From

Lipot Szondi, Ich-Analyse [Ego
Analysis]

Translated by

Arthur C. Johnston

© 2008

By Arthur C. Johnston, PhD

Please Observe: The copyright of this article (in German or in
English) belongs to the Szondi Institute and to Dr. Arthur C. Johnston. This means
you may not duplicate this article without their permissions.

CHAPTER
XI

PROJECTION

Concept and Forms of Projection

The process, which one calls
projection far and wide in present psychology, was first discovered in the
psychopathology of the paranoid (Freud). Almost at the same time was revealed
the fact that the projection process also played an outstanding role in the normal perception of the external world.
This means thus: Humans can project under sick and under physiological
conditions. The discovery of the collective unconscious (C. G. Jung) led to the
acceptance of collective
representations and original forms (archetypes) and with that one began to
speak of projective collective
representations and archetypes. Under this aspect, numerous mental
phenomena of the primitive soul were
interpreted as projection processes. Thus, in the first place the phenomena of
“archaic identity” and
the “participation mystique”
according to Lévy-Bruhl.

The discovery of the familial unconscious has led to the third
form of projection, namely to the transferring out [der Hinausverlegung]
of familial ancestor forms by means
of choice guiding genotropism. On the basis of the three part division of the
unconscious into three function units, we must speak here of three forms of
projection. These are:

1.     Personal projection, that is, transferring out and restitution of the contents of the
personal repressed unconscious. These have two forms: (a) the pathological and
(b) the physiological.

2.     Collective projection, by which the collective representations and
original forms (archetypes) are transferred out of the collective unconscious.

3.     Familial Projection: Transferring out of definite ancestor
forms out of the familial unconscious
by means of genotropism, which leads to the choice in love, friendship,
profession, illness symptoms, and means of death.

We will explain these three
forms of projection more precisely.

1.   Personal Projection

a)    Pathological
Projection

The analysis of symptom
formation with paranoids gave Freud the reason for the following definition of
projection:

“An internal perception becomes repressed,
and, after it has experienced a certain distortion as perception from the outer world, appears into consciousness
as a substitute for its content. The distortion with persecution delusions
consists of an affect transformation; what should have been perceived as love inside is perceived as hate from the outside.”1

Freud links the following to
this definition: The repression process consists actually in a detachment of
libido from persons and things that one has loved previously. This process
takes place completely silently and is therefore unconscious and inconspicuous.
For the process of distortion of the repressed in the case of paranoids, Freud
gives the following paradigm: The original inner perception is that of
homosexuality: “I (a man) love him (a man).” Or: “I (a woman)
love her (a woman).” On the other hand, the ego resists energetically
however and proclaims: “I do not love him -- I indeed hate him.”
Thus with the man. Or with the woman: “I do not love her. I indeed hate
her.” Also this affect transformation in the case of the paranoid is
always still unconscious. Only the transferring out of the repressed and
disguised homosexual content makes itself noisily noticeable in the outer
world. The ill person becomes conscious of: “I do not love him (respectively her)—I hate him (respectively her) because he (respectively she) persecutes me.”2

Already here we emphasize
the results of Fate Analysis [Schicksalsanalyse], according to which the
paranoid not only the same-sexuality love but also other needs -- thus in
particular the wish to kill the partner (the Cain) -- can be projected.

On the basis of this empirically found mechanism, Freud
established:

1.     Projection is the
transferring of inner perceptions into the external world.

2.     Fundamentally, it is however
a healing process, “which makes
the repressed to come back again and the libido to return back to the persons
abandoned by it.” Nevertheless, this returned libido contains—as
hate and persecution—a negative designation.

3.     “It is not correct to
say,” Freud writes further -- “The inner repressed perceptions were
projected outward: we see much more in this that inner raised-up material
returns from the external.”3

Therefore projection becomes
-- as a spontaneous healing process -- a defense mechanism on the one hand to
keep the drive dangers of homosexual and Cain impulses far removed -- in a
healthy sense -- from consciousness and on the other hand is able nevertheless
to maintain the intimate connection with the object.

b)
Physiological Projection.

The Original
Projection: Participation

Already with the explanation
of the sick form of projection, Freud calls our attention to the fact that
projection can also occur where there is no conflict. It concerns in this case of projection also a general, normal
physiological problem.

The original cause of
definite sensory feelings is not looked for in us, and we transfer it outward.
Thus this normal process earns the name of normal
projection.

In the attitude toward the
outer world, we, therefore, allocate a regular portion to the projection
process. The projection of internal perceptions into the outer world is a
“primitive mechanism – to which, for example, our sense perceptions
are also subject.” Human beings are indebted to this mechanism for the
separation of the interior world from the external world and thus with it the
discovery of the environment. S. Ferenczi emphasizes the same thing also. He
spoke already in 1909 of “original projection.” “One can
assume that to the newborns everything that his senses perceive occur wholly
and at the same time singly. Only later he learns to separate the hostile
things, which do not obey his will, as the external world from the ego -- that
is, the feeling from the perception. That was the first projection process, the
original projection, and thus this
indicated way can be used in the later paranoid development in order to push
still more of the ego into the outer world.”4

*

C. G. Jung expresses the
opinion that projection rests on an “archaic
identity” in the sense of Lévy-Bruhl. Identity means
unconscious and previous being the same with the object -- an identity, which
was never the object of consciousness. This archaic form of mentally being the
same of the subject with the object is out of a necessity broken up, and only
after the dissolving of the identity can one, according to Jung, speak of
projection.

The necessity of dissolving
the archaic identity steps in then “when through the absence of the
projected contents, the adaptation essentially is impaired and therefore
returning projected contents into the subject becomes desirable. From this
moment, the hitherto partial identity receives the character of the projection.”5

Projection is thus according to Jung a noticeable
archaic identity; the object has become one’s own subjective critic or
one has become the other.6 The differentiation of the process of
projection from that of introjection is illuminated in the following
definition: “Projection is therefore an introversion process, in which in opposition to introjection it
brings about no inclusion and no assimilation but a differentiation and
separation of the subject from the object.”7 According to
Jung, projection occurs thus as a result of the breaking up of the original
identity between subject and object. This manner of projection we call
secondary, since we call the primary projection “participation.”

*

We have consequently been
able to learn two different mechanisms of the projection process. According to
the Freudian mechanism, projection consists of the following four steps:

1.     Repression of an inner striving;

2.     Distortion of the repressed
contents;

3.     Transferring out of the
distorted contents;

4.     Recurrence of the inner
raised-up contents from the outside.

The Jungian interpretation
recognizes three events:

1.     Being the same of the
subject with the object: Archaic identity, which we call participation;

2.     Difficulties in adaptation
through the absence of projected contents;

3.     Restitution of the projected
contents in the subject through the dissolution of the original being the same
with the object.

How does the primary
identity between subject and object occur? We find Jung’s answer in
another work, where he states: The early
identity rests “on the projection of subjective contents.”8

At first subjective contents
are therefore projected into the object. Thus a partial identity -- a being the
same of the subject with the object, that is, participation -- occurs. Then arises
the necessity of restitution of the subjective parts from the object into the
subject, and through the breaking up of this identity, the person becomes
conscious that he is separated from the object. Jung says, “This
restitution appears through the conscious recognition of projected contents,
that is, through the acknowledgement of the ‘symbol value’ of the
earlier objects.”9

For our further explanation
it is important to emphasize that before and
after the condition of being the same
of the subject with the object a projection
has taken place. On the one hand the identity indeed is based on the “primary” projection of subjective
contents, thus on participation; on the other hand secondary projection is
based on the restitution of the earlier identity.

c) Analytic
Transference as Projection

Transference is interpreted in the analytic situation as a particular form of
personal projection. As is well known, psychoanalysis understands under transference the particular feeling
relationship of the one analyzed to the analyst, which, according to Freud, is
characterized by the following traits:

1.     The feeling binding in
transference goes far beyond a rational degree.

2.     It varies from tender
devotion to obstinate hostility. The transference has consequently a positive and a negative form.

3.
In the positive transference the patient projects all his or her
unconscious expectant love demands and love attitudes onto the physician. In
the negative phase all hate relationships with the parents are transferred onto
the analyst. We call the positive form of
transference: participation; the negative form, however, secondary projection.

4.     Positive as well as negative
transference can enter into the service of resistance.

The collective and familial
kinds of transference contents work the same way as the personal.

2. Collective Projection as Participation

When one takes the view that
“archaic identity” is based on projection and that nevertheless the
projection is the same primary
process that brings about the partial being
one and being the same of the
subject with the object of the external world, that is, participation, then we must examine the contents of the primary collective projection first of all with
so-called “primitives.”

(a)  The Role
of Collective Projections

in the
Thinking of Primitives

On the basis of the works of Lévy-Bruhl10, it is
today generally assumed that the mental life of primitives is subject to the
law of “participation mystique.”

“Participation mystique” is “the mysterious
participation of heterogeneous things with one another, which is effected
through mysterious powers, which are effective in them.”11

It consists in a mystic
union of subject and object, the power from which the subject may not be
distinguished essentially from the object. The subject and the object are
partly identical with one another -- the result of this “having part with
one another.” Through mysterious powers, which actually cause this
“participation,” consist of a “partial identity” and a “quasi-identity,” which is based on a “previous being
one of subject and object.”

*

According to
Lévy-Bruhl, the “fundamental law of the sameness of all
beings” is characteristic for primitives.

This sameness of all beings
is conditioned through an extraordinarily effective might and power and through
a something “that at the same time is whole and diverse, material and
spiritual, and in continued exchange passing from one to the other.”12
These changes, thus shifting might and power, were first introduced by R. H.
Cordington under the name “mana” in ethnology. Holmes identifies
these with the “imunu” of the natives of the Purari-Deltas and
states that this original material “is united with all things, nothing
occurs without it: no living being or lifeless thing can exist without it. It
is the soul of things…It possesses a personality, but only according to
the particular characteristic of beings, which it fulfills…It can be
effective in a good or bad sense, can cause or feel pain, can possess or be
driven out from the possession of a thing. Not tangible, it can make known its
presence therefore as sometimes the air or as the wind. It penetrates
everything, which in the eyes of the people makes up the life of the
Purari-Delta.”13

F. E. Williams, who observed
the same natives, states, “Everything that the native feared because of
illness, which may be inflicted on him; everything, before which he recoiled
from because of its strangeness; everything that he cherished to obtain an
advantage for himself; everything he kept safe through love -- all that he had
designated as imunu.”14
The belief in the original power of mana or imunu had for a result—writes
Lévy-Bruhl—that the primitive felt and thought the sameness among all beings. Although the primitive well
knew the difference of forms, he did not differentiate the living being from
the lifeless thing -- as we do -- into different kinds and classes. The
primitive concerned himself only about the question: Whether a being or thing
is filled or not with the fear-evoking power and might of mana or imunu; when
yes, in what degree is this power contained in it and if this being or thing
filled with mana is able to cause good or evil.

Mana, the imunu -- or as one
otherwise calls this mysterious material by different primitive people -- is
the transferable mystic power and might, which the “having part with one another” affects the different living
beings and lifeless things.

The results of this
“participation mystique” in the feeling and thinking of the
primitive Lévy-Bruhl summarizes as follows:

(1)     The Fundamental Sameness of all Beings

The mana or imunu is the same life principle in all
living beings and lifeless things. The same living material works its mystic
power in stones and rocks, which -- like living beings -- grow and multiply.
This same living power animates trees and plants. There is in the
representations of primitives scarcely a difference between humans and animal.
Animals live according to the manner of humans; thus tigers, elephants,
crocodiles can if they wish assume human form (metamorphosis) or also appear in
half animal and half human intermediate forms. These ideas lead to the
acceptance of totem animal ancestors and plant ancestors.

(2)
The Solidarity of the Individual with his Group

This is likewise the result of the participative
identifying manner of thinking of primitives. Not the individual but the group
(clan) is the real whole with them.15 Thus “group
relationships” arise. Partial identity and “mystic
participation” bring about an almost physical
dependence among the members of a family. Thus Smith, Dale and many others
report that the primitive belongs not to himself but to the kinship group. The
members of a kinship group are -- to speak with a Bible expression -- “so
to speak at the same time also of another member.”16
“The individual is for the family what the members are for the living
body -- head, arm or leg.”17 The common ground of their
beings, their life materials, briefly the quasi-identity, is with the
primitives particularly among the closest relatives, that is between father and
son and between brothers, the greatest. With different groups of people this
quasi-identity of father and son lasts up to the declaration of manhood. Before
circumcision, the son is described in many places as “no one, separate
from his father’s own individuality.”18

The intimate community between family members shows
itself in the custom with the Indians of Guyana who must have the same diet as
the ill persons of their family and also close relatives. (Report of Dr. W. E.
Roth.19) So that the life of a newborn should not be endangered, the
parents, particularly the father, must themselves undergo specific taboo
ceremonies.

The belief in the “expanding individuality to
more people,” thus in the quasi-identity of brothers, often leads to
tragic results. Thus in many places the brother -- on the basis of identity --
demands to care for the wife of his brother. The brother believes that they are
almost “interchangeable.” If now a man murders the wife of his
brother and who will not give himself up, thus it happens that the husband of
his wife speaks the following with the advice of the oldest of the village to
the murderer: “Speak not! You are guilty! And since that we are brothers and are one, your crime is also my
crime, and I will stand up for you. (Observation out of the region of the
Ogooué.20) Sexual relations between a wife and the brothers
of her husband are not seen as adulterous acts for a marriage. With many
primitives the brother has the duty to marry the widow. Another curiosity,
which stems out of the quasi-identity of the brothers, is that -- as is
expressed by Hutereau -- brother or parent murder is not punished; “It is
always considered as an unfortunate accident, and the murderer has, when he has
right of inheritance, exactly the same demands as the heir of his victim, as if
he had not brought this about. Often times the widow of the murdered man
chooses him as a husband.”21

The solidarity of the members among each other in the
social group brings along with it that the marriage is in the first place an
incorporation into the group and is not an affair for the individual. Out of
the same solidarity originate the custom of blood revenge and the right of the
group over the property of each of its members.

(3)
The Expansion of the Personality through Participation

Out of the partial identity and the participative
thinking of primitives, it follows that the
boundary of the personality is expanded. Thus comes the so-called “equipment” (accessories), thus all
secretions and excretions, such as body hair, nails, tears, urine, excrement,
semen, sweat, etc., that is the same as the individual. They belong not only to
him, but they are the same as he himself.
The expansion of the personality on the basis of participation brings along
with it that all the possessions of the personal property of a person is he himself. (Therefore the bewitching
by working on the accessories.)

The participative identification manner of thinking of
primitives leads to the belief in the “double,” the “second
ego” (atai, tamaniu, etc.) -- that is, in the “shadow” and
the “exact likeness,” mirror image, which is again the person
himself or herself. Here belongs also the belief in the “nunu.”22

An example: “A woman has imagined herself before
the birth of her child that a coconut, a fruit of the breadfruit tree or also
another similar object, stands in an original solidarity with its fruit. When
then the child comes into the world, it is the nunu of the coconut, the fruit of the breadfruit tree, etc. When it
grows there, there can be no price to eat the thing with which it is bound so
mysteriously; otherwise, one can become sick. No one believes in an actual
relationship of children to the thing or in an actual origination of children
from it; the child is a kind of echo of objects.”23

(4) The Doubling of “the
Personality through Participation.” Duality

(See
later the section on “Collective Inflation.”)

(5)  The Presence of “Spirits” in
all Phenomena and Functions

The
primitive soul “projects” into all things a power, a might, a being
that moves these things. One shows a primitive of the Lenguas of Chaco, for
example, a compass needle, which constantly points to the North; he thus
believes that in the compass “a little spirit sat, who immediately indicates
the way in one direction.”24 Another example: The adults with
the Koryak explained the mechanism of the phonograph: “A living being
that is capable of imitating the voices of human beings sits in the box.”25
They called it the “old man.”

The
man, the compass, and the boxes of phonographs are bearers of mana, and one of the functions in man
and in the thing is to be cared for by a particular being. Thus the
“bapuka” provides, for example, the being for hearing. If a bang
frightens the being “bapuka,” consequently it fails in its service
for hearing. Also the primitive explains the reproductive process by the
working within of the smallest being. “He believes in the actual, active
being present of one or more small perfectly trained beings inside the individuals,
and these illusions exempt him from the necessity to devote attention to the
mechanisms of actual happenings.”26

(6) The Confrontation of Matter and
Spirit

This
confrontation does not exist with the primitive. Out of each material and each
body radiates a mystic spiritual power; each spiritual being also has a physical part. The African primitive
believes that the material is a form of the soul. The concept of a pure spiritual being is unrecognized by
the primitive.

(7)
Genius, Spirit and Protective Spirit of a Species.

The
Archetype of a Species

When the
“cultured human being” represents for himself a picture of a
species and speaks of the genius of a species -- be it the species of a plant,
animal or human -- he has thus formed for himself a “general abstract
idea” for the species. If he meets now in reality an example of this
species, he thus sets up in the place of the abstract idea of the species a
concrete, sensual tangible form.

The
“symbolic” personification of a species as genius [ed.: a special
characteristic or spirit] comes -- thus Lévy-Bruhl maintains -- after
the concept.

With the primitives,
on the other hand, there is no clear general, abstract idea. The
genius—the life principle—of an animal or plant species comes about
with the primitive not after a concept formation of a species, but the genius
of a species is in his thinking actually the
origin and the concept of life materials (mana, imunu) that has a part in
the individual being of animal or plant or human species. Animals and plants
have an ancestor, which as “oldest brother” and as “chief,
commander, or king,” represents the mystic life principle of the genre
and at the same time works as the originator and protective spirit of the
species.

Thus, the beaver has
as ancestor the “oldest brother” of all beavers, the buffalo the
“commander buffalo,” the rice the “mother of rice,” the
rubber plant the “giant rubber plant” etc. as the genius of the
species or -- as Lévy-Bruhl himself expressed it -- as
“archetypes” and as original form of the genre.27

The individual being
of the genre stands with the oldest brother, with the “mother,”
with the “king” of the genre in a participative connection and
receives its “soul material,” its life principle, from this
personified being the genius of the species.

(8) The
Presence of the Ancestors in the Individual

With
good reason Lévy-Bruhl asserts that the individual with many primitives
means “at the same time one and
many,” that is, “a
geometric place of many participations” (lieu de participations).28

The
boundary of the individual with primitives is not only expanded through the
“equipment,” “ego seconds,” the identical image, the
shadow, and the mirror image but in particular through the being held within
and dwelling within, that is, through the
immanence of the ancestors in the individual. (Compare this to the ancestor
forms in Fate Psychology [Schicksalspsychologie]. The individual participates “in a being who is not completely
merged with him, who was there before him, and who after his death was
separated from him and during his life is still united only with him. It is
consubstantial with him and remains a part of his personality.”29 With the Australians, a cult apparatus,
the so-called “tjurunga,”
unites the individual with his totemic ancestors.

The
tjurunga30 are diamond
shaped cult apparatus made out of wood or stone. They are stored in sacred
caves. On their surface are these flat, oval, and long cult objects covered
with signs. All holy cult apparatus like the tjurunga are hidden from women and
children.31 According to the report of Strehlow, upon hearing the
tjurunga, also the so-called buzz-wood,
swung with a long string, he said that it sounded with a high buzzing noise.32

The
length of the tjurunga varies from 20 cm up to about 1 m and the width from 2
to 9 cm. The stone tjurunga is called by the Aranda “talkara”; they
are wider and shorter than the wood ones. The symbolic meaning of the tjurunga
is represented by the following on the basis of the best descriptions of Stehlow
according to Winthuis:

The
tjurunga is:

1.
the
body of a totem ancestor;

2.
the
body of men;

3.
the
body of totems;

4.
the
creative essence that the totem animal brings forth and increases when the
tjurunga is covered with fat and red ochre.33

The
tjurunga stands for “all of the
same body of men and his totem ancestors; it unites the individual with his
personal totem ancestor and in reality ensures him protection, lends him the
iningukua, while the loss of the tjurunga draws forth revenge upon him.”34

The
tjurunga is however not only the cult apparatus, which unites profoundly the
individual with the totem ancestor in a mystic participation; it is also the
union between the person and his totem animal or his totem plant. The tjurunga
increases and makes these totem animals and totem plants fat exactly as the
totem ancestor has done it. The tjurunga functions consequently as “the other body” of each man,
writes Strehlow, which outfits him with creative power and secures for him
protection against enemies. In that, Erich Neumann sees in the tjurunga the
symbol of the “body-self.”35

The
mental life of primitives is consequently determined through the mystic
participation; ego psychologically that means: through the collective projections.

These
propositions of Lévy-Bruhl are the most often treated; they have
recently found a precise confirmation through the experimental drive procedure
(Szondi Test).

One
of my co-workers, Dr. Emmerich Percy, assistant physician of Dr. Albert
Schweitzer in Lambarene, Equatorial Africa, has given the ten series drive test
to more than a hundred Bush Negroes of different tribes. The most important
result for us, perhaps, of his investigations is the experimental statement that the most
frequent and at the same time the most quantitative tense function of
primitive egos is total projection (p
= -!, -!!). The ego of these primitives shows chiefly the picture of the
so-called “mystic archaic ego”
(Sch = 0 -) or the autistic,
cosmodualistic ego (Sch = + -). About the importance of these findings of
E. Percy we will speak of again thoroughly in the third part of this book with
“Delusion Formations.”

(b) The Role of Collective Projections with Cultured People

We
see the essential in the appearance of a collective projection in the phenomenon
of participation – that is, in the “being the same and being one” of two objects. Everywhere
where one finds collective identities,
we must think about the collective contents.

Jungian
psychology was in fact untiring in the research of such identities in
relationship to the forming [Gestaltungen]
of human existence (Daseins). Thus it researched the collective forms [Gestaltens]
of the drive life, the spirits, the numerous forms of mythological and
religious stirring experiences, the values functions of the soul, and the
preservation of the original nature of man in the form of
“foreknowledge.”

The
collective similarity of the forming principle with all humans led Jung back to
the projections of collective original forms, the archetypes.

Each
drive fulfills in its manifestation an eternal, archaic, finally established
original form. The sameness of men in their drive manifestations was
consequently the result that each man transfers the same, eternal archaic drive
form and the same “drive archetypes” in the personal formations [Gestalts]
of his drive life. The sameness in the drive life occurs on the basis of
projection of the same archaic drive forms.

The
being the same and being one in spiritual and unspiritual definite human groups
at certain times of history are based on the sameness of the projections of the
same archetypes, which form the spiritual and respectively the unspiritual.

The
being the same and being one of human groups in the numinous moving emotions of
a religion, a ceremony, and a rite is the numinous projection action of the
same “curing” or “disturbing” collective
representations and archetypes. Jung maintains that the essential content of
all religions -- indeed even all “isms” -- bears an archetypal
numinous character.

Since
each archetype contains a particular feeling value, the projective archetype
determines the sameness of value
functions of the group and the crowd. From the sameness in collective
foreknowledge originates the sameness of the mass groups in relationship to the
collective anxiety -- respectively high or over estimation of certain
individuals (emperor [Kaiser], king, leader [Fuehrer]) in the
history of mankind. The sameness of the original nature preserved in the
collective unconscious conditions by
means of archetype projections and also the being the same of definite groups
in "foreknowledge” of the future.

Briefly:
The identity of human formation in the drive, spiritual, religious, people and
national life is conditioned according to Jung through the collective projection
of archaic original forms out of the collective unconscious of mankind. Differently expressed: Each being the same and being one in the
drive life, spirit life, religious life, and national life is the consequence
from projections of collective representations.

(c) Collective Transference as Participation

Jung
preserves the opinion that the feature of mystic participation plays an
important role not only with primitives but also with cultured people. Thus he
maintains the “transference phenomenon” as a particular form of
“participation mystique.”

With
transference one must assume a magic
action of the object on the subject.

Freud
has treated the problem of collective transference thoroughly in “Massen-psychologie
und Ich-Analyse” [Crowd Psychology and Ego Analysis].36

Freud
investigated the libidinous constitution of a mass in relation to its leader
and come to the following solution formula:

“Such
a primary crowd is a number of individuals, who place one and the same object
in the place of their ego ideals, and as a result of this have identified in
their egos with one another.”37

In
other words: The being the same and being one with members of a crowd with the
leader are based on the collective transference of the same ego parts, the ego ideals,
into the same object, the leader. Freud sees in the identification of the
members in a crowd with one another as the precondition of this process. The
content of the collective projection during a crowd formation is consequently
the collective ego ideal of the crowd. This collective ego ideal receiving this
projection object is the person of the leader.

The
condition for such mass formations is according to Freud that all members of this crowd will be loved by a
person, the leader, in the same way.

The
collective transference is based consequently on the demand for equality of the masses. “All individuals
should be the same with one another, but all will be dominated by one. Many are
the same as individuals, who can identify with one another, and only one who is
superior to all of them alone -- that is the situation that we find realized in
a viable crowd. We dare thus to correct the statement of Trotters that a human
is a herd animal; he is much more
than a herd animal; he is an
individual of a hoard led by a chief.”38 Here we find again an
important point for the corrections of our interpretation, according to which
is that the unconscious end goal of each
projection of being the same and being one is thus participation.

*

And now we come to the discussion of the  so-called “familial
projection,” which represents the specific sphere of activity of fate
analysis [Schicksalsanalyse].

3. Familial Projection

a)   Choice as Familial Projection. Genotropism.

Under familial projection
Fate Psychology understands the projection of those “ancestor
forms” into the outer world, which were preserved in the familial
unconscious from generation to generation of the same family. The carriers of
the ancestor forms are: The genes.

The familial projection -- that is, the transference of hidden ancestor
forms into the outer world -- manifests itself on one hand in unconscious seeking of definite
“ancestor related” persons and, on the other hand, in finding and choosing definite persons in love, in friendship, and in professions,
whose objects are definite persons.

Under “relationship” is here the same phenomenon as in the
“choice relationships” of Goethe’s.
“Those natures, which with meeting one another rapidly affects one and
are determined mutually -- these we call relations.”39
This classic definition of relationships among human beings Fate Psychology has
concurred with the fundamental observation that these
“choice-relations” fundamentally are “gene” related
individuals.40

The choice relationship is
the result of gene relationship. The unconscious seeking and finding, thus the
unconscious choice of certain -- and no other -- objects, is the result of the
familial projection of specific ancestor forms. The unconscious process
with the familial projections expresses itself consequently in the fact that
the person as carrier of certain specific ancestor forms unconsciously goes
into the environment on the search after such persons, who in their familial
unconscious bear partly or completely the same or related ancestor forms as
does the seeker and thus the chooser himself.

The biological concept of “genotropism”
coined by us in 1937 corresponds therefore in ego psychology to the mental
concept of the “familial projection”
of the ego.

The familial projection works consequently in that the person finds
another person gene related or choice
related with him in relationship to the hidden ancestor form, with whom he
unites himself in love or friendship and in occupation or in illness.

The being one and being the same with the partner -- that is,
participation in love, friendship, profession, illness and manner of death --
is the result of the projection of dynamic functioning ancestor forms out of
the gene stock of the familial unconscious into the outer world.41

The gene as carrier of the familial ancestor form unites the individual
not only physically with his ancestor, as the monistic school of genetics
teaches, but also mentally participative with all the “strange”
persons of the environment, who with him -- in the sense of sameness or
relatedness of the latent ancestor forms -- are “gene related” and
consequently “choice related.”

That is the heuristic new thing in the functional, dualistic human genetics of Fate Psychology [Schicksalspsychologie].

Therefore: The fate of the person is determined, but also limited,
precisely through his or her choice behavior in love, friendship, profession,
illness, and manner of death. These fate determined and limited choice
behaviors can occur according to the interpretation of Fate analysis [Schicksalsanalysis]
by the means of the familial projections. Therefore, we maintain that:

The fate of the individual is directed through the familial projection
of the most dynamic ancestor forms.

The immanence of ancestors -- as ancestor forms -- in the familial
unconscious makes possible all real participations in the life of individuals.

Real participation signifies in Fate Analysis the realization of having
part in the other and the realization of being one and being the same with the
others in the form of love, friendship, occupation, illness, and manner of
death.

*

It is indeed not difficult to discover the same phenomena in the
mentioned “immanence of ancestors in the individual” in the
thinking of primitives, which today science simply calls
“heredity.” The genetics of Fate Psychology does not speak however
of a “mystic” but of a “real”
participation of the individual with his ancestors.

The
geneticist calls this power, through which this participation occurs between
members of a family no longer “mana” or “imunu” but
simply “genes,” thus hereditary factors.

One
can never misjudge, writes W. Johannsen, that “something” in the
masculine and feminine germ cell, in the so-called gametes, must be mostly that
which decisively influences or determines the character with the fertilization
of the newly established organism. In the new individual, which is yielded out
of the union of both germ cells and which geneticist call the zygote, one can again find that
“something” which the maternal and paternal gametes brought
together with them. In every day language, one calls these
“somethings” “predispositions”; in genetics it is
called a “gene,” a “hereditary factor.” One can thus --
as in the sense of present day genetics -- say correctly that the
consubstantiality of the individual person with his ancestors physically is maintained and is
determined through the gene. In genetics, everything, which is determined by
genes, is called “genotype” or “hereditary form.”

Johannsen
calls genotype or hereditary form the totality of the
genes of an individual, thus, the whole “hereditary form,” which
results out of the union of the paternal and maternal germ cells.

Genotype
is called in general all that which is determined by the genes. Fate Psychology
uses next to the concept of hereditary forms, the genotype, also another
concept, that of “ancestor forms.” Ancestor form is a lower concept
of the higher concept of “hereditary form.”

We
call ancestor form that specific part
of the whole hereditary forms, which through a specific group of genes
conditions in heredity the specific form of particular ancestors of the family
and determines its return (recessivity) with one or more members of the family.

Thus
one can speak of the specific “ancestor forms” of musicality,
speech aptitude or of the ancestor form of a particular physical conditioned or
mental hereditary illness (like schizophrenia, manic depressive insanity,
epilepsy, sexual perversions, etc.) We assume that a specific gene group -- in its total working and through some
cooperation of external factors -- determines the materialization of a definite
specific ancestor form.

In
the familial unconscious of the
person lies therefore this gene group functionally dynamic and not statically
rigid but functionally dynamic “ancestor forms,” which all have the
tendency to appear again manifestly in the physical and mental constitution of
the carriers of this ancestor form.

This
is also the case, when the gene group conditioned by specific ancestor form is
present in a “full dose” in the hereditary resources. In these
cases the “ancestor forms” manifest themselves in the fate of the
descendant -- that is, in original form of the genotype. Mostly however the
person is no full carrier but a “part carrier” of these
specific genes, which causes the familial ancestor form. One calls these
individuals “heterozygotes” or “conductors.”42
(Their hereditary formulas are Aa, AaBb, AaBbCc, etc.).

If
a recessive gene group is full dose, in double dose, is present (aa, aabb,
aabbcc, etc.), the person is thus pure (recessive
homozygote) in relationship to the concerned ancestor form determined gene;
then these original ancestor forms, thus genotypes, come into appearance. Thus
they appear, for example, in the form of deafness, imbecility, schizophrenia,
manic depressive insanity, epilepsy, and perversion or as musical,
mathematical, psychological or other kinds of aptitudes.

In
single dose (Aa, AaBb, AaBbCc),
halved, and heterozygote condition in the familial unconscious of the person,
these living gene groups, according to our theory, work not genotypic but genotropic. The so-called
“genotropic” working of latent, recessive genes consists, as we
have already often explained,43 in that they direct the choice
behavior of the carriers.

Choice Is Based However on Familial Projection

Psychologically that means: the conductor persons, thus those
individuals, who in part dose or in half dose are the carriers of the gene
groups of an ancestor form, manifest the immanent ancestor form not physically
or mentally in the original form; instead they project the specific ancestor form out of the familial unconscious on those persons who either
likewise are latent carriers -- or more rarely -- are manifest representatives
of the same ancestor forms. These conductor persons unite themselves as a
result of these familial projections in love or friendship, in occupation or in
illness and in manner of death.

The being one and being the
same in the realized participation in love, in friendship, in occupation with
other people, in illness and in manner of death is psychologically the result
of an impulse that  we call
“completion drive” or “participation drive.”

The completion drive --
that is, the participation drive after wholeness and perfection -- is
biologically determined through the half essence of the individual in
relationship to the latent ancestor form. Psychologically the completion drive
is that elementary ego function that we call projection of the familial
ancestor forms. The seeking and the finding, thus the choice of partners in
love, friendship and in occupations, originate from the drive after
completeness, after wholeness, and after perfection, a drive that is satisfied
through the unconscious ego by means of the familial projection of the ancestor
forms. Love, friendship, and occupations (with other people) are consequently
fate possibilities in that the person as part carrier of the ancestor form can
complete his part form of his ancestor with the missing other part of his ancestor
with that of the partner.

In the first book of “Schicksalsanalyse” [Fate Analysis],
the reader will find a long series of examples, which strengthen these
interpretations. Also in the first part of this book, we have been able to
demonstrate that with case number 1 how extensively all choices occur with the
testee and with his family relations in this “completion” of the
ancestor form.

*

The ideas about the familial
form of projection as genotropism we can summarize as follows:

1.
Fate genetics [Schicksalsgenetik] is based on the rule of genotropism. It
establishes empirically that two
conductor persons, who in their hereditary framework and in their gene
stock carry hidden the same or related recessive hereditary factors, which draw
them mutually in love and friendship and in professions (whose professional objects are human beings). They are gene related
and because of that choice related.

2.
The gene relationship, a choice relationship, is consequently the genus
proximum, thus a generic term, whose boundary is transferred far over those
of the genealogical blood relationship. The genealogy of Fate Analysis is based
not only on the blood relationship but also on the choice and gene
relationships.

3.
Fate Psychology expressed the same facts in
different words as follows:

Choice related
persons are carriers and transmitters and seekers and finders of the same
ancestor forms.

Gene related or choice related persons are
thus individuals in whose familial
unconscious are to be found the same ancestor
forms for an integration of the same drive tendencies. Choice related or
gene related persons as carriers of the same ancestor forms project mutually
their latent ancestor forms on one another.

4.     Choice is thus an unconscious ego function, which consists in the projection
of the ancestor forms out of the familial unconscious. The ancestor forms
transferred out and sought for and mostly found in the outer world are the most
dynamic gene elements of the familial unconscious. The mental court
transferring out the ancestor forms is: The unconscious ego.

5.
The process of the familial projection of the ego is through the
attraction pull of the related ancestor forms, which the same genes guide, that
is, through the process of genotropism. Thus by the means of mutual familial
projections of identical ancestor forms, love relationships, unions, and marriages occur between related individuals. The unconscious
completion drive of two gene related persons to being one and being the same results thus from the
familial projections of identical latent ancestor forms and is manifested in
the most striking manner in the choice of marriage partners.

b) Familial Projection,
Incest Love and the Oedipus Complex

In the first book of “Schicksalsanalyse” [Fate Analysis] we
have already treated thoroughly these relationships.44 It is
sufficient here consequently to summarize briefly only the final results.

1.
In the families, in which a recessive hereditary illness is present,
the frequency of rape -- committed by the blood related and the gene related --
and the incestuous love connections and the marriage between blood related also
are relatively greater.45

2.
The question: Why were only
certain pairs of brothers and sisters drawn to each other in an incest
love? We answer that just these and
not other brothers and sisters carry the “recessive pathological ancestor
form” in a dynamically strongest degree in their familial unconscious and for that very reason
seek to unite each other in love.46

3.
The Oedipal, incestuous
binding between mother and son and father and daughter has not only a personal
experience but also a familial
projective, that is, a genotropic
basis.

According to our experiences with genetics, the daughter mostly takes
after the grandmother on the father’s side (or after a sister of the
father): the son, on the other hand, mostly after the grandfather on the
mother’s side (or after a brother of the mother or the grandmother). The
mother is consequently a conductor and
the transmitter of the ancestor forms of her father (eventually
grandfathers, uncles, great uncles, etc.) to the son; the father is the
conductor of the ancestor forms of his mother (eventually, grandmother, great
aunt, etc.) onto the daughter.

Mother and son and father and daughter are therefore “ancestor
form related individuals.” The sameness of the ancestor forms in the
familial unconscious has for a result
that they -- we mean by the way of the reciprocal projections of the same
ancestor forms -- mutually attract; they
will be one and the same, thus participate
in one another. They are not only blood related but also gene related.
Therefore the manifestation that has been named the Oedipus complex.

4.
The Oedipus complex is a
phenomenon, which may be interpreted only then correctly and perfectly when one
proceeds three dimensionally with its
emergence -- exactly as with dream interpretation -- and considers
synchronously the personal experiences and the familial and the collective47
factors.

*

The role of the familial projection in friendship choices and professional
choice is treated in the corresponding chapters of Schicksalsanalyse.

*

The analytical transference
is a mental situation, in which the familial projections are more frequently in
the process if one dares to perceive it. The chance of a favorable and rapid
running analysis is, according to our experience, all the greater, the greater
is the “genotropic” relationship between the one being analyzed and
the analyst. Therefore the opinion of so many analysts is incorrect that he is
no “menu,” which the analysand at first “favors” and on
this basis of sympathy or antipathy then chooses or rejects.

We are of the opinion that many depth psychological treatments fail
because the partners of the “analytical dual union” are gene foreign to one another.

End Notes

[1] FREUD, S.: Über einen autobiographisch
bescriebenen Fall von Paranoia. [On an Autobiographically Described Case of
Paranoia]. Ges. Schr. [Collected Writings], Bd. VIII, pp. 417-418.

2 Ibid., p. 414.

3 Ibid., p. 423

4 FERENCZI, S.: Introjection and Übertragung [Introjection
and Transference]. Jahrb. f. ps.-a. u. ps. -path. Forsch, Bd. I, p. 430.

5 JUNG, C. G.: Psychologische Typen [Psychological
Types]. Rascher, Zürich 1930, 5. u. 6. Tausend, p. 658.

6 Ibid., p. 657 f.

7 Ibid., p. 658.

8 JUNG, C. G.: Über psychische Energetik und das
Wesen der Träume [On Psychic Energy and the Essence of the Dream].
Rascher, Zürich. 2nd edition, p. 198 f.

9 Ibid., p. 199.

[1]0
LÉVY-BRUHL, L.: Das Denken der Naturvölker [The Thinking
of Primitive People]. W. Braumüller, Wien 1926. -- Die geistige Welt
der Primitiven [The Spiritual World of Primitives]. Fr. Bruckmann,
München 1927. -- Die Seele der Primitiven [The Soul of Primitives].
W. Braumüller, Wien-Leipzig 1930.

11 JERUSALEM, W.: Vorbemerkungen
zu Lévy-Bruhls Buch: Das Denken der Naturvölker [Preface to
Lévy-Bruhl’s Book: The Thinking of Primitives]. W.
Braumüller, Wien 1926.

12
LÉVY-BRUHL, L.: Die seele der Primitiven [The Soul of the Primitives].
Braumüller, Wien-Leipzig 1930. p. 3.

[1]3 HOLMES,
J. H.: In primitive New-Guinea, p. 150. Cited in Lévy-Bruhl: pp. 3-4.

14
WILLIAMS, F. E.: The Paimara ceremony in the Purari Delta (Papua). Journ. of
the Royal Anthrop. Inst., Bd. 53, 1923, p. 362. Cited in Lévy-Bruhl: p.
5.

[1]5 See on
this the critical remarks there of B. MALINOVSKI: Sitte and Verbrecken bei den
Naturvölkern [Custom and Criminals with Primitive People]. Francke,
Bern, Sammlung
Dalp.

[1]6
LÉVY-BRUHL: Die seele der Primitiven, p. 60

[1]7 Ibid.,
p. 66.

[1]8 Ibid.,
p. 81.

[1]9 Ibid.,
p. 80.

20 Ibid.,
p. 83.

21 Ibid.,
p. 87. Compare this to the Sitte des Habbe-Stammes [Customs of the
Habbe-Tribes]. Schicksalsanalyse, 2nd edition, p. 394.

22 Ibid.,
pp. 140-142.

23 Ibid.,
pp. 142-143.

24 Ibid.,
p. 108.

25 Ibid.

26
LÉVY-BRUHL: Die seele der Primitiven, p. 107.

27 Ibid.,
p. 54 ff.

28 Ibid.,
p. 206.

29 Ibid.,
p. 201.

30
WINTHUIS, J.: Das Zweigeschlechterwesen [The Two-Sexual Being].
Hirschfeld, Leipzig
1928. p. 22 ff. About the cult object of the tjurunga of the Aranda, F. J. GILLEN, B. SPENZER, C. STREHLOW, W.
SCHMIDT, G. ROHEIM, and J. WINTHUIS have in particular occupied themselves with
this. Ibid., p. 22 ff.

31
STREHLOW, C.: Die Aranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentralaustralien [The
Aranda and Loritja Tribes in Central Australia]. Published out of the
town’s Völkermuseum. Frankfurt on Main.
1907.

32
WINTHUIS, J.: Cited work, p. 83 ff.

33
WINTHUIS, J.: Das Zweigeschlecterwesen. Forschungen zur Völkerpsychologie
und Soziologie [Research on Folk Psychology and Sociology]. (Published
by R. Thurnwald.) Bd. V. Hirschfeld, Leipzig
1928. pp. 25-26.

34 Ibid.,
p. 23.

35 NEUMANN,
ERICH: Ursprungsgeschichte des Bewußtseins [The History of the Origin
of Consciousness]. Rascher, Zürich 1949. p. 309.

36 FREUD,
S.: Ges. Schr. [Collected Writings], Bd. VI, pp. 261-349.

37 Ibid.,
p. 316.

38 Ibid.,
p. 323.

39
GOETHE’S sämtliche Werke [Collected Works]. Max-Hesse-Verlag,
Leipzig. Bd.
XVI, p. 27.

40
Schicksalsanalyse [Fate Analysis] 2nd edition, p. 43 ff.

41 R.
REY-ARDID has confirmed the theory of genotropism in his work
“Contribución a la genética psiquiátrica”
(Arch. d. Neurobiologia, T. XVIII, Number 1, 1955).

42 Compare
this to our explanation in the first book of “Schicksalsanalyse,” 2nd
edition, pp. 36-68.

43 SZONDI,
L.: Schicksalsanalyse. Benno Schwabe, 1948. 2nd edition, p. 42 ff.

44
Schicksalsanalyse, 2nd edition, Chapter VI. "Inzest und
Genotropismus" ["Incest and Genotropism"]. pp. 148-156.

45 Compare
this to the example in Schicksalsanalyse, p. 149.

46 Example:
Cases 22/23. Ibid., p. 150 ff.

47 RANK,
OTTO: Das Inzest-Motive in Dichtung und Sage [The Incest Motive in Poetry
and Saga]. Deuticke, Leipzig-Wien 1926.