L. SZONDI the projection function of the Ego.

Lipot (LEOPOLD) Szondi, Ich-Analyse [Ego Analysis] Translated by Arthur C. Johnston, PhD © 2008 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. [DIV III] (bOOK) 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.

Thanks Google