# Cognitive functions as part of the ego



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Okay so I'm knee deep in an analysis of some ego stuff.
I'd like to get certain notions clear and want some feedback.

In ego psychology one often talks about functions of the ego.
Among these is identity, reality testing, defencemechanisms, synthesis, object relations and so on.

What I'd like to know is if there is a way to relate the Jungian functions to these ego functions 
in a meaningful way.
I know it is a tall order and I sort of suspect that there is a lot of overlap.

Jung was of the idea that the ego identified with the top function.
But it remains to be seen if that is a different ego theory, 
and if the functions embody traits that are just distrobuted differently in other ego psychologies.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Seems I have to advertise to get attention.
These people looks active and seem to have a somewhat good chance of engaging with the topic
@Entropic @cir @Figure @FearAndTrembling @tangosthenes @To_august @niss @drmiller100 @Animal @charlie.elliot @luemb @Spades @Marv @Sonny @myjazz @Azure the Dreamer

Disclaimer:
If I havn't mentioned you, you either suck at typology/psychology or I didn't remember/know your name at this moment.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

The only thing I can think of that relates to this is what's on this page -- the roles of each position 

The 16 Type Patterns


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

Strontphite said:


> Seems I have to advertise to get attention.
> These people looks active and seem to have a somewhat good chance of engaging with the topic
> @*Entropic* @*cir* @*Figure* @*FearAndTrembling* @*tangosthenes* @*To_august* @*niss* @*drmiller100* @*Animal* @*charlie.elliot* @*luemb* @*Spades* @*Marv* @*Sonny* @*myjazz* @*Azure the Dreamer*
> 
> ...


 I see you're fishing here. Alright, I'll bite. I think this might actually be the first time I've ever posted on the Cognitive Functions forum.

Result: *flop flop* This fish is definitely out of its element. Please cut me some slack, I'm not up to date on the lingo.



Strontphite said:


> Okay so I'm knee deep in an analysis of some ego stuff.


 You're trying to study the mind and you _only_ got your feet wet? *readies a swimming pool and a diving board*

"Regular" Jungian psychology stuff is within the parameters of this research and analysis, right? If so, have you looked into the "Collected Works of C.G. Jung"?

For a limited time only (I think this link expires in a week?) get a kindle version of the complete series!!!



> *I'd like to get certain notions clear* and want some feedback.


 You're looking for clarity from a collection of social-biological sciences (I'm assuming you're in the "science" portion of psychology and not the "arts" portion), which also encompasses studies of the _unconscious_, that is notorious for untestable hypotheses and unreproducible results.

Almost by definition, the unconscious consists of things that are not clear to us. Like art. You might as well ask for a universal dream-symbols dictionary when you get lost in the collective unconscious.

I hope you can find ways to make peace with the uncertainties of life, and that you're not too attached to sanity (it's all relative and overrated anyways).



> In ego psychology one often talks about functions of the ego.
> Among these is identity, reality testing, defencemechanisms, synthesis, object relations and so on.
> 
> What I'd like to know is if there is a way to relate the Jungian functions to these ego functions
> ...


 Low hanging fruit answer: shadow functions are a very specialized theory/application of generalized psychological shadows. While doing shadow work, everything you listed (identity, reality testing, defensive mechanisms, object relationships, etc) will be confronted and tested. Synthesis roughly corresponds to enantiodromia, or "The Law of Three" in the process enneagram.



> Jung was of the idea that the ego identified with the top function.
> But it remains to be seen if that is a different ego theory,
> and if the functions embody traits that are just distrobuted differently in other ego psychologies.


 Your ego will experience itself as various states of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma, etc) throughout the process, and it will hurt your body, spirit, and soul when rigid egoic structures (preconceived notions, habitual behavior, emotional reactivity, etc) are blown up to pieces, liquified, sublimated, etc. 

These cognitive functions are "rigid egoic structures". Human potential is not so limited that our brains' operations can be fully defined and constrained within these weak structures. They're basically "training wheels".

You will face your death. Repeatedly. Hence "ego death".

Like I said, hope you're not too attached to sanity. Good luck!


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

charlie.elliot said:


> The only thing I can think of that relates to this is what's on this page -- the roles of each position
> 
> The 16 Type Patterns


Thanks for sharing.

That gave me an idea, since they used the word process I was reminded of Freuds primary process thinking.
Now if we are to take Jung litterally the ego isn't the cognitive functions.
The ego identifies with the dominant.
Sort of like someone worshiping a celebrity, they are not the celebrity, but they sort of want to be.
In that sense the less the ego identifies with a function the less valued it becomes in the psyche.

Having placed the cognitive functions outside the ego with a marked identity footprint.
The primary process uses the cognitive functions to form mental images to relieve tension.
That relieved tension transfered to the functions is the libido.
Since the ego identifies with the dominant function that is where the libido primarily flows.
All the IDs pent up desires is channeled trough the dominant primarily and hence coloured by it.
What we want takes the shape of our dominant perspectives.

Heh I think I have an answer to my question, unless someone disagrees strongly with what I just wrote.
Then I urge them to step forward and provide a sound reasoning for why they disagree.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

cir said:


> I see you're fishing here. Alright, I'll bite. I think this might actually be the first time I've ever posted on the Cognitive Functions forum.


Yay I got a big one!



> Result: *flop flop* This fish is definitely out of its element. Please cut me some slack, I'm not up to date on the lingo.


Lingo is old faded and boring anyway.



> You're trying to study the mind and you _only_ got your feet wet? *readies a swimming pool and a diving board*


Well that is always relative I guess.



> "Regular" Jungian psychology stuff is within the parameters of this research and analysis, right? If so, have you looked into the "Collected Works of C.G. Jung"?


Well Ihavn't read everything there.
Only
Psychological Types
Aion
Letters to Job
Man and his symbols
The psychology of the unconcious



> For a limited time only (I think this link expires in a week?) get a kindle version of the complete series!!!


I have it on my external harddrive, but it might be useful to others.



> You're looking for clarity from a collection of social-biological sciences (I'm assuming you're in the "science" portion of psychology and not the "arts" portion), which also encompasses studies of the _unconscious_, that is notorious for untestable hypotheses and unreproducible results.


Well I got to this train of thought from reading the more science minded theories yet.
Sort of like a pilgrimage where I pay lip service to all the other names that are held up high.
So that I can stop this nagging feeling that I have somehow missed something with my too Jung heavy focus earlier.



> Almost by definition, the unconscious consists of things that are not clear to us. Like art. You might as well ask for a universal dream-symbols dictionary when you get lost in the collective unconscious.


Yeah, I know there are many many strange things buried down there.



> I hope you can find ways to make peace with the uncertainties of life, and that you're not too attached to sanity (it's all relative and overrated anyways).


Yeah I've lost my sanity a couple of times already in a sense, I doubt it can get much worse.
But who knows, maybe that was just the warmup...



> Low hanging fruit answer: shadow functions are a very specialized theory/application of generalized psychological shadows. While doing shadow work, everything you listed (identity, reality testing, defensive mechanisms, object relationships, etc) will be confronted and tested. Synthesis roughly corresponds to enantiodromia, or "The Law of Three" in the process enneagram.


Hmm, I see, now we are talking.



> The *Law of Three* is described by Gurdjieff as "the second fundamental cosmic law". This law states that every whole phenomenon is composed of three separate sources, which are Active, Passive and Reconciling or Neutral. This law applies to everything in the universe and humanity, as well as all the structures and processes. The Three Centers in a human, which Gurdjieff said were the Intellectual Centre, the Emotional Centre and the Moving Centre, are an expression of the law of three. Gurdjieff taught his students to think of the law of three forces as essential to transforming the energy of the human being. The process of transformation requires the three actions of affirmation, denial and reconciliation.


I can see how that is so yes.



> Your ego will experience itself as various states of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma, etc) throughout the process, and it will hurt your body, spirit, and soul when rigid egoic structures (preconceived notions, habitual behavior, emotional reactivity, etc) are blown up to pieces, liquified, sublimated, etc.


Hmm, reminds me of Eckhart Tolle ridiculing the part of the ego he calls "the story of little me".



> These cognitive functions are "rigid egoic structures". Human potential is not so limited that our brains' operations can be fully defined and constrained within these weak structures. They're basically "training wheels".


I also get the impression that they are rigid, but I'm wondering more and more if they are not part of the ego.
The jungian cognitive functions that is.


> You will face your death. Repeatedly. Hence "ego death".
> 
> Like I said, hope you're not too attached to sanity. Good luck!


Sure thanks, your input is appreciated!


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Strontphite said:


> Thanks for sharing.
> 
> That gave me an idea, since they used the word process I was reminded of Freuds primary process thinking.
> Now if we are to take Jung litterally the ego isn't the cognitive functions.
> ...


Speaking of Sigmund Freud I just mentioned him earlier today and here I am in a Freud heavy laced thread 

With CF's and the Ego, the Self, the Conscious, etc etc. As you mentioned the Ego identifies with Dom Function or main Attitude this is where the Psychic/Mental energy ( Libido) ebb's and flow's. But doesn't completely define the Conscious Self or Ego....kinda like the celebrity idea or a Psyche vampire and whatever the main Function = the Blood.



As far as the Id I agree with Jung that it is more complex, Shadow, than Freud's idea, as well as agree somewhat to his idea's. 

This whole subject has a complexity that can't be summed up with just one idea more like several ideas depending on the situation. Freud focused on a more of a PTSD side of things


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

myjazz said:


> Speaking of Sigmund Freud I just mentioned him earlier today and here I am in a Freud heavy laced thread
> 
> With CF's and the Ego, the Self, the Conscious, etc etc. As you mentioned the Ego identifies with Dom Function or main Attitude this is where the Psychic/Mental energy ( Libido) ebb's and flow's. But doesn't completely define the Conscious Self or Ego....kinda like the celebrity idea or a Psyche vampire and whatever the main Function = the Blood.
> 
> ...


Firstly thank you for sharing.
I considered retireing from perc if I didn't get any substantial feedback here.

I think the reason it is so hard to agree on what the ID is,
is because we only see the result of it after it have been coloured by our main process.
So Freud saw his libido coloured by Si, Jung saw it coloured by Ni.
Jungs genious is that he mangaed to see past this and discovered that there was a coloring process.
Still he didn't fully realize that the complexity he percieved was more or less a result of his own Ni.
The archetypes, is after all a symbolic pointer to the complexity to our DNA and cultural history.
That is in one way pretty simple, and in one way pretty complex.
His affinity to Ti, just like you also myjazz, gives a further reason to add a sense of complexity to the phenomena.
My Ni preserves the complexity at one level, but my Te demands it simplified.
Just like Freuds Te demanded it simplified within the realm of Si.

We then stands with a phenomena that cannot be purely viewed in it's essence.
As it is the root of the viewing process itself.
It is the root of our conciousness and it eludes us, as it is forever moved outside the horizon.
The closest we get is biology, but biology is just Ti or Te trying to define names for physical structures.
We can use our scanners to look into those structures, but when we do, we must use our colored theories.
Our understanding therefore rests on the colored process, and how that color makes the world seem.
Theories like quantum physics point to a world that is very unlike the sensory illusion our senses tell us is happening.
I suspect that the phenomena of the ID is just as elusive and strange as those theories hint at.
As it is after all excisting in that same reality and hence follow the rules of that reality.
Especially those rules that we have a hard time detecting and coming to terms with.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Strontphite said:


> Firstly thank you for sharing.
> I considered retireing from perc if I didn't get any substantial feedback here.
> 
> I think the reason it is so hard to agree on what the ID is,
> ...


I agree it's like a coloring process which is why there is different shades/flavors of people. People become the result's of there coloring process which is kinda what Jung was getting at. 

When people is at the process of unable to see past there color process is when it is important for them to seek there other shade's. This also in a way is still there color process by using let's say Tert/Inf Function to help align the ID in the color the Ego can respond to.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

myjazz said:


> I agree it's like a coloring process which is why there is different shades/flavors of people. People become the result's of there coloring process which is kinda what Jung was getting at.
> 
> When people is at the process of unable to see past there color process is when it is important for them to seek there other shade's. This also in a way is still there color process by using let's say Tert/Inf Function to help align the ID in the color the Ego can respond to.


That is an interesting perspective.
And it stands to reason why people of different colorings, percieve each other as selfish.
As you see ID manifested in a color that seems not appropriate in relation to ones own ego.

I agree that the individual ego needs to channel ID in more than one function.
Also from a metaperspective an individual with knowledge of functions can take into account what function
is most likely to give them gratification of their drives.
Just because they always drive the Dom/Aux combo or the Dom/tert loop doesn't mean that the tert/inf axis,
can't be a better outlet at times. In fact the balancing effect if often worth more in unbalanced cases.
Going to the Dom/Aux combo is probably the best for Dom/tert loops though.
However there is usually a good explanation in the environment for why expression of the aux is more or less impossible.
You usually see a weak misguided prototype attempt at the aux in such cases.
But I'm getting outside the main focus here.
The JCF dynamics have been covered to infinity other places.

The main point is that as the ID makes demands of the ego, the ego will always redirect it towards the most valued function.
However the superego wants a say too.
And here is where the dynamics can be a bit tricky to tease apart.
Is it that functions that negotiate with the superego.
Or has the superego demands already been calculated before the ID gets directed towards the functions?
To me it seems more likely that the functions are only passive recipents of libido.
And that the battle between superego and ID decides where it is appropriate to express the wants.
Then terms like Dom/tert loop and being in the grip of the inferior makes much more sense.

Whatever expression of the concious four are chosen, 
it is chosen because that leads to the most acceptable expression for the superego.
Maybe an FJ lives in an environment where Fe is frowned upon.
So the superego is very adamant about too much libido being given to Fe.
The unhealthy adaptations of this, 
makes the symptoms of people in the grip or in loops much more theoretically sound.

Question is, is this a legitimate way of looking at it?
Or is there an alternative way that I'm not seeing.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Strontphite said:


> That is an interesting perspective.
> And it stands to reason why people of different colorings, percieve each other as selfish.
> As you see ID manifested in a color that seems not appropriate in relation to ones own ego.
> 
> ...


And here is where the complexity of the Psyche elevates and yet pattern's still exist.
Yeah, I would say what you mentioned is a way to look at it.



As far as the Id, ego, Super ego, etc and which calculations get's directed depends on the variables. These variables can make it even more tricky to tease apart. For instance one variable you mentioned "the environment may look down on "X - CF" this can cause loops, grips, over charged Dom - etc"


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

myjazz said:


> As far as the Id, ego, Super ego, etc and which calculations get's directed depends on the variables. These variables can make it even more tricky to tease apart. For instance one variable you mentioned "the environment may look down on "X - CF" this can cause loops, grips, over charged Dom - etc"


Interesting concept of the overcharged dom.
Need to think about that for a while.

Yeah, I guess the whole negotiation process between the ego, id and superego is complicated.

Still from my pov I think that it is important to make sure that the first bridge between the elements are complete. (before I try to branch out into any serious level of complexity)
Reading Freud I come across the assertion that the superego is a relatively unconcious part of the ego.
If the superego is a part of the ego, and that part is unconcious.
Then the influence of the superego, should be something automatically added onto the ego's choice.
This outside of the ego's awareness.
It just happens and libido is sent in the most favorable direction, that the system can tolerate.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Strontphite said:


> Interesting concept of the overcharged dom.
> Need to think about that for a while.
> 
> Yeah, I guess the whole negotiation process between the ego, id and superego is complicated.
> ...


If I recall, comparing 

Superego to the parental figure ( subconscious/pre-conscious, conscious or unconscious)

Ego to the adult self ( subconscious/pre-conscious, conscious, or unconscious )

Id to the child ( unconscious )


The direction of the Libido also determines as to what's doing the guiding The Ego, Superego, or the Id?
Under normal circumstances then the favorable direction that is best suited...such as Ego or superego

The Id will direct it towards favorable of one's want's or desire's.

The Ego, Superego, and Id is kinda like how the Dom/Aux can blend together making it hard to determine which is which..who's calling the shot's. Mainly because there is only one mind and different process's or element's within this structure.
By this then the influence may not always be automatic toward's the Ego. If the Superego and Ego has a companionship like the Dom/Aux then this influence would be more fluid like...the superego/Aux backs up the Ego/Dom. Also the outburst of the Id (or Inferior) would be more noticeable.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

I come back to your answer now that I have gotten my initial structural curiosity of the id, ego and superego solved.
(Yes I went and borrowed Freuds ego and id in the library!)
Anyway, my initial comments where my initial reactions 
and should in no shape or form be held as any conclusive progress on this topic.



cir said:


> Low hanging fruit answer: shadow functions are a very specialized theory/application of generalized psychological shadows. While doing shadow work, everything you listed (identity, reality testing, defensive mechanisms, object relationships, etc) will be confronted and tested. Synthesis roughly corresponds to enantiodromia, or "The Law of Three" in the process enneagram.
> 
> Your ego will experience itself as various states of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma, etc) throughout the process, and it will hurt your body, spirit, and soul when rigid egoic structures (preconceived notions, habitual behavior, emotional reactivity, etc) are blown up to pieces, liquified, sublimated, etc.


Firstly dragging in synthesis as the enantiodromia or the law of three.
This can of worms deserves it's own little session.
Now if the ego is to have this ability as a function, what does it tell us about the ego's structure?
It strikes me as a sort of editing tool, that reshapes the ego to make conflicting parts connect without friction.
A way to get parts of the ego that has been repressed due to conflict reorganized into the structure again.










As you can see the robot isn't too thrilled about the process, but does it anyway.

From this perspective it is easy to see that since we have this function.,
reorganizing the ego to get over past limitations is a neverending process as you pointed out.
Of course as Freud wrote, the ID has many identifications in the ego that are substitutes for objects lost.
So when you mess with the object identifications you will experience the pain of the loss it is trying to replace.
That is partly why letting go of ego identifications is so hard.
The ID will be very upset and throw a tantrum.
This will impose a severe level of anxiety on the ego, your defence mechanisms will kick in
and you need to deal with the inner pain as if it was a real event.

Of course if you manage to heal that trauma and sublimate the energy released in this process.
Then you have in many ways changed your character for the better.
This is after all editing of you character on the deepest level.
The pent up energy locked into a repressed form need some kind of outlet.
It is after all pure demanding ID libido.
Jung reportedly taking several years in a state of depressed melancholic effort 
to not identify with the shadow and all it's symbolic loss.

At least that is how this syntetic function seems to work from my POV.
I'll cover the others in other posts.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

In my opinion, if you want to associate Cognitive Functions with Freudian ego functions it is necessary to first say what aspects of the psyche JCF's actually influence. Jung to my knowledge never went into that level of detail. Some people think JCF's are rote mental processes, other treat them as behavior habits, and others, such as those in Socionics, see them as informational filters. Jung himself, as I understand it, calls functions just a theory of archetypes. All of these are very general, and not fleshed through enough to be dealing apples to apples in Freud theory. 

The ego functions you mentioned are actually linked back to individual types in Enneagram theory, if you're interested in that - specific object relations, ego ideal, and defense mechanisms for each of the 9 types.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Figure said:


> In my opinion, if you want to associate Cognitive Functions with Freudian ego functions it is necessary to first say what aspects of the psyche JCF's actually influence. Jung to my knowledge never went into that level of detail. Some people think JCF's are rote mental processes, other treat them as behavior habits, and others, such as those in Socionics, see them as informational filters. Jung himself, as I understand it, calls functions just a theory of archetypes. All of these are very general, and not fleshed through enough to be dealing apples to apples in Freud theory.


I see, I will open Psychological types and see if I can't tease something obscure out of it.
I'm aware that there are many takes on functions.
Guess I'm rapidly approaching nomansland here.
Still I'm pretty sure that the ego identified with the cognitive functions in Jungs view,
need to doublecheck that.




> The ego functions you mentioned are actually linked back to individual types in Enneagram theory, if you're interested in that - specific object relations, ego ideal, and defense mechanisms for each of the 9 types.


Yes I'm aware that it links back to the enneagram.
Object relations are new to me, I'm pretty confident about defence mechanisms.
I assume the ego ideals are what some refer to as holy ideas.

@*myjazz* 
It seems to me that you suggest that the different parts have different targets.
That might very well be so.
I can in many was see the dominant attitude as something felt to be me.
While the aux feels like it is morally responsible and supporting the ego ideal.
While decending into the inferior has a certain feel of indulging.
In many ways aligning with the Bebee model of archetypal carriers.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

@Figure
An update to my latest findings.

From a cursory glance at Freuds ego and id, and Jungs psychological types.
What seem to be the concepts in common is the idea of projection and introjection.
Out from these two concepts Jung runs in a very different direction than Freud did.
As Freud kept pointing to the ego as a "body-I".
In my view this is a clear indication of Freuds Si bias.
The ego apears to Freud as sensory oriented as that is where Freuds ego is oriented.
Jung is able to see past this illusion to a certain extent, but is no less the victim of his own Ni paradigm.

Further I think that Freuds criteria on something becoming concious, is very similar to Jungs criteria for thinking.
It seems like Jungs idea of Ni is that it can look into the preconcious where the elements have not yet
formed into concrete concepts for thinking to grasp or feeling to put a value on.
His sensation is what Freud termed the perception-conciousness.
However Jung went much further in splitting these up in terms of the projective or introjective quality of each level.
Freud don't seem to give feeling much room in the pyche, crowding it into the id as lust 
and into superego as a bad concience.

It seems to me that the real difference between Jung and Freud is that 
they have a different take on the processes interacting with the ego.
Freuds id/superego is in many ways as he himself said to Jung 
the fortress he rose to keep the dark mud of occultism out.
No wonder Jung who was very much into intuitive realms had to break those concepts 
and provide an alternative conceptual basis for what the contents of the unconcious constituted.

It also explains Freuds whole Oedipus-complex where every identification is massively introjected.
Si is of course as all introverted functions an introjected perspective.
It stands to reason that Freud experienced his own complex as having gone trough this process.
His focus on the oral, anal and phallic phase are all very sensory focuses and for Freud
as a Si type would in his mind be the most central focus that his ego would constelate around.
However probably only Si-types would experience these phases and their impression in such a way.
It would be very probable that other types, would have discarded these Si impressions into the unconcious.

Of course this is just me trying to tie together these things in a way that makes both systems make sense.
So that they can be better used in tandem.
Of course there are a multitude of other issues I didn't touch on as I honed in on getting a conceptual clarity here.
And anyone not very familiar with both Jung and Freud will probably have lost me at this point.

Anyone familiar with both are welcome to give critique, I'd love to hear different opinions on these issues.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Strontphite said:


> In my view this is a clear indication of Freuds Si bias.
> The ego apears to Freud as sensory oriented as that is where Freuds ego is oriented.


I believe that Freud was limited in his ability to further his ideas such as Libido. He was limited to associating the Libido with sexual energy because he wasn't able to relate it to anything past that. Which is where Jung came in and furthered the Libido idea or understanding with Psychic/Mental Energy where the complexity was lost on Freud.

With Jung the Ego was more or less the Conscious, so in a way what Jung came to realize is that people's Conscious/Ego is directed by different Function orientations and Attitude's...not the actual Ego itself.

Which as further's the difference with different people in how they handle/deal/act or go about situations like trauma.
(Psychic - Psyche)


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

myjazz said:


> I believe that Freud was limited in his ability to further his ideas such as Libido. He was limited to associating the Libido with sexual energy because he wasn't able to relate it to anything past that. Which is where Jung came in and furthered the Libido idea or understanding with Psychic/Mental Energy where the complexity was lost on Freud.
> 
> With Jung the Ego was more or less the Conscious, so in a way what Jung came to realize is that people's Conscious/Ego is directed by different Function orientations and Attitude's...not the actual Ego itself.
> 
> ...


Yes very good observation, his libido is very crude and is mostly there to honor introjected sensuality.
But, I think Freud like most Si doms was able to see the complexity of it.
He just didn't want to go there.

An example of where he comes upon the kinds of complexity he realizes the unconcious must have.


> When we now have to set up a third not repressed unconcious, we have to admit that the character
> of the unconcious starts to lose it's significance for us. I becomes a many-faceted quality,
> that don't allow us to take the broad and indispensable conclutions we had been looking forward to.


As we can see, Freud was very aware that therewas complexity there.
He just didn't feel it was very important to pay much attention to that complexity.
He had a project, a fortress to erect againt occultism.
Nitpicky details would have to yield to make way for this monument of sensual introjection.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Strontphite said:


> As we can see, Freud was very aware that therewas complexity there.
> He just didn't feel it was very important to pay much attention to that complexity.
> He had a project, a fortress to erect againt occultism.
> Nitpicky details would have to yield to make way for this monument of sensual introjection.


Freud did realize there was more to conscious/pre conscious/unconscious. 

It's kinda odd you mention Freud and occultism and going against it. Because to me Freud was just as much into it than his claims against Jung. Freud's own Ego got in his way, imo.

It's as I said before I agree with a lot of what Freud's ideas that came about but I also agree with Jung's on furthering those idea's. As you pointing out adapting the two idea's together
But we are getting into a Freud-Jung tandem >.<


----------

