Individuation, the process of othering, and the ideology of sameness

[M Winther]

The definition of the word 'individuation' implies a process of
"othering", that is, to differentiate out of group identity. To see
the "Other" is necessary for a true relationship to develop, so it is
not anti-social. But the notion of "othering" has also been used to
denote a political agenda of domination and oppression. Individuation
has both light and dark consequences, but it is a force that cannot be
stopped. There is only a choice to articulate it through the lens of
the individual or the collective. Webster's Dictionary gives:

Individuation.
(1) : the development of the individual from the universal.
(2) : the determination of the individual in the general.
b : the process by which individuals in society become differentiated
from one another.

Individuation is experienced as a painful process. We are averse to
being existentially alone, disconnected from everything else in the
universe. The self as a goal of individuation is a 'complexio
oppositorum'. It seems contradictory that utmost individuation, which
leads to a distinctive character and consciousness, is also the
archetype of totality. I think it has to do with the fact that
individuation is a necessary prerequisite for attaining that divine
form of unconsciousness which, in Christian history, has been denoted
the mystical union with God. Individuation implies that consciousness
is extended, as you more and more stand out from collective
unconsciousness through disidentification, thus gaining a perspective.
But at a point in time one must allow oneself to sink back into the
'darkness of God'. Unpolluted by collective identification and
unconsciousness one may descend into that other form of
unconsciousness, the dark night of the soul, as into a bath. Hence the
disidentified and differentiated individual returns to the all-
encompassing Oneness, which is God. C.G. Jung often cited Empedocles
(c.490-430 B.C.) who said that "God is a circle whose centre is
everywhere, whose circumference is nowhere." It means that the centre
of God is the differentiated individual. So a human being can only
attain wholeness by becoming an individual, i.e. differentiating
himself out of unconscious wholeness and collective identity.

Individuation is coupled with great difficulties. When the children
grow out of Kindergarten, they begin to lose their group identity,
when all children exist in naive togetherness - Blacks and Whites,
too. A complication of the first phase in natural individuation is
'shadow-projection'. (The 'shadow' is the hidden or unconscious
aspects of oneself, which the ego has either repressed or never
recognized.) But an important step is when the individual realizes
that something has emerged out of his own unconscious as a projection.
The shadow is only integrated after having been projected.

However, the term "othering" cannot simplistically be equated with
shadow-projection. The process of othering is discussed by many
philosophers and psychoanalysts. The notion of the "Other" does not
simply denote "the scapegoat". In fact, according to Levinas, God is
"The Infinite Other". The notion of the Other is relevant in
individuation. If one fails to distinguish otherness, it only means
that one has failed to differentiate out of collective identity.
According to Freudians and Lacanians, if the individual fails to
distinguish between self and other, identification and desire, he/she
is bound to develop some form of narcissistic pathology.

The ideal of "sameness" today dominates the discourse. The purport of
politically correct thinking is that we must stay put in Kindergarten,
when One is All and All is One. This merely serves to curb
individuation. We won't prevent the phase of shadow-projection by
prolonging the immature phase of collective mass-psychology. In fact,
it gets even worse, because the force of individuation will break out
of its prison and create a massive collective shadow-projection. We
cannot prevent individuation. We can only further a sophisticated
process of othering on individual basis, known as 'individuation'.
Alternatively, we can curb this process by building a collective
ideology of "sameness", thus paving the way for primitive collective
shadow-projection. In the end, sameness cannot be maintained without
otherness. There are still those people who cannot be fitted into
sameness. These are the "others" who must be destroyed, so that we can
maintain sameness. This means that the ideology of sameness is bound
to shoot itself in the foot and destroy itself. In Mao's China the
authorities launched campaigns against the capitalist traitors who had
infiltrated society. The people who suffer persecution are typically
intellectuals and successful people. In Kampuchea they went as far as
shooting every intellectual. If you have developed your intellect, it
means that you are a traitor in that you have begun to differentiate
out of group identity.

I think that the evidence is mounting that if individuation is impeded
(i.e. if the "immature phase of collective mass-psychology" is
prolonged), then the collective must retain internal sameness by a
process of othering that points out the Jews (e.g.) as the arch-fiend.
This is evident in case of Nazi-Germany, the Soviet Union, Mao's
China, Islamism, nationalism during WWI. Either the individual
individuates, i.e. separates himself from the collective, or the
collective will individuate, by separating itself from humanity,
rejecting the others as "slave natures". This individuating force is
immense, e.g., to attain the superior Aryan man, the exemplary
socialist citizen, the heroic soldier of the Holy War who single-
handedly blows the arch-fiend to pieces. This is the perverted form of
individuation which will seize control of the population if
individuation is impeded through the ideology of sameness.

Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/