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. Thi=
s means
you may not duplicate this article without their permissions.
=
C=
HAPTER
XI
P=
ROJECTION
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 reveal=
ed
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 th=
e third
form of projection, namely to the transferring out [der Hinausverlegung<=
/u>]
of familial ancestor forms by m=
eans
of choice guiding genotropism. On the basis of the three part division of t=
he
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 uncon=
scious
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) Patho=
logical
Projection
The analysis of symptom
formation with paranoids gave Freud the reason for the following definition=
of
projection:
“An internal perception becomes repres=
sed,
and, after it has experienced a certain distortion as perception from the outer world, appears into consciou=
sness
as a substitute for its content. The distortion with persecution delusions
consists of an affect transformation; what should have been perceived as lo=
ve inside is perceived as hate from t=
he outside.”1
Freud links the follow= ing 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 inconspicu= ous. For the process of distortion of the repressed in the case of paranoids, Fr= eud gives the following paradigm: The original inner perception is that of homosexuality: “I (a man) love him (a man).” Or: “I (a wo= man) 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 ha= te 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<= o:p>
Already here we emphas=
ize
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 h=
owever
a healing process, “which=
makes
the repressed to come back again and the libido to return back to the perso=
ns
abandoned by it.” Nevertheless, this returned libido contains—as
hate and persecution—a negative designation.
3. “It is not corre=
ct 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 b=
ecomes
-- 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 neverthel=
ess
to maintain the intimate connection with the object.
b)
Physiological Projection.
The O=
riginal
Projection: Participation
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; =
Already with the expla=
nation
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 outwa=
rd.
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 percept=
ions
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 t=
he
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 -- t=
hat
is, the feeling from the perception. That was the first projection process,=
the
original projection, and thus t=
his
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 t=
he
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, whi=
ch
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 on=
ly
after the dissolving of the identity can one, according to Jung, speak of
projection.
The necessity of disso=
lving
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 project=
ion.”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 b=
een
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 repr=
essed
contents;
3. Transferring out of the
distorted contents;
4. Recurrence of the inner
raised-up contents from the outside.
The Jungian interpreta=
tion
recognizes three events:
1. Being the same of the
subject with the object: Archaic identity, which we call participation;
2. Difficulties in adapta=
tion
through the absence of projected contents;
3. Restitution of the pro=
jected
contents in the subject through the dissolution of the original being the s=
ame
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.”<=
sup>8
At first subjective co=
ntents
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 t=
he
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 t=
he
earlier objects.”9
For our further explan=
ation
it is important to emphasize that b=
efore and
after the condition of being th=
e same
of the subject with the object a pr=
ojection
has taken place. On the one hand the identity indeed is based on the “=
;primary” projection of subje=
ctive
contents, thus on participation; on the other hand secondary projection is
based on the restitution of the earlier identity.
c) An=
alytic
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 f=
orm of
transference: participation; the negative form, however, secondary projecti=
on.
4. Positive as well as ne=
gative
transference can enter into the service of resistance.
The collective and fam=
ilial
kinds of transference contents work the same way as the personal.
2. Collective Projection as Participation
When one takes the vie=
w 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 t=
he
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) Th=
e Role
of Collective Projections
i=
n 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 mystiqu=
e.”
“Participation mystique” is “the mysterious
participation of heterogeneous things with one another, which is effected
through mysterious powers, which are effective in them.”
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 b=
eings
is conditioned through an extraordinarily effective might and power and thr=
ough
a something “that at the same time is whole and diverse, material and
spiritual, and in continued exchange passing from one to the other.”<=
sup>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 ob=
served
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.”
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) &=
nbsp; 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 anim=
al.
Animals live according to the manner of humans; thus tigers, elephants,
crocodiles can if they wish assume human form (metamorphosis) or also appea=
r 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<= o:p>
This is likewise the result of the participative
identifying manner of thinking of primitives. Not the individual but the gr=
oup
(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 -- ̶=
0;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. Be=
fore
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 sh=
ows
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 t=
he
Ogooué.20) Sexual relations between a wife and the brothe=
rs
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; “I=
t 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, a=
s if
he had not brought this about. Often times the widow of the murdered man
chooses him as a husband.”21
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp;
The solidarity of the members among each other i=
n 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 Partici=
pation
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 ̶=
0;equipment” (accessories), th=
us all
secretions and excretions, such as body hair, nails, tears, urine, excremen=
t,
semen, sweat, etc., that is the same as the individual. They belong not onl=
y to
him, but they are the same as he hi=
mself.
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 bewi=
tching
by working on the accessories.)
The participative identification manner of think=
ing of
primitives leads to the belief in the “double,” the “seco=
nd
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 al=
so
another similar object, stands in an original solidarity with its fruit. Wh=
en
then the child comes into the world, it is the nunu of the coconut, the fruit of the breadfruit tree, etc. Whe=
n 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 childr=
en
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 “SpiritsR=
21; in
all Phenomena and Functions
The
primitive soul “projects” into all things a power, a might, a b=
eing
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 in=
dicates
the way in one direction.”24 Another example: The adults w=
ith
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.=
221;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 serv=
ice
for hearing. Also the primitive explains the reproductive process by the
working within of the smallest being. “He believes in the actual, act=
ive
being present of one or more small perfectly trained beings inside the indi=
viduals,
and these illusions exempt him from the necessity to devote attention to the
mechanisms of actual happenings.”26
(6) The Confrontation of Matter a=
nd
Spirit
(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 pla=
nt,
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 speci=
al
characteristic or spirit] comes -- thus Lévy-Bruhl maintains -- after
the concept.
With the prim=
itives,
on the other hand, there is no clear general, abstract idea. The
genius—the life principle—of an animal or plant species comes a=
bout
with the primitive not after a concept formation of a species, but the geni=
us
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 bea=
ver 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 individua=
l 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) T=
he
Presence of the Ancestors in the Individual
With
good reason Lévy-Bruhl asserts that the individual with many primiti=
ves
means “at the same time one a=
nd
many,” that is, “a
geometric place of many participations” (lieu de participation=
s).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 ance=
stor
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.”
The
tjurunga30 are diamo=
nd
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-w=
ood,
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 tjuru=
nga
is represented by the following on the basis of the best descriptions of St=
ehlow
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 t=
he
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.R=
21;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 tjuru=
nga
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 proced=
ure
(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<=
/i> (p
=3D -!, -!!). The ego of these primitives shows chiefly the picture of the
so-called “mystic archaic ego=
”
(Sch =3D 0 -) or the autistic,
cosmodualistic ego (Sch =3D + -). About the importance of these finding=
s of
E. Percy we will speak of again thoroughly in the third part of this book w=
ith
“Delusion Formations.”
(b) The Role of Collective Projections with Cultured People
We
see the essential in the appearance of a collective projection in the pheno=
menon
of participation – that is, in the “being the same and being one” of two objects. Everywhere
where one finds collective identiti=
es,
we must think about the collective contents.
Jungian
psychology was in fact untiring in the research of such identities in
relationship to the forming [
The
collective similarity of the forming principle with all humans led Jung bac=
k 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 d=
rive
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 gr=
oups
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 emotion=
s 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 conditio=
ns by
means of archetype projections and also the being the same of definite grou=
ps
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 proje=
ction
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 consequen=
ce
from projections of collective representations.
=
; (c) Collective Transference as Partici=
pation
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 magi=
c
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 obje=
ct
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 consequent=
ly
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 love=
d 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 wh=
o is
superior to all of them alone -- that is the situation that we find realize=
d in
a viable crowd. We dare thus to correct the statement of Trotters that a hu=
man
is a herd animal; he is much mo=
re
than a herd animal; he is an
individual of a hoard led by a chief.”38 Here we find agai=
n an
important point for the corrections of our interpretation, according to whi=
ch
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 project=
ion
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 ance=
stor
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 profes=
sions,
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 relationshi=
p 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 proce=
ss
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 proj=
ection”
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 indivi=
dual
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 [Sch=
icksalspsychologie].
Therefore: The fate of the person is determined, but also limited,
precisely through his or her choice behavior in love, friendship, professio=
n,
illness, and manner of death. These fate determined and limited choice
behaviors can occur according to the interpretation of Fate analysis [Sc=
hicksalsanalysis]
by the means of the familial projections. Therefore, we maintain that:
The fate of the individual is directed through the familial project=
ion
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 individua=
ls.
Real participation signifies in Fate Analysis the realization of ha=
ving
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 howe=
ver
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 fertilizat=
ion
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 thu=
s --
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 Psycho=
logy
uses next to the concept of hereditary forms, the genotype, also another
concept, that of “ancestor forms.” Ancestor form is a lower con=
cept
of the higher concept of “hereditary form.”
We
call ancestor form that specifi=
c part
of the whole hereditary forms, which through a specific group of genes
conditions in heredity the specific form of particular ancestors of the fam=
ily
and determines its return (recessivity) with one or more members of the fam=
ily.
Thus
one can speak of the specific “ancestor forms” of musicality,
speech aptitude or of the ancestor form of a particular physical conditione=
d 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 defi=
nite
specific ancestor form.
In
the familial unconscious of the
person lies therefore this gene group functionally dynamic and not statical=
ly
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 t=
he
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 p=
ure (recessive
homozygote) in relationship to the concerned ancestor form determined gene;
then these original ancestor forms, thus genotypes, come into appearance. T=
hus
they appear, for example, in the form of deafness, imbecility, schizophreni=
a,
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 perso=
n,
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 physica=
lly
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 representati=
ves
of the same ancestor forms. These conductor persons unite themselves as a
result of these familial projections in love or friendship, in occupation o=
r in
illness and in manner of death.
The being one and bein=
g the
same in the realized participation in love, in friendship, in occupation wi=
th
other people, in illness and in manner of death is psychologically the resu=
lt
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 dr=
ive
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 satisf=
ied
through the unconscious ego by means of the familial projection of the ance=
stor
forms. Love, friendship, and occupations (with other people) are consequent=
ly
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 a=
ncestor
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 familia=
l
form of projection as genotropism we can summarize as fo=
llows:
1.&n= bsp;