everyone in your dreams is yourself
thomas....@gmail.com
I have heard it said that Jung thought every character in your dreams
is an aspect of yourself. Can anyone point me to the exact source of
this idea (preferably with text I can access online), and whether he
supposed it to apply to anything else (i.e. works of fiction, or real
life)?
tom
M Winther
Not correct. The dream can also be interpreted on the objective level,
that is, if you dream about your boss at the workplace, the dream actually
regards this relation. But the same dream could also be a subjective
dream, that is, the person signifies an aspect of yourself.
Mats
The_Sage
>is an aspect of yourself.
"The dream is the theater where the dreamer is at once scene, actor, prompter,
stage manager, author, audience, and critic" (General Aspects of Dream
Psychology)
"...the meaning of most dreams is not in accord with the tendencies of the
conscious mind but shows peculiar deviations...When I attempted to express this
behavior in a formula, the concept of compensation seemed to me the only
adequate one, for it alone is capable of summing up all the various ways in
which a dream behaves...compensation, as the term implies, means balancing and
comparing different data or points of view so as to produce an adjustment or
a rectification. In this regard there are three possibilities. If the conscious
attitude to the life situation is in large degree one-sided, then the dream
takes the opposite side. If the conscious has a position fairly near the
“middle,” the dream is satisfied with variations. If the conscious attitude is
“correct” (adequate), then the dream coincides with and emphasizes this
tendency, though without forfeiting its peculiar autonomy. As one never knows
with certainty how to evaluate the conscious situation of a patient,
dream-interpretation is naturally impossible without questioning the dreamer.
But even if we know the conscious situation we know nothing of the attitude of
the unconscious" (ON THE NATURE OF DREAMS, pg 11-12. Retrieved from
http://scriptorpress.yage.net/BM32_2004_jung.pdf)
This tells us two things:
1) Lists of symbols or books or people who claim to be able to interpret dreams
without in-depth psychological analysis of the dreamer, are not in accord with
Jungian principles, and
2) If I dream of my boss, just like in real life it will only be a projection of
what I imagine my boss to be, and therefore, one way or the other, a dream of my
boss will always ultimately only be a reflection of myself.
>Can anyone point me to the exact source of
>this idea (preferably with text I can access online), and whether he
>supposed it to apply to anything else (i.e. works of fiction, or real
>life)?
Do some research on Jung's concept of projection for the answer to that one.
The Sage
=============================================================
http://members.cox.net/the.sage/index.htm
[The current anthropomorphic global warming nonsense is
based on] "inherently untrustworthy climate models, similar
to those that cannot accurately forecast the weather a week
from now" -- Dr. Richard Lindzen
=============================================================
M Winther
> ...
> 2) If I dream of my boss, just like in real life it will only be a projection of
> what I imagine my boss to be, and therefore, one way or the other, a dream of my
> boss will always ultimately only be a reflection of myself.
In Jungian psychology this is not correct, but perhaps you take from
Buddhist philosophy. From The Jung Lexicon by Sharp:
...Although Jung pioneered the teaching of dream interpretation on the
subjective level, where symbolic meaning is paramount, he also
recognized the value of the objective approach.
"...Enlightening as interpretation on the subjective level may be ...
it may be entirely worthless when a vitally important relationship
is the content and cause of the conflict [behind the dream]. Here the
dream-figure must be related to the real object. The criterion can
always be discovered from the conscious material..." [General Aspects
of Dream Psychology," CW 8, par. 515.]
Mats Winther
John Uebersax
> >I have heard it said that Jung thought every character in your dreams
> >is an aspect of yourself.
I take that as a general rule. Perhaps there are exceptions -- and
like any other rule, this one can be misapplied. But in general it is
a good rule -- a place to begin in dream interpretation.
...
> 2) If I dream of my boss, just like in real life it will only be a projection of
> what I imagine my boss to be, and therefore, one way or the other, a dream of my
> boss will always ultimately only be a reflection of myself.
I agree. And not just dreams, but our whole waking experience of
other people and society is mostly just a reflection of our own
personality and beliefs.
>Can anyone point me to the exact source of ...
This principle rests not so much on anything Jung said or believed;
it's almost tautological given what we know about how human beings
make sense of things and operate cognitively.
John Uebersax PhD
www.satyagraha.com
jcoggins
<18ed0219-b251-4c43...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
John Uebersax <jsueb...@gmail.com> wrote:
Firefox can't find the above url. Please advise how to get to it.
Thank you for your help.
John Uebersax
> and whether he supposed it to apply to anything else (i.e. works of fiction, or real life)?
Most likely Jung would have agreed that the principle applies
generally to works of fiction, movies, plays, etc. This is so obvious
an implication of his theory that he might not have even mentioned it
except in passing. Psychoanalytic criticism of literature and art,
which implies much the same thing, is very common.
joggins wrote:
> >www.satyagraha.com
>
> Firefox can't find the above url. Please advise how to get to it.
Oops, sorry. The currect URL is: http://satyagraha.wordpress.com
John Uebersax PhD