by C. G. Jung
(The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, CW 8, p. 121)
Consciousness. C. G. JUNG: “When one reflects upon what consciousness really is, one is profoundly impressed by the extreme wonder of the fact that an event which takes place outside in the cosmos simultaneously produces an internal image, that it takes place, so to speak, inside as well, which is to say: becomes conscious.”
(Basel Seminar, privately printed, 1934, p. 1)
“For indeed our consciousness does not create itself—it wells up from unknown depths. In childhood it awakens gradually, and all through life it wakes each morning out of the depths of sleep from an unconscious condition. It is like a child that is born daily out of the primordial womb of the unconscious.”
(Psychology and Religion: West and East, CW 11, pp. 569 f.)
Dream. C. G. JUNG: “The dream is a little hidden door in the innermost and most secret recesses of the psyche, opening into that cosmic night which was psyche long before there was any ego-consciousness, and which will remain psyche no matter how far our ego-consciousness may extend … All consciousness separates; but in dreams we put on the likeness of that more universal, truer, more eternal man dwelling in the darkness of primordial night. There he is still the whole, and the whole is in him, indistinguishable from nature and bare of all egohood. Out of these all-uniting depths arises the dream, be it never so childish, grotesque, and immoral.”
(Civilization in Transition, CW 10, pars. 304 f.)
Extraversion. Attitude-type characterized by concentration of interest on the external object. See Introversion.
God-image. A term derived from the Church Fathers, according to whom the imago Dei is imprinted on the human soul. When such an image is spontaneously produced in dreams, fantasies, visions, etc. it is, from the psychological point of view, a symbol of the self (q.v.), of psychic wholeness.
C. G. JUNG: “It is only through the psyche that we can establish that God acts upon us, but we are unable to distinguish whether these actions emanate from God or from the unconscious. We cannot tell whether God and the unconscious are two different entities. Both are border-line concepts for transcendental contents. But empirically it can be established, with a sufficient degree of probability, that there is in the unconscious an archetype of wholeness which manifests itself spontaneously in dreams, etc., and a tendency, independent of the conscious will, to relate other archetypes to this centre. Consequently, it does not seem improbable that the archetype produces a symbolism which has always characterized and expressed the Deity … The God-image does not coincide with the unconscious as such, but with a special content of it, namely the archetype of the self. It is this archetype from which we can no longer distinguish the God-image empirically.”
(Psychology and Religion: West and East, CW 11, pp. 468 f.)
“One can, then, explain the God-image … as a reflection of the self, or, conversely, explain the self as an imago Dei in man.”
(Ibid., p. 190)
Hierosgamos. Sacred or spiritual marriage, union of archetypal figures in the rebirth mysteries of antiquity and also in alchemy. Typical examples are the representation of Christ and the Church as bridegroom and bride (sponsus et sponsa) and the alchemical conjunction of sun and moon.
Individuation. C. G. JUNG: “I use the term ‘individuation’ to denote the process by which a person becomes a psychological ‘in-dividual,’ that is, a separate, indivisible unity or ‘whole.’ ”
(The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, CW 9, i, p. 275)
“Individuation means becoming a single, homogeneous being, and, in so far as ‘individuality’ embraces our innermost, last, and incomparable uniqueness, it also implies becoming one’s own self. We could therefore translate individuation as ‘coming to selfhood’ or ‘self-realization.’ ” (Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, CW 7, par. 266)
“But again and again I note that the individuation process is confused with the coming of the ego into consciousness and that the ego is in consequence identified with the self, which naturally produces a hopeless conceptual muddle. Individuation is then nothing but ego-centredness and autoeroticism. But the self comprises infinitely more than a mere ego … It is as much one’s self, and all other selves, as the ego. Individuation does not shut one out from the world, but gathers the world to oneself.”
(The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, CW 8, p. 226)
Inflation. Expansion of the personality beyond its proper limits by identification with the persona (q.v.) or with an archetype (q.v.), or in pathological cases with a historical or religious figure. It produces an exaggerated sense of one’s self-importance and is usually compensated by feelings of inferiority.
Introversion. Attitude-type characterized by orientation in life through subjective psychic contents. See Extraversion.
Mana. Melanesian word for extraordinarily effective power emanating from a human being, object, action, or event, or from supernatural beings and spirits. Also health, prestige, power to work magic and to heal. A primitive concept of psychic energy.
Mandala (Sanskrit). Magic circle. In Jung, symbol of the center, the goal, or the self (q.v.) as psychic totality; self-representation of a psychic process of centering; production of a new center of personality. This is symbolically represented by the circle, the square, or the quaternity (q.v.), by symmetrical arrangements of the number four and its multiples. In Lamism and Tantric Yoga the mandala is an instrument of contemplation (yantra), seat and birthplace of the gods. Disturbed mandala: Any form that deviates from the circle, square, or equal-armed cross, or whose basic number is not four or its multiples.
C. G. JUNG: “Mandala means a circle, more especially a magic circle, and this form of symbol is not only to be found all through the East, but also among us; mandalas are amply represented in the Middle Ages. The specifically Christian ones come from the earlier Middle Ages. Most of them show Christ in the centre, with the four evangelists, or their symbols, at the cardinal points. This conception must be a very ancient one because Horus was represented with his four sons in the same way by the Egyptians … For the most part, the mandala form is that of a flower, cross, or wheel, with a distinct tendency toward four as the basis of the structure.”
(Commentary to Secret of the Golden Flower, CW 13, par. 31, mod.)
“Mandalas … usually appear in situations of psychic confusion and perplexity. The archetype thereby constellated represents a pattern of order which, like a psychological view-finder’ marked with a cross or circle divided into four, is superimposed on the psychic chaos so that each content falls into place and the weltering confusion is held together by the protective circle … At the same time they are yantras, instruments with whose help the order is brought into being.” (Civilization in Transition, CW 10, par. 803)
Numinosum. Rudolf Otto’s term (in his Idea of the Holy) for the inexpressible, mysterious, terrifying, directly experienced and pertaining only to the divinity.
Persona. Originally, the mask worn by an actor.
C. G. JUNG: “The persona … is the individual’s system of adaptation to, or the manner he assumes in dealing with, the world. Every calling or profession, for example, has its own characteristic persona.… Only, the danger is that [people] become identical with their personas—the professor with his text-book, the tenor with his voice.… One could say, with a little exaggeration, that the persona is that which in reality one is not, but which oneself as well as others think one is.”
(The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, CW 9, i, pp. 122 f.)
Primordial image. (Jakob Burckhardt) Term originally used by Jung for archetype (q.v.).
Psychoid. “Soul-like” or “quasi-psychic.”
C G. JUNG: “… the collective unconscious … represents a psyche that … cannot be directly perceived or ‘represented,’ in contrast to the perceptible psychic phenomena, and on account of its ‘irrepresentable’ nature I have called it ‘psychoid.’ ”
(The Structu
re and Dynamics of the Psyche, CW 8, p. 436)
Quaternity. C. G. JUNG: “The quaternity is an archetype of almost universal occurrence. It forms the logical basis for any whole judgment. If one wishes to pass such a judgment, it must have this fourfold aspect. For instance, if you want to describe the horizon as a whole, you name the four quarters of heaven.… There are always four elements, four prime qualities, four colours, four castes, four ways of spiritual development, etc. So, too, there are four aspects of psychological orientation … In order to orient ourselves, we must have a function which ascertains that something is there (sensation); a second function which established what is is (thinking); a third function which states whether it suits us or not, whether we wish to accept it or not (feeling), and a fourth function which indicates where it came from and where it is going (intuition). When this has been done, there is nothing more to say.… The ideal of completeness is the circle or sphere, but its natural minimal division is a quaternity.”
(Psychology and Religion: West and East, CW 11, p. 167)
A quaternity or quaternion often has a 3 + 1 structure, in that one of the terms composing it occupies an exceptional position or has a nature unlike that of the others. (For instance three of the symbols of the Evangelists are animals and that of the fourth, of St. Luke, is an angel.) This is the “Fourth,” which, added to the other three, makes them “One,” symbolizing totality. In analytical psychology often the “inferior” function (i.e., that function which is not at the conscious disposal of the subject) represents the “Fourth,” and its integration into consciousness is one of the major tasks of the process of individuation (q.v.).
Self. The central archetype (q.v.); the archetype of order; the totality of the personality. Symbolized by circle, square, quaternity (q.v.), child, mandala (q.v.), etc.
C. G. JUNG: “… the self is a quantity that is supraordinate to the conscious ego. It embraces not only the conscious but also the unconscious psyche, and is therefore, so to speak, a personality which we also are.… There is little hope of our ever being able to reach even approximate consciousness of the self, since however much we may make conscious there will always exist an indeterminate and indeterminable amount of unconscious material which belongs to the totality of the self.”
(Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, CW 7, par. 274)
“The self is not only the centre but also the whole circumference which embraces both conscious and unconscious; it is the centre of this totality, just as the ego is the centre of consciousness.”
(Psychology and Alchemy, CW 12, par. 44)
“… the self is our life’s goal, for it is the completest expression of that fateful combination we call individuality …”
(Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, CW 7, par. 404)
Shadow. The inferior part of the personality; sum of all personal and collective psychic elements which, because of their incompatibility with the chosen conscious attitude, are denied expression in life and therefore coalesce into a relatively autonomous “splinter personality” with contrary tendencies in the unconscious. The shadow behaves compensatorily to consciousness; hence its effects can be positive as well as negative. In dreams, the shadow figure is always of the same sex as the dreamer.
C. G. JUNG: “The shadow personifies everything that the subject refuses to acknowledge about himself and yet is always thrusting itself upon him directly or indirectly—for instance, inferior traits of character and other incompatible tendencies.”
(The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, CW 9, i, pp. 284 f.)
“… the shadow [is] that hidden, repressed, for the most part inferior and guilt-laden personality whose ultimate ramifications reach back into the realm of our animal ancestors and so comprise the whole historical aspect of the unconscious.… If it has been believed hitherto that the human shadow was the source of all evil, it can now be ascertained on closer investigation that the unconscious man, that is, his shadow, does not consist only of morally reprehensible tendencies, but also displays a number of good qualities, such as normal instincts, appropriate reactions, realistic insights, creative impulses, etc.” (Aion, CW 9, ii, p. 266)
Soul. C. G. JUNG: “If the human [soul] is anything, it must be of unimaginable complexity and diversity, so that it cannot possibly be approached through a mere psychology of instinct. I can only gaze with wonder and awe at the depths and heights of our psychic nature. Its non-spatial universe conceals an untold abundance of images which have accumulated over millions of years of living development and become fixed in the organism. My consciousness is like an eye that penetrates to the most distant spaces, yet it is the psychic non-ego that fills them with nonspatial images. And these images are not pale shadows, but tremendously powerful psychic factors.… Beside this picture I would like to place the spectacle of the starry heavens at night, for the only equivalent of the universe within is the universe without; and just as I reach this world through the medium of the body, so I reach that world through the medium of the psyche.”
(Freud and Psychoanalysis, CW 4, pp. 331 f.)
“It would be blasphemy to assert that God can manifest Himself everywhere save only in the human soul. Indeed the very intimacy of the relationship between God and the soul automatically precludes any devaluation of the latter. It would be going perhaps too far to speak of an affinity; but at all events the soul must contain in itself the faculty of relation to God, i.e. a correspondence, otherwise a connection could never come about. This correspondence is, in psychological terms, the archetype of the God-image [q.v.].”
(Psychology and Alchemy, CW 12, par. 11)
Synchronicity. A term coined by Jung to designate the meaningful coincidence or equivalence (a) of a psychic and a physical state or event which have no causal relationship to one another. Such synchronistic phenomena occur, for instance, when an inwardly perceived event (dream, vision, premonition, etc.) is seen to have a correspondence in external reality: the inner image of premonition has “come true”; (b) of similar or identical thoughts, dreams, etc. occurring at the same time in different places. Neither the one nor the other coincidence can be explained by causality, but seems to be connected primarily with activated archetypal processes in the unconscious.
C. G. JUNG: “My preoccupation with the psychology of unconscious processes long ago compelled me to look about for another principle of explanation, because the causality principle seemed to me inadequate to explain certain remarkable phenomena of the psychology of the unconscious. Thus I found that there are psychic parallelisms which cannot be related to each other causally, but which must be connected through another principle, namely the contingency of events. This connection of events seemed to me essentially given by the fact of their relative simultaneity, hence the term ‘synchronistic.’ It seems, indeed, as though time, far from being an abstraction, is a concrete continuum which contains qualities or basic conditions that manifest themselves simultaneously in different places through parallelisms that cannot be explained causally, as, for example, in cases of the simultaneous occurrence of identical thoughts, symbols, or psychic states.” (“Richard Wilhelm: In Memoriam,” CW 15, par. 81, mod.)
“I chose this term because the simultaneous occurrence of two meaningfully but not causally connected events seemed to me an essential criterion. I am therefore using the general concept of synchronicity in the special sense of a coincidence in time of two or more causally unrelated events which have the same or a similar meaning, in contrast to ‘synchronism,’ which simply means the simultaneous occurrence of two events.”
(The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, CW 8, p. 441)
“Synchronicity is no more baffling or mysterious than the discontinuities of physics. It is only the ingrained belief in the sovereign power of causality that creates intellectual difficulties and makes it appear unthinkable that causeless events exist or could ever occur.… Meaningful coincidences are thinkable as pure chance. But the more they multiply and the greater and
more exact the correspondence is, the more their probability sinks and their unthinkability increases, until they can no longer be regarded as pure chance but, for lack of a causal explanation, have to be thought of as meaningful arrangements.… Their ‘inexplicability’ is not due to the fact that the cause is unknown, but to the fact that a cause is not even thinkable in intellectual terms.” (Ibid., pp. 518 f.)
Unconscious, the. C. G. JUNG: “Theoretically, no limits can be set to the field of consciousness, since it is capable of indefinite extension. Empirically, however, it always finds its limit when it comes up against the unknown. This consists of everything we do not know, which, therefore, is not related to the ego as the centre of the field of consciousness. The unknown falls into two groups of objects: those which are outside and can be experienced by the senses, and those which are inside and are experienced immediately. The first group comprises the unknown in the outer world; the second the unknown in the inner world. We call this latter territory the unconscious.”
(Aion, CW 9, ii, p. 3)
“… everything of which I know, but of which I am not at the moment thinking; everything of which I was once conscious but have now forgotten; everything perceived by my senses, but not noted by my conscious mind; everything which, involuntarily and without paying attention to it, I feel, think, remember, want, and do; all the future things that are taking shape in me and will sometime come to consciousness: all this is the content of the unconscious.”