioneering. I have often gone astray and many times been forced to go back and learn from the beginning. But I am aware of it and therefore resign myself to having to admit that as day arises from night, so truth is born from error.”
But I have never been afraid of making mistakes, nor have I seriously regretted mistakes. Scientific research was never for me the cow that gave milk, nor even a means of gaining prestige, but often a bitter confrontation with reality, forced upon me by my daily psychological experiences among the sick. Therefore, not everything I present is written with the brain, and not so much with the heart, and the benevolent reader is asked not to forget this when he follows the main line of intellectual argumentation and encounters breaks that are not satisfactorily repaired. One can only expect a harmonious course of presentation when one writes about things already known. When instead one seeks new methods forced by the necessity of helping and healing, one is forced to talk about things that are not known.
Jung was not a mystic but an agnostic
This confession of Jung is to be highly appreciated. His understanding of the relativity of our knowledge and the recognition of the inevitable subjective element in every researcher led him to eschew all systematic formulations and categorical statements. He took a firm position based on psychological experience and the empirical method, thereby demonstrating a true scientific spirit. However, he combined the above with some lack of precision in thought and writing and an unwillingness to admit a substantial reality transcending the purely psychological sphere. This limitation, however, shows how unjust the accusation of “mysticism” was, which was often leveled at him. Such an attack shows a lack of understanding of both Jung and mysticism. In reality, the two positions are not only different but also completely incompatible. The mystic firmly believes in the existence of God, in a Universal Spirit; he is convinced that he is, or has been, in a state of union with transcendental Reality. Jung, on the other hand, adopts an agnostic attitude towards this; he admits the subjective, “psychological” reality of experience, but claims that its essential, transcendental reality cannot be considered as demonstrated. This may be considered a merit or a limitation depending on the point of view. In any case, Jung is acquitted of the charge of mysticism—a serious charge in the opinion of some.
The structure and functions of the psyche
Let us now turn to the fundamental problem of psychology: the structure of the psyche. Jung has a keen sense of the complexity of the human psyche. In his own words: “Our psychic nature is so complex and multifaceted that it is impossible to imagine.” He has emphasized the relative autonomy of the diverse contents of the psyche, and the existence of different, often completely incompatible sub-personalities or personas, as he calls them. (In Latin, “masks”).
He distinguishes, however, between these personas—which also correspond to social, interpersonal roles and functions—and the “inner personality.” In his view, “the inner personality is one’s mode of behavior in relation to inner psychic processes. I call the outward attitude or outer character persona. I call the inward attitude anima or soul.” (Psychological Types, p. 593)
As far as the psychic functions are concerned, Jung distinguishes, as is well known, between four basic ones: sensation, feeling, thinking and intuition. Here he differs from almost all other psychologists by his acceptance of intuition as a normal psychic function in man. Psychosynthesis has the same attitude and places great emphasis on the importance and value of intuition, and on the necessity of its development. According to Jung, it is the psychic function which allows perceptions to rise from the unconscious and is the cause of their content breaking forth as complete wholes. He continues: “intuitive cognition therefore has an inherent character of certainty and conviction, which enabled Spinoza to uphold ‘scientia intuitiva’ as the highest form of cognition.”
Among the more recent advocates of intuition, the greatest has been not a psychologist but a philosopher—Henry Bergson. Much can be said about intuition, but I will simply mention that there are different types and levels: Bergson’s intuition, which arises mainly at the level of the ordinary personality, differs greatly from Plotinus’, which is exclusively spiritual. Jung emphasizes that intuition exists at both levels, where it appears to be diverse, but fundamentally the same.
An important difference from psychosynthesis is found in connection with the psychological functions. Psychosynthesis claims that Jung’s four fundamental functions do not provide a complete description of psychological life; but that there are other functions which are equally fundamental and should therefore be included. The first is imagination. Jung’s failure to recognize the function of imagination seems strange in light of the great importance he attributes to images and symbols. The explanation is that he believes that imagination is able to manifest itself in the other four functions. But he claims this without demonstrating it, or dealing with it. It seems impossible to admit that imagination or imagination can manifest itself in connection with “sensation”, which is a perception via the senses of external reality; i.e. of influences from the external world. On the other hand, other psychologists rightly give imagination a fundamental place in psychological life.
Another group of functions that should have the same considerations are the “dynamic or goal-directed” functions (from the Greek word “orme, which means tendency or impulse).
This group includes instincts, tendencies, impulses, desires, and aspirations, that is, everything that prompts action. Desire is included among these purposeful activities, although desire is generally described solely or at least mainly in terms of its subjective aspect—desire as something one feels, an emotion one has. But this is only its subjective aspect; in reality desire is and has a dynamic energy that impels one to action. It has been said of desire that it is an original tendency, the alluring impulse toward the non-self. The Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytical Terms by H. and E. English (New York, Longmans Green, 1958), an excellent collection marked by objectivity, defines desire as something active, described by the terms “wish,” “need,” “urge” to possess. The Lexique de Philosophie by A. Bertrand notes: “According to Spinoza, desire is a basic tendency to survive.”
It may seem surprising that the will is not included among these active tendencies. But there is a fundamental difference between drives, impulses, and desires on the one hand, and the will on the other. We can all confirm the difference between them, even the opposition; one could say that the “condition of man” is a constant conflict between drives, impulses, desires, and the will.
In a way, the will is something of a mystery, and if academic psychologists have neglected desire, they have largely ignored the existence of the will. I will quote in this connection the above-mentioned Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytical Terms. Under the heading “will” and “act of will” it says: “Scientific psychology has not yet arrived at a solution of how these concepts should be defined or used; however, it seems impossible to do without a concept for patterns of behavior characterized as acts of will, which differ from other patterns in various ways that are poorly described.” Although this is vaguely expressed, one notices a reluctant admission that there is this disturbing element in psychology, which is the will.
One of the reasons for this mystery of the will is its close connection with the “I,” the subject, the center of consciousness. In reality, all functions are functions of a living, self-conscious being and thus belong to an “I.” It is the “I” that feels and thinks, that desires, imagines and wills something—above all, wants something—and because one generally has a vague and nebulous sense of the self, of self-consciousness, it is not surprising that the sense of its basic function—the will—is equally confused and weak. The diagram below should roughly show this psychological structure.
THE CENTER OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE PSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS
Assagioli’s star chart
The triangles starting from the central circle represent the psychic functions: Sensation, emotion, imagination, impulse and desire, thought and intuition. The will occupies a different position from the others, a central position indicated by the circular area surrounding the point of self-consciousness, the “I” or Ego.
Typology and direction of life energy
We now come to the direction that psychic energy can have, and thus pass from the descriptive to the dynamic aspect. One of Jung’s most valuable contributions was the discovery and description of two fundamental psychological types based on the direction of psychic energy – whether it was outward or inward, and thus “extroverted” or “introverted”. I should mention at once that it is less a question of “types” in a precise and static sense, but more of the predominant direction of the vital energy (the vital interest), and hence its consequent judgments, choices and actions. This dominant tendency may be strong (for example, by stating this intensity in percentage terms – ninety percent) or weak (sixty percent or, let us say, forty percent). It is not necessary to describe the characteristic of extrovert and introvert; by now it is common knowledge. It is worth remembering that this predominant tendency may exhibit extreme, even pathological, variations. Extroverted behavior can be observed in its almost pure form in manic states, introverted behavior in melancholy and depression.
The direction of the life energy is sensitive to changes and fluctuations ranging from the normal and moderate to the extreme and pathological. The extremes in the shifts are seen in cyclothymia and manic-depressive psychoses, which may or may not have periods of equilibrium in between. Furthermore, the shifts may be slow or rapid, the cycles long or short. It is interesting to observe how a normal shift occurs in relation to the different ages from birth to old age. The child is completely introverted, completely absorbed in his organ sensations. As childhood progresses, he becomes increasingly extroverted and directs his interest towards the external world. The teenager returns to introversion when the awakening of energies, feelings and emotions creates problems and crises, which causes him to direct his focus towards himself. This generally gives way again to an extroverted attitude as the young man and adult become involved in relationships with others (personal and social) and in activities aimed at the profession. Maturity and especially old age create a return to introversion, accompanied by disengagement and dwindling interest in the external world and by a tendency towards an inner life, reflection and dispassionate observation.
By combining the tendency to extroversion or introversion with the four psychological functions, Jung postulates that he arrives at a classification of eight functional types: the extraverted sensing type, the extraverted emotional, the extraverted mental, the extraverted intuitive, and four corresponding introverted types. But this and other classifications expose those who use them to the danger of schematizing and categorizing, of succumbing to the (so easy!) tendency to label people. We must be on guard against overlooking the multiple and complex facets of human reality. It is too easy to see others as “objects” instead of “subjects”. Labeling and the associated judgmental or more often derogatory attitudes create hostile reactions, sometimes intense, as has been thoroughly proven.
But to the eight functional types that Jung discovered, some more must be added. Opposite types can be associated at the same time with different levels of the same personality. For example, a man may be predominantly extroverted physically, introverted emotionally, and again extroverted mentally. His will may also be extroverted or introverted. Furthermore, the following distinction must be made: The direction of the life energy is subject to two separate “modalities” or attitudes: the active and the passive. Jung mentions this, but does not develop this point further, which in my opinion has a fundamental significance. A passive extrovert, characterized by excessive sensitivity, who is subject to any external influence and who is dominated by the will of others, is very different from an active extrovert, who is inclined to dominate things and people, to bend them to his will. In this sense, the types are opposite.
To this must be added the fact that there are two other directions which the life energy can take, which should be recognized and given the greatest attention; these are the direction downwards into the depths towards the low which may be called subversion, and the direction upwards towards the higher or supraversion. Subversion is the tendency to plunge into the unconscious in its lower aspects; and it may be said to be the department of “depth psychology” in its narrower sense (“the descent into hell”) and may be compared to underwater sports. Freudian psychoanalysis shows an almost one-sided interest in the lower aspects of human nature.
In supraversion, on the other hand, there is a vital interest in and search for the higher aspects of the psyche, for the superconscious, for spiritual experiences. This can be compared to underwater sports with mountain climbing. Jung is to be credited with having discovered and demonstrated that there is a natural search for the high in man, that there is a genuine need for spiritual satisfaction, which he perceived as instinctive. He emphasized that disregarding or repressing this need can create serious neuro-psychic and psychosomatic disorders.
There is another important difference than the direction of the life energy, and that is a difference in quality. There may be a direction towards the superconscious, but of lower quality: the dreamer, the passive idealist, the sterile theorist, the utopian are examples of the superconscious direction of lower quality. Thus there is also a direction towards the lower unconscious, but of high quality, as scientific investigation and exploration of the lower aspects of the unconscious, which may be termed psychological geology and archaeology.
Although I cannot now discuss the tasks of psychosynthesis in connection with the different directions that the life energy can take, I should mention that there are also other psychological types that arise from differences in the “structure” of the personality. There are individuals who are relatively coherent, well “structured,” even rigid. On the other hand, there are others who are diffuse, constantly changing. Others, again, have a habit of being contradictory or ambivalent.
All this shows the great complexity of the human psyche and the impossibility of classifying it according to a system or a description arrived at from a single point of view. Only the sum of the different points of view, of the different approaches or “frames of reference”, can give a less erroneous perception of the psyche of that strange being, the member of the fourth kingdom of nature – the human being.
The different types of the unconscious
So far I have barely mentioned the unconscious. Its existence is now generally accepted, with the exception of a few psychiatrists and psychologists who are bound by concepts from which evolution has sprung.
According to Jung, the unconscious is a special psychological concept and includes all the psychological elements, contents and processes that are not connected with the “I” or Ego in a conscious way. Therefore, Jung claims that the unconscious has no “personal center”. This is in accordance with psychosynthesis, which warns against the tendency to make the unconscious an independent “whole”, almost a personality, which is more or less in accordance with or in opposition to the conscious. “Unconscious” should be considered an adjective, not a noun, which I have emphasized elsewhere, and it describes a temporary state of “psychic content” that could have been conscious before and could become so again.
Jung’s most significant contribution to the psychology of the unconscious is represented by his extensive studies of the collective unconscious. Before him, psychoanalysis had been almost exclusively concerned with the study of the personal unconscious. Jung thus showed the great content of collective psychological elements and forces which exert a powerful influence on the human personality. In my scheme of the structure of the psyche, the collective unconscious lies outside the personal psyche. (See the diagram a little further on.) The dividing line is dotted to show the constant interchange which takes place between the collective and the personal unconscious. The unconscious exists at all levels of the personal as well as the collective psyche.
The collective unconscious is an immense world, extending from the biological to the spiritual level, and therefore distinctions must be made between origin, nature, quality and value. It should be noted that Jung often ignores these distinctions: he speaks of the collective unconscious as a whole, and tends to confuse what he calls “archaic”, i.e. what comes from the ancient collective human experience, with what is higher (we would call it the superconscious), which is in the spiritual sphere. Jung thus speaks of “archetypes” as “concepts”; but sometimes he describes them as archaic, racial concepts, charged with a strong emotional tone, which have accumulated over the centuries. On other occasions he treats them as principles, as “ideas”; and he even suggests their affinity with Plato’s ideas. In reality, there is not only a difference but a real contradiction between these two conceptions of “archetypes”. This confusion has various consequences that should be discussed, discussed on a theoretical level, because there is a risk of harm in the therapy situation, which I will have the opportunity to mention when I discuss Jung’s therapy. In my opinion, it can be said without being disrespectful that Jung himself was dominated by the potent fascination of the collective unconscious, against which he urges his patients to be wary.
Jung rightly believes that symbols and symbolism are of great importance, to which he devoted a large part of his studies. He discovered that one and the same symbol could have several meanings, in contrast to the all-too-frequent tendency to interpret a symbol in only one way based on the preconceived theory of the casual interpreter. Jung showed that the same symbol can have different meanings, not only in different individual cases, but also in the same person. He further demonstrated that there are regressive and progressive symbols, symbols that relate to the archaic symbolism of the collective unconscious, and symbols that show the attempts, the efforts to solve certain problems, to bring about certain developments. Jung claims that some symbols are messages from the unconscious (we would say from the superconscious) to the conscious personality, and he often uses these progressive symbols in his treatment method.
Spirituality and religion
We now come to an important subject: spirituality and religion. It is Jung’s great merit (along with very few modern psychologists) that he has discovered and described the existence and significance of spiritual needs. He argued that man has a need to find meaning in life, to understand that it has a value and a purpose of a spiritual nature. He established that many neuro-psychic disorders have their root in the failure to satisfy this need or its repression. To quote himself: “. . .the failure to satisfy life is a mental illness, the full extent and significance of which our time has not yet understood.” (Jung, “The Soul and Death,” in Spring, 1945, p. 415). He therefore fully admits the importance of the spiritual factor, and of religion insofar as they reflect spiritual values and promote the satisfaction of spiritual needs.
On the other hand, although Jung had psychic experiences at a high level, there is no evidence that he had the direct experience of a spiritual, metaphysical reality. This can be assumed from his statements on agnosticism. He insists on a distinction between spiritual consciousness, as a subjective state, and a supposed metaphysical, transcendental reality; and while he affirms the existence and value of the former, he does not pronounce on the latter. He goes so far as to state that God is a “psychological function” of the individual. He does not categorically reject the possibility of God’s existence, but he says that objective reality cannot be demonstrated.
Jung can be linked in this respect with the great American psychologist William James, who, in his lectures on “The Varieties of Religious Experience,” which he very courageously delivered at the beginning of this century, puts forward the possibility and importance of a scientific psychological study of religious experience. James did not have, as he says, direct religious experiences; and this deficiency in both James and Jung makes their recognition of the reality and value of spiritual experience all the more remarkable. Here is evidence of the true scientific spirit, which admits the existence of certain conditions if they have been ascertained and documented, even if they have not been personally verified.
Another important topic – the Ego and the Self – is addressed in the following sections concerning the use of psychosynthesis in therapy and education.
Jung is considered a researcher, an explorer in the vast and little-known territory of the psyche, but we can add that he was a brave and brilliant pioneer who opened new paths and gave new dimensions to the human mind. He contributed much to the liberation of psychology from the restrictive bonds of a purely descriptive objectivity and expanded its field immeasurably by demonstrating the existence and value of the higher psychological functions, of the spiritual levels and needs.
Moreover, as we shall see later, he shows the way to liberation from the controlling pressures on the personality and from the powerful influences exerted by images and structures in the collective unconscious. In this way he gave effective help in promoting the process of “individuation”, the discovery and development of one’s true being, one’s Self.
Jungian therapy versus psychosynthesis
Focus on the healthy
A comparative survey of Jung’s therapeutic method and that, or rather, those used in psychosynthesis, reveals a great deal of agreement in terms of the desired goals; but also some marked differences in terms of the methods and techniques used. One of Jung’s greatest merits has been his opposition to the “pathological”, which still has an almost unchallenged hold on official medical science, including psychotherapy. Attention is directed mainly to morbid manifestations, especially to the study of symptoms and their quantitative assessment by means of numerous examinations and analyses. The aim is to formulate a diagnosis, i.e. to give the disease a “name”. Once this has been achieved, one proceeds to “fight” the disease, often by fighting with medical “cannons” without concern for possible damage to healthy tissue and organs. Recently, however, a reaction against extremes of this kind has become visible in the official ranks of medical circles. Books and articles have recently been published that indicate physical and mental disorders and illnesses caused by inappropriate medication.
A number of doctors have taken a step in the right direction; doctors equipped with a human attitude and a sense of relativity, emphasizing that in reality there are no “diseases” but only “sick individuals” in whom the same sick condition takes on different forms and a different course. But so far only a small minority has taken this attitude and attached sufficient importance to it. Moreover, this represents only an initial step, which in itself is not sufficient: we are still in the “pathological” field. The next and decisive advance – which may seem revolutionary – is to start from the “healthy state” and consider man as a fundamentally healthy being who has a more or less temporarily damaged or poorly functioning organ, but whose biological forces will always strive to restore harmony, the healthy state. Many symptoms are thus no longer considered as a direct expression of the disease, but are perceived as the defense reactions of the healthy organism against diseased elements. A typical example of such a defense reaction is fever; and it is therefore often wrong and even harmful to combat fever with antipyretics.
The “pathological” attitude of official medicine has been met by a reaction that supports the use of “natural treatments” by some doctors and many non-medical healers. Unfortunately, this reaction not infrequently takes on far-reaching, sometimes fanatical forms. Official therapy has had great and indisputable success, and has saved many lives, and all the good it contains cannot and must not be discarded. Antibiotics are a good example of this situation: moderate use in appropriate cases can have great therapeutic benefit, but abuse can cause a great deal of harm.
Here too the principle of synthesis should be applied. Irreconcilable opposites do not exist. Opposing attitudes and methods can be united in a constructive synthesis. The relationship can also be formulated in this way; it is not a question of “this or that” but of “this and that”; in each case it is a question of finding the right adjustment, the appropriate integration, the synthesis of what seem to be opposites and instead complement each other.
All this also applies to the field of neuropsychiatric disorders and physical illnesses of psychological origin (psychosomatic disorders). Here too, and especially within this field, the diagnostic label often has a very relative meaning. One finds combinations of symptoms that cannot be classified according to the “diseases” described in psychiatric treatments. Here too, there are “defense structures” created by the patient’s psyche that must be recognized and not dismantled until one has found a way to replace them with other and better patterns. The practice of psychotherapy is often aimed at “fighting” symptoms and disorders and ignores what is healthy and, at times, of higher quality in the patient.
As I have mentioned, Jung reacted vehemently against such “morbidization” and declared: “I prefer to understand man from a healthy perspective.” (Cahen, La Guérison Psycholgique, Librairie de L’Université, Georg et Cie, Geneva, p. 180.) Jung’s position here is in complete agreement with the basic principles of psychosynthesis.
The individual approach to therapy
Let us examine in more detail the therapy Jung used. This study, however, presents difficulties for various reasons. First of all, Jung openly recognizes the infinite variety of human beings and conditions, and therefore the necessity of using different psychotherapeutic methods adapted to the nature and special situation of each patient. He puts it this way: “Seeing that everything in this world can end in absurdity if pushed beyond a certain limit, the problem of neuroses and the methods of curing them becomes a huge issue. I always find it amusing when doctors who conduct their affairs admirably claim to cure by A’s method, or S’s and F’s, or even J’s. Such a thing does not exist and cannot exist, and if it does, it is well on the way to failure. If I treat Mr. X, I am forced to use the X method, and Mrs. Z with the Z method, and this means that the ways and methods of treatment are mainly determined by the nature of the patient.” Here is another example of a close correspondence with psychosynthesis and its use of diverse psychotherapeutic techniques.
Another difficulty arises from the fact that Jung’s methods were developed and expanded during the many decades of his practice as a physician, parallel to his increasing breadth and depth of experience and to the new ideas and intuitive knowledge that arose in his alert and open mind. On this basis – and because in his later years he had a generally growing interest in cognitive subjects and in psychological investigations of purely therapeutic questions – Jung never wished to set forth his methods of treatment in any complete or systematic way.
To fill this gap in some way, one of Jung’s students, Dr. Roland Cahen, with great patience and skill selected passages and chapters from the mass of Jung’s writings dealing with therapy and compiled them in La Guérison Psycholoque (see above). This work was revised and approved by Jung himself and thus has the status of an authorized interpretation.
A preliminary observation of a general nature concerns the actual name of Jung’s therapy. He continued to call it “Analytical Psychology” to the end, a term he chose to use to show the derivation from and connection with psychoanalysis. In reality, however, this name did not do justice to the integrating and synthesizing tendency that increasingly inspired Jung’s therapy. In reality, the above aims at producing a profound transformation of the personality and its integration by means of what Jung calls the “individuation process.”
But before I explain and examine Jung’s specific method, it must be stated, as he himself said, that this method should not be applied to all patients. There are many people, especially among the young, whose disturbances have been provoked by psychic traumas, by conflicts which have their roots in the personal unconscious, or by conflicts between the individual and other people, above all family members and the social environment. Jung maintains that in such cases mainly psychoanalytic therapy and certain methods which he included in what he called “minor therapy” will suffice. “See (La Guérison Psychologique, p. 239). These cases, however, often require the use of active techniques which Jung ignores.
On the other hand, there is a broad group of patients whose disorders are the product of crises and deep conflicts of an “existential” nature, involving fundamental human problems concerning the meaning and purpose of life in general and of the individual’s own life. It should be noted that the patient is frequently unaware of these deep-seated causes of his illness, and that it is the treatment that makes him aware of the problems and subsequently helps him to eliminate them.
Jungian therapy and psychosynthesis
The main purpose of Jung’s method, as it was formulated by him in his last active period of work, is to free the individual from influences from the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious, by means of a process whose phases can be described as follows:
1. A clear conception or the above-mentioned realization of the nature and cause of the disease.
2. Conscious assimilation of the contents of the unconscious.
3. The Discovery of the Self.
4. Transformation of the personality.
5. Its integration and synthesis.
From the above, it is clear how closely related psychosynthesis is to what could be called “Jung’s therapeutic program”.
It is not my intention to describe Jung’s approach; it can be found in detail in his own books and those of his students. He developed a series of concepts, sometimes somewhat obscure, about the “shadow,” about certain parts of the unconscious both opposite and complementary to the personality, which he called the “anima” in the man and the “animus” in the woman. All this, I repeat, can be found in the books of Jung and his associates. I will touch only on a few points, in order to emphasize the similarity and difference between these concepts and the techniques of psychosynthesis.
1. Clarification. Jung promotes the patient’s awareness of the content of the unconscious and its assimilation into the patient’s conscious personality by means of dream analysis and drawing. Dream analysis is the basis of psychoanalytic therapy, but this implies their interpretation, and here a significant difference arises between orthodox psychoanalysis and Jungian “analysis”. In psychoanalysis, interpretation tends to “reduce” everything to infantile impressions and traumas and to infantile instinctive drives. Jung, on the other hand, although he admits the existence of this type of dream, claims that there are dreams of a completely different type, especially those he calls “prospective” or constructive, i.e. dreams that contain true messages from the unconscious (I would say from its higher level, the superconscious), which show the patient’s conscious personality certain situations, certain realities of which he was not aware, and point to a solution to his conflicts and to the path that leads to integration. In his works, Jung gives many examples of dreams of this type and of their interpretation confirmed by the patient’s realization and by the healing effect. In reality, dreams fall into many different categories, and one must be wary of stereotypical interpretations of the “dream book” kind. But all too often therapists fall into this easy approach, ignoring the fact that the same symbol can have as many meanings (some of them contradictory) as there are patients. Jung was aware of this fact.
Freehand drawing is an excellent tool for promoting the emergence of material from the unconscious and messages from the superconscious. In this connection it should be emphasized that the usefulness of drawing is independent of the artistic value, or lack thereof, of the drawing itself. Drawing is a way for the unconscious to express itself and can have a primitive character; in fact, it is easier for the unconscious to send “messages” to a person who has never drawn before than to one with some training and skill in drawing. In the latter case, a concern with form can disturb and inhibit the spontaneity of the unconscious.
Although psychosynthesis makes extensive use of these useful methods, it also employs others which promote the emergence of material from the unconscious. Among these, the presentation of “suggestive images” called the “TAT” (Thematic Apperception Test) holds a prominent place and is widely used in America. It consists of twenty standardized images; but I do not limit myself to these when using the test, principally because they have a negative character; they tend only to evoke complexes and conflicts and not to promote the emergence of the higher aspects.
Given the diverse group of patients, I prefer to use different images that are tailored to the specific case.
Of course, this excludes the possibility of applying statistics to the material, which experimental psychologists love so much – and which is often so useless.
There is also Desoille’s method, “reve éveille” (the waking dream), which, when skillfully used, is very rewarding, not only in stimulating the emergence of the contents of the unconscious, but also in promoting the therapeutic integration of the personality. A method similar to this is Leuner’s “Initiated Symbol Projection”. In addition to the images used in these and other methods, I use many different symbols selected according to their suitability for the type of patient in question. (See Psychosynthesis – A Manual of Principles and Techniques, pp. 177-191.) Listening to appropriate pieces of music also gives very good results, because the unconscious’s response to music is lively and spontaneous.
2. A frequent emergence of a true invasion of the unconscious. Elements and tendencies, especially from the collective unconscious, can cause problems and sometimes be dangerous, as Jung clearly recognized. Therefore, in the use of psychosynthesis – in parallel with the awakening of the “demons” from the unconscious, and sometimes even before – active methods are used to enhance self-consciousness. Thus to increase the awareness of the I or Ego, and to develop its strength to master the elements that are already present and active in the conscious personality. This very important part of psychotherapy is generally ignored. The discovery of the unconscious, the interest in investigating it, has often diverted the therapist from what has first priority, from the conscious personality and its center, the I or Ego. A typical admission of this neglect was made by Emil Gutherl at the American Psychoanalytic Convention in Washington in 1958. Here is what he said: “We should recognize that the Ego is far more important than has been recognized so far, but we know almost nothing about it.”
Among the many techniques available for strengthening the Ego, the training of the will has been given an important place in psychosynthesis. (The will, as I have mentioned elsewhere, can be described as the “unknown factor” in modern psychology.) In addition, special techniques are used to activate content and activities from the higher part of the unconscious, the Superconscious, and “descend” into consciousness.
Jung’s and Psychosynthesis’s View of the Self
3. We now come to the central point – the discovery of the Self . Here we must clarify how Jung’s conception of the Self differs from that of psychosynthesis. For Jung, the Self is a “point in between” where the conscious and the unconscious meet. (See Jacobi: The Psychology of Carl G. Jung.) He considers it an “archetypal quantity” and states: “The Self is, from an intellectual point of view, nothing more than a psychological concept, a construction whose purpose is to express an essence; as such imperceptible and inconceivable because it exceeds our understanding.” And later he states: “The idea of the Self is in itself a transcendent postulate and can only be justified from a psychological point of view and without the possibility of scientific proof.) (Quoted from Depth Psychology by A. Frau and H. Shaffens. P. 116.)
Psychosynthesis, on the other hand, regards the Self as a reality, as a living being of which one can have some knowledge or acquaintance. In other words, the Self can be defined as one of those “immediate data of consciousness” (to use Bergson’s expression) which do not need to be demonstrated, since they contain in themselves the proof of their own existence – as, for example, in ethical consciousness, aesthetic experience and the experience of the will. There is a considerable body of evidence to support this. Here are among many of Farther Gratry’s significant contributions:
“We have an ‘inner sense’ which, at special moments, when we succeed in interrupting the usual flow of disturbances and emotions, gives us direct and clear knowledge of our soul. I used to experience an inner form full of strength, beauty and joy, a form of light and fire which nourished my whole being; constant, always the same, often recovered in my life; sometimes forgotten, but always recognized with infinite joy and with the exclamation, ‘here is my true Being’.” (La Connaissnce de L’ Ame)
Others emphasize the universal aspect of the conscious Self in their explanation. Hermann Keyserling, for example, writes: “That which is deeper, greater than the individual is never the ‘general’, but the ‘universal’: the ‘universal’ expresses itself precisely through the individual, and the individual becomes more universal as it becomes deeper.” (Problems of Personal Life, p. 167). Here we have an example of “coincidentia oppositorum” – the fact that expressions which, according to Aristotle’s logic, rationally appear as opposites, are not mutually exclusive. Life is a constant synthesis of opposites; even biological life involves a fine equilibrium (homeostasis) between antagonistic systems.
The Self has a dual aspect, the individual and the universal. This is shown in the diagram below of the structure of the human psyche by the location of the “star”, which is partly outside the individual psychic structure and partly inside. The location outside shows the union of the Self with the transcendent, ontological Reality, the universal Self; the location inside shows the relationship with the individual Superconscious. The ego or conscious “I” is an emanation or projection of the higher Self and can become conscious of this in different ways and to different degrees. The ego can thus identify itself more or less and temporarily with the higher Self. (see other versions of the oval diagram)
Assagioli’s oval diagram
Assagioli’s oval diagram
There is no, I repeat, no conflict between these two aspects of the Self: they are not opposites but complement each other. As an Oriental writer has so brilliantly put it: “There is no identity (i.e., self-consciousness) that can exist without the universal, and there is no consciousness of the universal without individual realization.” Poets sometimes have an intuition that goes beyond intellectual concepts. An Italian poet, Carducci, had a vivid experience of this fusion and expressed it admirably in a verse in his Cantico dell’Amore (Song of Love):
“Do I embrace the world, or is it the universe that from within is absorbing me again? Oh, those were notes from the eternal poem that I heard, and tried to resonate in this little verse.”
The poet does not know how it has happened, whether the “I” has expanded into the universe or whether the universal life has absorbed him. Furthermore, he is aware of the difficulty of expressing this experience, this state of consciousness, and of the incompleteness of any formulation (“this little verse”).
An examination of the varying relationships of the individual and universal aspects with respect to these experiences would be very interesting. Here I will merely mention that experiences of a mystical, intuitive character will be dominated by the universal aspect, i.e., the consciousness being filled with a greater Reality. In experiences reached through psycho-spiritual training, where the consciousness seeks to rise to the Self and achieves a momentary union with It, the feeling of self-consciousness remains strong. The individual continues to feel “present” and active while participating in a much wider type of consciousness.
The relationship between therapist and client
4. Let us now examine the phases of personality transformation and integration. According to Jung, they are a largely spontaneous process, which can, however, be facilitated by the “catalytic” presence of the therapist and the human relationship with him.
Jung attributes a special significance to this relationship, which he calls “transference.” The Jungian concept of transference is neither clear nor unambiguous, and changes over the years.
He himself states in the “Conclusion” of his book The Psychology of the Transference: “The problematic nature of transference is so complex and multifaceted that I lack the necessary categories to provide a systematic presentation.” (p. 171)
He has thus preferred to treat the concept of transference through a commentary on and interpretation of a text from alchemy, Rosarium Philisophorum, where the symbolism seems extremely complicated and obscure, and where Jung himself finds contradictions.
In psychosynthesis, the building of a good relationship between patient and therapist is made easier – or should we say less difficult. The therapist thus identifies and suggests to the patient, like Jung, the goal of his “individuation”. He encourages and trains him from the very beginning in the use of active methods to achieve an increasingly clear self-perception, to develop a strong will and to be able to master the right use of his emotional, imaginative and mental energies. Furthermore, the patient is trained to use all means to achieve independence from the therapist.
Despite the variety and complexity of the relationship created between therapist and patient, in the practice of psychosynthesis, four main forms can be distinguished; each is used, guided, and regulated with the patient’s healing and well-being in mind:
a. Transference in the strictest sense, as originally formulated by Freud; i.e. the impulses, attachments and emotions the patient has experienced in relation to his parents in childhood are “projected” onto the therapist. These attitudes can be positive (loving) or negative (hostile). The projections must be analyzed and dissolved. Here there is agreement between Jung’s therapy, psychoanalysis and psychosynthesis.
b. The specific relationship created by what we can call the therapeutic situation. Here the therapist primarily represents and exercises a “parental” function. He must to some extent fulfill the role and task of protector, advisor and guide. In dream symbolism he frequently appears as the “old, wise man”, according to Jung, and corresponds to what the Indians call “guru”. This relationship differs significantly from the unconscious projection, which takes place by transference. It is conscious, real, reality-based.
The therapist as an external unifying center
In the diagram the therapist is indicated by a star outside the individual’s psyche. He works as a link or bridge between the individual’s ego and the Self. When the ego does not gain direct awareness of the Self “vertically”, it can be effectively helped by the therapist, who appears to the patient as one who is in touch with his own Self, and therefore becomes a “role model”, or even a “catalyst”.
Assagioli’s oval diagram and the therapist’s function
C. A human relationship which develops as the treatment progresses and which creates psychological reactions at different levels and of different kinds. A detailed study of this cannot be entered into on this occasion; I will only say that the tactful and difficult task of the therapist is to maintain this relationship within appropriate limits and, one might say, “at a high level”. He should contribute to the positive or constructive aspects of the relationship, but resist attachments, demands, pretense and attempts to monopolize on the part of the patient. This can be done with firmness combined with tact and kindness. The patient must be made to understand how these attitudes are in reality harmful to him, even if they give him satisfaction at the moment.
The transition from the second to the third type of relationship is valuable, even indispensable, for various reasons, first of all to promote the patient’s growing independence, then to eliminate the tendency to lean on another person, to discharge one’s own responsibility, and to be led by the hand of moral laziness; further, to prevent a crisis in the patient when he discovers the human faults of his mentor and helper. This happens easily, one might say inevitably! And in his disappointment the patient switches from extreme admiration and obedience to criticism and hostility in an equally excessive degree.
d. Dissolution of the relationship at the end of treatment. This is a critical point and needs to be handled with wisdom. I said “dissolution” and not termination of the relationship because the end of treatment can often be gradual and almost imperceptible; also because the positive relationship can continue afterwards in another form, either as a friendship or a collaboration or both. Often the healed patient can understand and help other sick people better than the so-called healthy ones. In this way the recovering patient can cooperate and maintain a constructive relationship with the therapist even before he is completely healed.
These relationships with patients and the entire therapeutic process in general require appropriate training of the therapist, not only scientifically and technically, but above all humanly and spiritually. Jung was fully aware of this necessity and formulated it explicitly. Here is one of his statements on this matter: “The latest developments in analytical psychology . . . give the personality of the therapist a prominent place in terms of its healing or harmful character. This requires an inner improvement of the therapist himself – an education of the educator.”
Jung therefore expressly stresses the necessity of a didactic analysis; in other words, the one who intends to give psychotherapy must himself undergo a psychological analysis with another psychotherapist. This is so, says Jung: “that the therapist cannot see in the patient that he does not know in himself, or will be influenced unnecessarily by it.” (La Guérison Psychologique, p. 237.) Psychosynthesis is in full accordance with this. Two things are worth noting. The first is as follows: if the didactic psychosynthesis cannot be given, the therapist should himself carry out a “self-psychosynthesis”. It must be remembered that a non-“orthodox” psychoanalyst like Karen Horney is in accordance with this, as her book Self-analysis (NY: Norton, 1942.) can attest. But she stays within the framework of psychoanalysis, and does not enter into the area of psychosynthesis. Nor does she operate with higher psychological functions.
In psychosynthesis, on the other hand, the therapist can make use of a greater number of aids in the form of active techniques which he can apply to himself and experiment with. I would say that each of us, and in particular every therapist and every teacher, can be considered a “living laboratory” in which the “owner” “experiments” twenty-four hours a day (since dreams are included). Furthermore, it is not strictly necessary that either didactic psychosynthesis or self-psychosynthesis be completed before one begins to give psychotherapy. The need in this area is so urgent and so great that anyone who is prepared to devote himself to it should do so as soon as his training allows; even if certain areas are deficient. His equipment, however, must include a critical sense and sufficient humility to recognize his own weaknesses and the will to eliminate them. In fact, self-psychosynthesis, like education, should be a lifelong pursuit.
Therapy and Education
The transformation of the personality and its integration or psychosynthesis – apart from transference – often occurs spontaneously. Jung claims that the above is a result of the creative and synthesizing effect of symbols emerging from the unconscious. Jung advises against active interference in this process of self-healing, either on the part of the therapist or by the will of the ego, the conscious “I”.
Psychosynthesis therapy proves that these processes can be promoted and effectively supported by a collaboration with the conscious personality; at the same time, psychosynthesis fully recognizes the importance of the spontaneous self-healing processes and the integrative function of symbols. The conscious action is carried out by what constitutes the center, the dynamic element, i.e. the conscious and active subject who uses his will.
There are two reasons for the necessity of cooperation between the conscious personality and the spontaneous self-healing processes. The first is, as already mentioned, to be able to master and control the energies that break out from the unconscious, in order to then promote their transformation, sublimation and constructive use. This applies especially to sexual, emotional and aggressive tendencies and energies that reinforce the tendencies that are already present in the conscious personality. The importance of this part of the treatment is as obvious as the importance of having knowledge of and being able to use the active method in order to carry out the treatment. These methods can be used to an equal extent in teaching and in self-psychosynthesis, and should be widely disseminated and practiced.
The second reason for active cooperation in order to achieve integration and synthesis of the personality lies in the advantage, indeed sometimes the necessity, of developing the psychic functions which have remained at a primitive, infantile level, paralyzed by devaluation or arrested by repression. This development thus takes place through active training.
In modern man, absorbed in his interests and practical problems, the intellectual function is often developed one-sidedly. Often one sees an inability or weakening of the higher emotions such as aesthetic sensitivity, the ability to feel one with nature and the ability to create human communication.
In other people, emotional abundance and the richness of imagination often relegate mental and sometimes also practical activity to an inferior place. There are other examples to which Jung points out where the higher striving and needs are ignored, underestimated or feared, and thus neglected or repressed. One of Jung’s most valuable contributions is that he directed the attention of psychotherapists to these cases and encouraged in his medical works the expression and formulation of these spiritual needs.
But one can go further along the path he opened. The penetration of spiritual material and energies from the superconscious can be actively promoted. As mentioned above, in many cases – I really believe in most – active training is required to eliminate or at least mitigate the lack of balance in the development of the various psychological functions. This support is of particular importance when the conscious “I” is to be able to accommodate and assimilate the penetrating energies from the superconscious and integrate them harmoniously into the total psychic life*
*This subject has been discussed in Self Realization and Psychological Disturbances. A pamphlet originally published by the Psychosynthesis Research Foundation of New York and now found in the book Psychosynthesis – A manual of Principles and Techniques – New York: Hobbs; 1945.
Psychotherapeutic techniques
The use of the active techniques can and should be supported by the therapist. I said “supported” because it is not his responsibility to personally teach the patient how to use them. He can use the help of competent assistants, thus entrusting the patient to their respective abilities. But he must always control and direct the treatment according to a clear plan, and encourage the patient to learn to continue on his own as soon as possible.
The techniques include about a dozen, and I will only mention the most important groups:
A. Psycho-physical techniques
1. Relaxation exercises
2. Concentration and awareness of physical sensations, including muscular ones (methods from Virtoz, Schultz etc.)
3. Neuro-muscular coordination exercises – Rhythmic movements and dance.
4. Various physical activities.
5. Crafts
6. Drawing, painting and modeling.
7. Play musical instruments.
8. Diction – Recitation – Singing.
B. Psychological techniques
1. Observation.
2. Visualization.
3. Evoking auditory, tactile, olfactory, etc. “images”.
4. Mental exercises – meditation etc.
C. Psycho-spiritual techniques.
These can be divided into two groups:
1. The techniques that promote the ascension of the “I” or ego, the center of self-awareness, to levels that are usually superconscious;
towards a union with the spiritual Self.
2. The techniques that promote the opening of consciousness towards the “downstreaming” material and energies from the superconscious.
The choice of techniques to be used in therapy must be determined by the needs of each individual case. They must be combined and alternated between in accordance with a plan or program whose purpose is to promote the gradual and harmonious integration of the personality. This plan gives psychosynthesis therapy and teaching its special character. I have included psychosynthesis teaching because the greater part of the techniques mentioned can, with the right adaptation, be used effectively in teaching in the family as well as in the school.
Jung’s and psychosynthesis’ views on teaching
This brings us to Jung’s ideas on education. Although he does not deal directly and actively with the application of his concepts to education, his writings contain much of interest in this field. As far back as 1910 Jung published an essay on Conflicts of the Infantile Mind, in which – on the basis of a series of accurate observations of the psychological development of a 4-5 year old child – he very skillfully examined various problems which arise in the child’s mind and which parents must therefore deal with. These problems concern the birth of children, the contrast between imagination and thought, the connection with parents, etc. The various Prefaces to the different editions and the Appendix contain some wise observations on the relative and complementary elements of different points of view in psychology. These are supplemented by useful advice on how to teach and explain sexuality to children. Later, Jung developed his pedagogical ideas and experiences within the general framework of his psychological concepts in a series of lectures, which have been published under the title Analytical Psychology and Education in the volume Contributions to Analytical Psychology (London: Hartcourt Brace, 1928). Jung summarizes his ideas in the following statement:
“The difference between this and all previous psychology is the fact that analytical psychology does not avoid dealing with complex mental matters such as the four functions of orientation: thinking, feeling, intuition, and sensing. We admit that we do not know what these functions really are. We would very much like to know into what primitive elements, for example, one could dissolve feeling. But despite our ignorance of ultimate principles, we use these functions as if they were clearly defined organs of the mind. Another difference is the method of investigation. We have no academic laboratory. Our laboratory is the world. Our tests are real events of everyday life, and the people we test are our patients, family, friends, and—last but not least—ourselves. There are no needlesticks, artificial shocks, startling lights, or any of the various devices that go into experiments in a laboratory; but there are the pains and joys, the horrors and achievements of real life which give us our material. Our method is to understand life as it appears in the human psyche.” (Contributions to Analytical Psychology, p 348
As we have seen, Jung attaches great importance to the human relationship between patient and therapist, but also believes that the psychological connection between parents and children and between teacher and students is of decisive importance. Therefore, the teacher must have a clear awareness that his psychological ignorance and weaknesses, his own complexes and conflicts, inevitably have harmful consequences for those he wishes to teach. He should therefore be aware of the heavy responsibility he has and his duty to train himself for the noble but difficult task by means of an appropriate self-education based on the discoveries and methods of the new dynamic psychology.
Jung states this as follows: “It is of course quite impossible for parents to have no complexes at all: that would be superhuman. But they should consciously deal with them, they should make it their duty to work their way out of them for the sake of their children. They should not avoid their problems and try to suppress them in order to avoid painful discussions.” (ibid., p. 375)
The specific application of Jung’s ideas and method of education cannot be given in a summary. The way in which he practices them with the patients to whom he refers should be studied. This can be done in the book mentioned above. Moreover, one of Jung’s pupils, Dr. Frances Wickes, has written an excellent book on child psychology, to which Jung himself has written an extensive introduction. The book is entitled The Inner World of Childhood (New York: Appleton-Century-Croft; 1927), and it contains valuable advice on the education of children, especially on the problems of parental influence on the child. The author describes in a chapter of special interest and originality an aspect of the child’s psychic life which is not very well known—the child’s invention of imaginary playmates.
Jung’s own experiences with teaching
Jung gave a lecture on The Gifted Child at a conference on education in Basel in 1942. The subject is of great importance and interest in view of the growing importance attached to the recognition and education of gifted and exceptionally gifted children. The value of Jung’s essay is enhanced by the description of his own personal experiences and hardships as a “talented boy,” and therefore deserves to be quoted at some length. Here is Jung’s lively and entertaining account of his eventful schooling.*
*The following page references, except where indicated, are to the Italian edition Psicologia e Educazione
“When I was a ten-year-old schoolboy, I did not feel sleepy or stupid at all. I was often terribly bored when the teacher paid special attention to students who were unable to follow. But boredom was not the worst thing at all. Among our many style topics, which were hardly inspiring, we once had one that interested me. I set to work enthusiastically and carefully polished my sentences. In the joyful expectation of having written the best style, or at least one of the best, I gave it to the teacher. When the teacher had handed out the styles, he used to discuss the best one first and then the rest in order of merit. Mine was not the first, nor the second, nor the third. All the others’ styles came before mine, and when he had finished discussing the last performance, the weakest of them all, the teacher puffed up in a threatening and ominous manner and pronounced his verdict:
“Jung’s style is by far the best, but he has ruined it with indifference and thoughtlessness. For this reason it does not deserve a place on the list.” “That is not right,” I interrupted the teacher, “I have never worked so hard with a style as I have with this one.” “You are lying,” he shouted. Look at X (X was the student who had written the worst style); he has really put in the effort. He will go far in life, but you will not, because you do not become successful by means of skills and tricks.” I said nothing, and from that moment on I did not order anything in the German lessons.
“This experience goes back more than half a century, and I have no doubt that conditions in the school have changed a great deal and have improved. But that episode gave me much to think about and left me with a feeling of bitterness, which, however, with greater life experience has given way to a more balanced assessment. And I understood how the teacher’s attitude had been deeply influenced by his high principles of helping the weak and wiping out the bad. Sometimes, however, these principles become mechanical rules and, as time goes by, are accepted without further consideration, creating sad caricatures of what was once good. It is true that in this way the weak are helped and the bad are combated, but at the same time there is a danger of exposing the more gifted to neglect. It is as if stepping forward from the ranks is in itself a difficult and troublesome matter. There is nothing to be done about it; the average person distrusts and does not trust what his brain cannot grasp. “Il est trop intelligent” – an expression that justifies outright distrust,” (pp. 135-137).
The teaching of gifted children
Jung rightly deplores this pseudo-humanitarian view and misunderstanding of democracy: “The desire to bring all people to the same level and reduce them to the same status as sheep by suppressing the natural aristocratic and hierarchical structure (please note: in the psycho-spiritual sense) inevitably leads sooner or later to a catastrophe.” (pp. 144-145)
Jung adds some valuable observations concerning the difficulties of detecting and educating gifted children: “The problem of the gifted child,” he writes, “is by no means a simple matter, since it cannot be detected solely from the fact that he is a good student. In some cases, the opposite is true. He may even make himself dangerously noticeable by being absent-minded, having a head full of nonsense, laziness, sloppiness, lack of attention, being impudent, stubborn, and by giving the impression of being only half-awake. From a superficial assessment it is often difficult to distinguish the gifted child from the weakly gifted. Furthermore, it must not be forgotten that gifted children are not always precocious, but tend to develop slowly, which is why their abilities may remain latent for a long time,” (pp. 137-138)
Jung draws attention to and shows the importance of what he calls the faculties of the heart: “In addition to the faculties of the head, there are also those of the heart, which are no less important, but which are easily overlooked, because in these cases the head is often weaker than the heart. And yet this type of person is often more useful and valuable to the welfare of society than those with various talents.” (p. 141)
“Gifted children encounter complications not only in the intellectual sphere but also in the moral, that is, emotional, sphere. Adults who often distort the truth, lie, and commit countless other sins of moral neglect can create problems in a morally gifted child that throw him or her off balance. Just as intellectual sensitivity and maturity are not noticed or underestimated, so too can criticism of a gifted child in moral and emotional situations be met with the same reaction. The abilities of the heart are often less visible and striking than the intellectual and technical; and just as the latter have a right to the teacher’s understanding, the former have an equal right to the best the teacher can give; in other words, this requires that the teacher also be educated” (p. 140).
Finally, Jung draws attention to the lack of balance and conflicts in gifted children and to the dangers of their abilities being used in an antisocial and destructive way. He writes: “There are not so few gifted individuals whose usefulness is paralyzed, often even corrupted, by their human deficiency in all other areas. Talent has no real value in itself; it has that value only if the rest of the personality is able to follow it so far that the talent can be used with advantage. Unfortunately, creative abilities can manifest themselves just as effectively in a destructive way. Whether the talent is directed towards good or evil is determined solely by the moral attitude of the personality.” (p.142)
In connection with the education of these children, Jung raises the question whether they should be together in special schools or in ordinary ones. He prefers the latter option, but does not go into the various aspects of the problem. I have treated this subject in a pamphlet, The Education of Gifted and Super-gifted Children (New York: Psychosynthesis Research Foundation).
Teaching and interpersonal relationships
Teaching is a kind of relationship between individuals; let us therefore examine the problems and methods of social relationships and between individuals from the Jungian point of view and from psychosynthesis. In practice, the goal and the end result of Jungian therapy is individuation. I say “in practice” because Jung admits (to quote him) that the very “process of individuation” entails an awareness of what society is. Individuation implies a union with oneself and therefore with humanity, of which each individual carries a small part within him.” (La Gúerison Psychologique, p. 228) “The individual,” Jung reiterates, “does not live his life fully and does not grasp its purpose unless he is able to place his “I” at the service of the spiritual and superhuman order.” (p. 145)
Jung, however, limits himself to these allusions, which indicate a striving rather than an effective movement in that direction. His method is not designed to actively help the patient to initiate and “live” a community with other people. Rather, he strongly encourages opposition, conflict between the individual and the mass, and between personal life and the collective pressure exerted by modern social life. This pressure is mechanized and unidirectional, not only material but also psychological, as is witnessed by mass ideologies. It is the pressure towards conformity, the influence of advertising and “persuasion” and the various forms of propaganda. Jung shares this position with a number of other critics of modern life: philosophers, sociologists and psychologists, among whom Erich Fromm is the most prominent.
There is unfortunately a great deal of truth in all this, but the rigid and extreme opposition seems one-sided and too absolute. We must recognize that the individual and the mass are included in the extended sphere of human relations, forming a part of the ordinary life of man; man is by his innermost nature as well as by external necessity both a social and gregarious being. It is true that these human relations are far from being easy, harmonious and constructive. We can observe this all the time. In addition to mass influence, human relations are faced with many difficulties. The mainly introverts find it difficult to create psychological relations with others, to communicate “humanly”. The mainly extroverts, on the other hand, establish an extensive network of relations; but these are superficial and accidental, so that the individual in reality remains psychologically and spiritually isolated.
The difficulties and conflicts of human relationships are largely due to an excessive tendency to self-assertion and overestimation of success in the external world. This leads to a devaluation or suppression of the higher feelings and of the capacity to love, to understand, to have compassion and to altruistic love. A reassessment and active development of these feelings thus becomes a necessity. There are, as I have mentioned earlier, effective methods for doing this. The creation and expression of these feelings should be considered by the therapist and the teacher as their most important tasks.
The first step is the recognition and proper appreciation of human and higher values. The study of the inspiring lives of heroes, great saints and great humanists, who exemplify the above values, is an effective method for this purpose. But many, far more of these values than one would think, can be found among simple and humble people, as the “Price of Kindness” (which should be considerably expanded) has shown.
The second step is to awaken and create goodwill. This can be done in various ways; a particularly effective way is direct contact with human suffering. This can be done by visiting, or better, by actively helping in hospitals, prisons, in the city slums, and by visiting and helping the lonely – especially the elderly. There is also cooperation in creative and socially useful activities where group spirit and solidarity are developed, and where understanding and friendship exist.
There are a number of methods that I cannot deal with now; I will simply mention them.
1. Initial methods: Obstacles are removed: egocentrism; assertiveness; hostility and combativeness; prejudice and bias.
2. Positive methods: Understanding: generosity: good will; altruistic love.
Help to achieve interpersonal and group psychosynthesis (also called interindividual and social psychosynthesis) is an important, and indeed indispensable, part of psychosynthesis theory and training. It can be rightly argued that our civilization is neurotic and unbalanced, and that there are real group neuroses and psychoses; e.g. national glorification and ideological fanaticism. Therefore, psychotherapy should include and carry out these more comprehensive tasks, for which it is well equipped. Every sick individual who is helped to establish real human relations becomes an element of balance and health in his society; and conversely, every effort to adjust imbalances and collective psychoses makes it easier for the individual to achieve and maintain his personal health.
Thus the tasks and activities of therapists and teachers converge and are united in a double purpose. The same applies to all those who in various fields and in various ways have devoted themselves to the healing of socially conditioned diseases. The first and most urgent task is to secure humanity from the dangers which its own blindness and stupidity have created. The second task is to promote a new and better civilization in which the individual can freely express and utilize for the good of all the wonderful potentialities which exist in every human being.
How to move forward
Here you can receive seven free meditations where you develop different aspects of yourself.
Also read the article Psychosynthesis an integral psychology
