The psychology of Jung

By James Oppenheim

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The psychology of Jung
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The psychology of Jung

Author: James Oppenheim

Release date: February 5, 2026 [eBook #77864]

Language: English

Original publication: Girard: Haldeman-Julius Company, 1925

Credits: Tim Miller, toy9683 and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PSYCHOLOGY OF JUNG ***




LITTLE BLUE BOOK NO. 978 Edited by E. Haldeman-Julius

The Psychology of Jung

James Oppenheim


HALDEMAN-JULIUS COMPANY GIRARD, KANSAS




Copyright, 1925, Haldeman-Julius Company

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA




THE PSYCHOLOGY OF JUNG.




CONTENTS.


 Chapter                                Page
    I. The Psychology of the Future        5
   II. The Sexual Theory                   8
  III. Will-To-Power                      18
   IV. The Break Between Freud and Jung   22
    V. The Introvert vs. the Extravert    33
   VI. Types                              45
  VII. The Conflict and Its Solution      53
 VIII. Note                               61




THE PSYCHOLOGY OF JUNG.




I.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE FUTURE.


The origin of the new psychology, with its technic universally known as
psycho-analysis, lies in the effort which man has always made to cure
those ills “not of the body.” When we speak of the ills of the “soul,”
we do not, however, mean that the mind is not a part of the body. We
merely mean that there is a difference, for instance, between the
illness that might arise from receiving bad news, and that which was
caused, say, by being knocked down by a motor car. The first we call a
mental ill, a spiritual malady, the second a physical.

The old shaman of the savage tribe did not only attempt to cure
gangrene and malaria and sore throat; he also treated people who were
“possessed by demons” or had “lost their souls”; he treated people who
had lost hope, who were despairing, who wanted a charm to conquer the
object of love or hate, who desired success, who heard voices, saw
visions and were afraid to live.

From the beginning, therefore, man has attempted to bring a healing to
the mind. Every religion has been such an attempt.

The trouble with this, however, from our modern standpoint, is that a
religion demands faith, not only in the natural, but the supernatural;
and not only, let it be added, in the supernatural, but a very definite
and dogmatic supernatural, some set of stories and brand of divinities.
There are Gods, Devils and ghosts to which we must submit. But modern
science, which has steadfastly discredited mythology and sought to
explain life and its phenomena by natural causes, or laws of nature,
has seriously undermined the old religions, and we see them beginning
to topple in all places of the earth.

However, the science of medicine, which sought to discover the causes
of sickness, reached a limit beyond which it could not pass. If there
is no medicine for a broken heart, there is also none for a man with a
fixed idea or one with a sense of utter inferiority. The insane cannot
be cured by drugs or by operations, except in those rare curable cases
which have an indubitable physical origin. The thousands creeping and
stumbling around the world, victims of neurosis, cannot be reached by
serums or diets.

It was therefore necessary for medicine to go beyond itself, to invade
the wide and dark realm of religion and preempt the creeds, by applying
the technic of science to what had hitherto been understood darkly
through intuition, guess-work and “revelation.”

It is not my intention to give a history of the origin and rise of
psycho-analysis. That, in itself, is a book. It is merely necessary
to say that the first genius in this field was Sigmund Freud, that
Freud made the first great discoveries, that he traced the first chart
of the unconscious mind, and that he originated the first technic of
psycho-analysis.

If Freud, however, was the pioneer, it remained for two of his pupils
to carry the work forward to the point where it has become one of the
vital contributions to the race. The work of Adler, the first of these,
came as a revolt against Freud and gave rise to a rival theory. The
work of Jung, however, not only brought a synthesis of the work of
Adler and Freud, but went beyond both. It is for this reason, then,
that I call his work “the psychology of the future.”

In order to come to a clear understanding of Jung, it will be
necessary first to summarize the theories of both Freud and Adler. We
can then see how Jung, accepting both, has transcended both, and laid
out the first tracings of a complete psychology.




II.

THE SEXUAL THEORY.


Freud sees life as a great and never-ending conflict between
civilization, or organized society, and the individual. The individual
is born with certain instincts, desires, wishes. Many of these are
in conflict with the law and moral code of society. Hence, they are
suppressed.

This suppression works, however, in a curious way. Not only are the
unlawful and “sinful” impulses shut out of the mind; they are also
forgotten. And because they are forgotten, we actually have the
spectacle of pious men and women who can solemnly swear that they are
quite free of murderous, lustful, lecherous, dangerous thoughts and
wishes; that they are “good” people; that they have nothing in common
with the criminal and the debased.

As a matter of fact, however, no instinct, no function in man can be
abolished by cutting it off from consciousness. It is merely repressed,
and forms what Dr. Jung later denoted as a _complex_; that is to say, a
group of ideas, emotions, wishes that all go together and become a sort
of mental family living off by itself, in exile.

It is, in reality, a part of consciousness of which we are
unconscious: a part of the mind shut out by the barrier of our will and
our forgetfulness. And since there are many things that we repress,
a goodly area of the mind is so cut off. Hence, all that part of the
mind which is repressed, and of whose existence we are not aware, Freud
calls _the unconscious mind_.

But since the unconscious is living, not dead; since every impulse in
man seeks constantly for expression; the unconscious is continually
active, like a volcano. Only, instead of sending up its fire and lava
and steam in their native state, it is sending them up in a camouflaged
form. The bottled up energy seeking ever an outlet, loads itself into
some part of the body, and becomes a symptom. It may appear as a
paralysis of some muscle, as deafness or blindness, heart trouble or
stomach trouble, etc. Naturally, these symptoms are not organic; it is
not a real blindness, a real paralysis. Which explains why there can
be miracles when believers touch saint’s bones or repeat the dogmas of
the Christian Scientists. The reason is, that being mental in origin,
these symptoms can also be cured in a mental way. But since faith
healing does not probe to the secret source of the symptom, which is
in the unconscious, such healing is usually followed by the outbreak
of another symptom, in a different place, perhaps, and of a different
nature.

However, the repressed complex does not only express itself in bodily
symptoms. It may appear in the conscious mind. But since the conscious
mind resists the invasion, it appears in a masked form. It may become
apparent as a fixed idea, for instance, the idea that one must go to
some street corner and preach the Gospel, an idea which, in spite of
its absurdity and irrationality, the patient cannot dislodge, and which
is therefore fixed. Or it may appear as a fear, a fear of dogs, or of
the dark, of closed places, going outdoors, etc.

Nor is this all. Where there is a marked repression of a large part of
oneself, the repressed material may become what is called a secondary
personality, and every so often preempt the conscious mind, so that
at one time the personality may be timid, pious, good, and at another
bold, wicked and evil. It is, in a way, the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr.
Hyde.

Finally, the unconscious appears in consciousness in the form of
dreams. It is really this great discovery which led to the development
of the technic of psycho-analysis, and opened up the path which has led
to all the other discoveries.

A dream takes place when we are asleep; that is to say, when the
conscious mind is completely relaxed, when all the bars are let down.
What more natural than that the repressed portion of the mind may now
flare up, just as the stars become visible when the sun is withdrawn
from the sky? But dreams usually have something absurd about them. We
walk in seven league boots, we cut off a hand and sew it on again,
animals talk; we are in the land of make-believe and of the fairies and
the bad spirits.

Why does the unconscious speak such a fantastic language? Why doesn’t
it express itself in simple English? According to Freud, this is
because the conscious mind has refused to face the evil which it
has repressed, and the unconscious therefore ever seeks a masked or
camouflaged expression, whether in the form of a physical symptom, a
fixed idea, a phobia, or a dream.

Dreams, in short, are symbolic. Everything in a dream stands for
something else. But these symbols are not haphazard; what they stand
for are definitely expressed by the symbol. It is not haphazard for
instance that a dove has always symbolized the holy spirit, or that a
spear has stood for the masculine organ, or that a vessel has stood for
the womb. There is a certain likeness between symbol and fact.

It is nothing new to invest dreams with meaning. The human race has
always done so. Man has always intuitively known that these strange
manifestations of the night held a hidden meaning for him, a meaning
that must be searched out by interpretation and analysis. So we
read in the Bible of Joseph interpreting the dreams of Pharaoh; in
Euripides’ play, Iphigenia, the action begins with a dream of the
heroine, which she herself interprets, though somewhat mistakenly. So
too we have the well-authenticated dream of Lincoln (ten days before
he was assassinated) that he heard a noise of lamentation and sobbing
downstairs in the White House and took a candle and went down. Around a
catafalque moved a crowd of weeping people. He asked who was dead, and
was informed that it was the President, who had been killed.

Such dreams are of the prophetic order, and will be dealt with later
on. The last dream, also, was straightforward. It was not symbolic. But
such dreams are outside the usual run; they are the exceptions to the
rule.

The way then to find out the meaning of a dream is to treat the images
in it as symbols and try to discover what the symbols stand for. And
the quickest way to do this is to ask the dreamer himself.

You dream, for instance, to use a simple illustration, that you are
involved in a fight between a cat and a dog. Well, what do you think of
cats and dogs? What are your associations?

You begin to tell all the thoughts that come into your mind when you
think of these two animals. You may drag in personal stories of a pet
cat you once had, of a dog it fought with, etc. When all you have said
is boiled down it may amount to this: that cats and dogs appear to be
opposites, that cats are aloof, “selfish,” withdrawn, asking much and
giving little, whereas dogs are loving, affectionate, very sociable,
and may even give their lives for their masters. Symbolically then, the
cat stands for the ego-impulses, the dog for the social impulses. It
is natural that they should fight each other every so often; there are
times when we are in great conflict between our wish to serve others
and our desire to gratify or satisfy ourselves.

What Freud discovered was that the repression came to light through
the dream; that the dream material, if analyzed, showed exactly why
the patient was ill, why he had his phobia or his physical symptom.
For instance, the man might have a strain of sexual perversion in him.
He himself is not aware of it. But the dream immediately brings it to
light and he is forced to recognize it.

Naturally it is difficult to get a patient to accept the repressed
material. If he repressed it because of a great moral revulsion, he can
only be led by a process of re-education to accept it. When he first
comes for treatment, therefore, he merely tells the analyst all that
he remembers about his past, his family and personal history, etc.
Gradually he acquires confidence in the analyst. This unburdening is
like a confession. The analyst hears things that the patient has never
before mentioned to anyone else. The analyst, because of his knowledge
of psychology, also shows an understanding of the patient that quite
startles the latter. The analyst, in short, becomes more than a father
to him, more than a mother. There is a feeling of gratitude, of trust,
which approaches the border of love. This feeling, this attitude,
is called the _transference_. The patient has transferred himself,
his burden, to the analyst. And no cure can take place until this is
achieved.

For when the transference is made, the patient is now ready to go
along with the analyst in his re-education. He gains a new standpoint.
He discovers that the ugly and evil things which he suppressed are not
his personal property, his private depravity, but are public property,
that every one who is a human being has the same impulses, the same
shameful lusts, the same wicked wishes; and that there can be no
genuine health until one allows these impulses in consciousness and
accepts them in their nakedest aspect.

The patient then is ready to face squarely and truthfully the
divulgences of his dreams.

And what is the cure? Sometimes, happily, it is a simple matter. The
man who has suppressed his sexuality altogether, for instance, may now
marry and gain a good direct expression for his need. But what of those
who find strong perverted wishes, what shall we do with them?

At this point Freud erects the theory of _sublimation_. It is not a new
theory. The youth in college is admonished to go into athletics that
he may channel off and use up the energy which otherwise would provide
him with a sexual problem. It is the substitution of a “higher” thing
for a “lower.” Only, of course, the higher thing must stand in some
natural relation to the lower, that the instinctive craving may have
some genuine satisfaction.

The classic example is that of surgery. A man is sadistic. That is,
he desires to practice cruelty on the object of his love. Turn this
upside-down from something destructive to something creative, and you
let him dig his knife into the human body, but now it is to help and
heal another, not to hurt him. Hence, the surgeon is sublimating his
sadistic tendencies.

Another example, according to Freud, is the artist. His wicked and
criminal impulses, we will say, would indicate a long list of murders
if he lived them out. He does not live them out, he writes them out. He
becomes known as a writer of crime and detective stories, and in this
form he releases his evil energy and spends it utterly.

Or take the actor. As a child he wanted constantly to exhibit himself,
to go naked before others. This strong strain of exhibitionism can be
satisfied finally by acting, by showing himself off before audiences.

Hence, the Freudian cure for those impulses we cannot live, is, first,
to recognize and accept them, and secondly, to sublimate them.

The Freudian psychology, however, does not rest at this point. It has a
theory which underlies all the others; it is the theory connected with
the Oedipus complex.

Oedipus was the man, celebrated in Greek drama, who, by a fluke of
fate, married his own mother, had children by her, and later had to
expiate his crime by blinding himself and wandering poor and helpless
about the world. For his crime is the one crime which mankind has
usually found absolutely taboo. In practically all the savage tribes,
and in every civilized code, incest, or intermarriage between child and
parent, brother and sister, has been strictly forbidden.

Why is this so? Freud believes that there is a natural sexual
attraction within the family group itself, that the child begins its
sexual life very early, that the boy gains satisfactions through his
mother’s caresses; and that hence the whole beginnings of sexuality
are wrapped up in the incestuous wish. Naturally, however, for the son
there is a great rival. It is his father. His father would fight him
off just as he would any other male rival. This is one of the reasons
for the universal taboo.

But if the origins and beginnings of sexuality are entwined in the
incestuous wish, and incest is taboo, we have an immediate cause of
trouble in human nature. We are all bound to repress. And indeed if we
look upon man, we see that he is afflicted with much sickness, that he
is born to trouble as the sparks fly upward.

If, however, this is the nuclear complex, this Oedipus complex, how
can we account for the other sexual difficulties, the perversions?
They originate, according to Freud, in the Oedipus complex itself. The
child’s first act is suckling, this involves the mouth; he then learns
to suck his finger when he cannot get at the nipple, this involves
mouth and hand; he then begins to use his hand rubbing himself and this
leads to rubbing the sexual organ (auto-erotism); he now takes pleasure
in his own body and in bodies like his own (homosexual interest), and
finally he becomes interested in bodies unlike his own (normal sexual
wish). He may find, however, that he cannot cross the last bridge and
get to normal sexuality. The repressed incest wish stands in the way
and makes him fear the woman who would, unconsciously, be used as a
substitute for the mother. Hence, he remains fixed at some infantile
stage; mouth-erotism, auto-erotism, homosexuality, etc. Often in
analysis, when he discovers this, according to Freud, he can learn
to renounce the infantile fixation, or perversion, and learn to take
pleasure in normal sexuality.

Such, in brief, and with, alas, much omitted, is an outline of the
Freudian theory. It is a sexual theory. The psychological troubles
of mankind, with all their symptoms, either physical or mental, are
traced back to a disturbance in sexuality, to taboos which bring the
individual into conflict with society and so cause these unnatural
repressions. Freud, however, does not use the word sexuality in a
narrow sense; he makes it synonymous with love-life, though the purely
sexual element is, on close examination, always present.

However, recently, Freud, now an old man, has advanced a new theory to
supplement the sexual theory. He believes, though he is very cautious
in his statement, that beside the sexual impulse, the will-to-live, to
create and procreate, there is an opposite impulse, a will-to-death, a
wish to have done. In this, he pays an unconscious tribute to some of
the theories of Jung, which will be discussed later on.




III.

WILL-TO-POWER.


Alfred Adler was a pupil of Freud. In the course of his psycho-analytic
practice he stumbled across a discovery which led to a break with Freud
and the enunciation of a new theory. In contradistinction to the sexual
theory it may be called the power-theory.

What Adler noticed in every neurotic was a marked feeling of
inferiority, a feeling, as he put it, of being _under_, and a
consequent incessant striving to be _over_ or on top. To use a simple,
concrete case: If a man felt inferior to the woman he loved, and this
was a symptom of inferiority he had always had toward the women he
loved, he would strive by every means to put the woman down and himself
up. He might put her down by economic pressure, by intellectual attack;
or he might put her down in the sexual way, for instance through
cruelty (sadism).

In the latter case, Freud would say that the problem was sexual.
But Adler would say, what the man is striving for is not sexual
satisfaction, but power. If he could put the woman down through
money-pressure, that would satisfy him, or if he could put her down
sexually, that would be satisfactory. What he was seeking was mastery.

Take the well-known case of the Don Juan who has one love-affair
after another, who wins a woman only to tire of her and pass on to the
next. Such men will admit, as a rule, that the greatest pleasure is in
conquest, and that when a woman has been conquered she is no longer
interesting. They look upon love-affairs as a series of battles, and
the aim is not love or sexuality, so much as triumph.

What becomes then of the Oedipus complex, the incestuous longing of
the son for the mother? According to Adler this, too, is a problem of
power. The father is the head of the house, the master, the king in the
realm of the family, and possesses the mother. The son is under the
father, but would depose this king and take his place. In short, he
would be the head and possess the mother. But actually, what the child
is seeking, is not really to possess the mother, but to have power in
the manner of his father.

The cause, then, of mental disorders and spiritual maladies, Adler
traces to an excessive feeling of inferiority which leads to a marked
will-to-power. But whence arises this feeling of inferiority? Adler at
this point is sure that the origin is to be sought not in something
psychic but in something physical. His theory is that the feeling of
inferiority is due to some _actual organic inferiority_.

In other words, he believes that a child who has a club foot, like
Byron, or one subject to epileptic fits, like Dostoyevski, or one with
an impediment which causes stammering, like Demosthenes, or one with
a chronic tendency to constipation like Lincoln (the cases of great
men could be multiplied endlessly), that such a child feels himself
inferior to normal children; he feels that there is something the
matter with him, that he has less chance of success, etc. This is the
feeling of inferiority, the feeling of being under. And the deeper this
feeling, the greater the reaction to it, the greater the striving to
change the position about, so that instead of being under his fellows
he is over them. Out of such defects, then, arise the great ambitions,
or as Adler puts it, the “guiding fiction.” By this he means a phantasy
of some great goal which the child dreams about and sets out to reach.

A classical case is that of Demosthenes. Because he stammered, because
he was inferior in speech to other children, an ambition awoke not
merely to be able to talk in the normal manner, but something far
greater: namely, to be the greatest of orators, an ambition he actually
achieved. But suppose he could not have achieved such a victory,
suppose conditions had been such that it was impossible for him to
be an orator? Then his incessant striving would prove futile, the
feeling of inferiority would increase, and there would be a breakdown.
The breakdown would be a neurosis, and he would be ready for a
psycho-analyst.

Why did Napoleon set out to conquer Europe? His inordinate
will-to-power could be traced back to a painful feeling of inferiority
in his youth, which showed itself in the military school, where he was
put to shame by his fellows. They, he must have felt, would become in
time great generals and leaders in the army; hence, he must be even
more than they, the general of generals.

As to the feeling of inferiority itself, Adler denotes it as the
feeling of being _feminine_. Woman, he believes, has the psychology of
being under, man that of being over, as shown in the sexual act itself.
Besides, man is physically stronger than woman. Hence, if a man has an
organic inferiority, he feels that he is not a man, and hence, that he
is in some way feminine. All his striving therefore is to be masculine,
and indeed, super-masculine. This striving Adler calls _the masculine
protest_. One finds it in women also; a marked feeling of inferiority
in a woman leading her to strive to be like a man, and a refusal to
accept her own psychology.

Such, in brief, is the Adler theory. It owes many things to Nietzsche,
who, in his “Thus Spake Zarathustra” teaches will-to-power as the
guiding principle of life, who relegates woman to a lesser, man to a
greater sphere, and who finds in the striving of the ego the dominant
impulse of life.




IV.

THE BREAK BETWEEN FREUD AND JUNG.


At the time that Dr. Freud was making his discoveries in Vienna, Dr.
Carl Jung, a young psychiatrist, was conducting certain experiments
in Zurich, Switzerland. These were of a dry technical nature which
need not be given here, but they led to a tentative theory of an
unconscious mind. It was while he was engaged on these experiments that
Jung first read the work of Freud. He knew at once that he had found
his master and hastened to become Freud’s pupil and colleague. He did
more than that. At that period Freud was the laughing stock of Vienna,
and wherever his work penetrated. He was jeered and ridiculed for his
fantastic notions, and was suffering the bitter fate of all pioneers.
Jung was in a powerful position at Zurich, and at once proceeded to
enlarge and deepen the fight for Freud. He became the most powerful
exponent of the Freudian psychology, and helped to bring the new
knowledge and new technic into its first acceptance by the world.

Freud looked upon Jung as upon a favorite son. They fought
shoulder-to-shoulder, the work spread, and they were invited to
this country to give lectures. In Switzerland, Austria, England and
America the psycho-analyst made his appearance, and the world of the
intelligentsia awoke with a shock to the sexual theory. Among the
cultured everywhere there was discussion of the Oedipus complex, the
repressions, the sexual perversions, the idea that much that we had
thought purely spiritual, like art and religion, were merely masks for
sexual complexes. The psycho-analytic movement, held firmly together by
two great men, was forging ahead.

However, Jung, from his continued analysis of patients, and from his
own experiences, was beginning to form doubts in his own mind. There
was something, he began to think, inadequate in Freud’s theory. He
hardly dared, at this time, to make any formal criticism; but finally,
after a great conflict, he was moved, even inspired, to write his first
great book. This book is entitled “The Psychology of the Unconscious.”

He has said of it that it was a voyage of discovery. He himself, when
he started it, hardly knew to what depths it would lead him, to what
conclusions it would force him. But when he was finished, he knew that
he could no longer withhold his own point of view and that this would
inevitably lead to a break with Freud.

It proved to be so. Freud was shocked and appalled. He sent the
manuscript back with a letter in which their relationship was ended. He
said that Jung had betrayed the psycho-analytic movement, that he had
ventured out beyond the bounds of science, and that he was seeking to
destroy the greatest values in the new psychology.

Of course such a break was inevitable, and in the end it proved
fortunate. It set Jung free. He could now go on, without hindrance, in
his great task, which led finally to the greatest contributions thus
far made.

The break itself may be traced to a divergence between two theories of
the unconscious. As will be remembered, Freud’s theory would define the
unconscious as something which is produced after we are born, and when
the repressions begin. All that is anti-social, that flies in the face
of conventional morality and the law of the land, everything that is
taboo, gets walled off from the conscious mind, and is henceforth the
unconscious mind. The unconscious then is a storehouse of the evil, the
thwarted, the unconventional, the instinctive.

Jung does not deny that a _part_ of the unconscious is exactly of this
nature. But in “The Psychology of the Unconscious” he proceeds to
prove, by a wealth of material and a sureness of analysis, that the
unconscious is something far deeper and greater than merely a personal
bag of discards.

He finds in numerous typical dreams and phantasies of his patients
that they reproduce symbols and stories as old as the human race. He
shows that the human mind everywhere, among the most widely scattered
peoples, and in different ages, produces the same typical myths, the
same figures of deities and demons; and that the patient of today gives
forth, in analysis, a similar mythology; and very often something which
he, the patient, has been utterly ignorant of and which is beyond his
understanding.

He finds further that man has always had what might be called a typical
psychological fate; that the story of man’s inner life and development
has always taken a certain form, embodied in the figure of the hero.
The hero, in the myth, is always he who goes forth to conquer greatly,
who overcomes dragons and supernatural powers, but who finally loses
his power, is subjugated and dies an inner death. But out of this death
he is reborn and appears with a new life, often magical, by which he
goes on to his greater achievements.

Such a death and rebirth is pictured in the story of the crucifixion
of Jesus. It appears in a modern work, in “Jean-Christophe,” where
the hero suffers a spiritual disintegration and can no longer compose
music, but with the first breath of Spring, feels the new tides of life
pouring into him and rises to the greatest heights of his creative
power. Such, too, is doubtless the inner story of our greatest American
poet, Walt Whitman. When he was about 35, and after suffering some deep
personal reverse, he secluded himself on Long Island beside the sea for
some weeks, and had a spiritual experience which led to his awakening
as a poet and the beginning of “Leaves of Grass.”

What is this typical myth? It is known as the sun-myth, for the savage
doubtless based it on the strange fact that the sun, after setting in
the west, rose again the following morning in the east. This sun-myth,
boiled down to its essentials, is somewhat as follows: The sun is the
hero. He is born of the mother, the sea, in the east. He rises in his
splendor and reaches the zenith. But now his strange descent begins,
and when he reaches the west, he must re-descend into the waters of the
sea, die again and re-enter the mother’s womb. Actually he is pictured
as being devoured by a sea monster. In the belly of this monster he
rides in the sea under the earth back toward the east. At first he lies
supine; but finally, plucking up courage he begins to battle with the
monster. Finally he kills him, and the body of the great fish floats to
shore, where the hero, the sun, steps out reborn, and rises again in
the east.

This story, based on something seen in nature, is found to be typical
of man’s soul. And Jung discovered that wherever an analysis was
carried far enough, this typical myth appeared in various forms in
the dreams of the patient, and the patient went through an experience
analogous to the myth.

What is this experience? A man has reached a high point of development
and achievements. There comes upon him now a sense of deadness and
futility, a period of disillusionment and turning away from the world,
the experience which is described in the beginning of Goethe’s “Faust.”
This inner death proceeds until he is lost in himself, until he is,
in the language of the myth, devoured by the monster; and now he goes
through a long period of inner suffering and groping until the time
comes when a new life awakens and he goes back to the world of men with
a greater energy, a new vision, and perhaps a new life-task. So, in the
beginning of Nietzsche’s “Thus Spake Zarathustra,” we see the hero step
forth after his years of preparation in the wilderness to bring his
message to the world of men.

This then is the typical experience of those who carry their
development to any height. What is its meaning psychologically?

There is no understanding of it, says Jung, unless we broaden the
conception of the unconscious. And with this he introduces his theory
of the _collective unconscious_.

The human body is the product of millions of years of evolution, and in
it is written the history of life. It is not a sudden creation. If this
is true of the body, how can it be anything but true of the mind, which
is a function of the body? The mind, too, is a product of millions of
years of evolution, and just as the history of life is written in the
flesh, so too the history of man’s spirit, his adventure, is summed
up in the mind. In other words, the new born babe does not present a
mind like a blank sheet of paper on which his personal experience will
begin to write; he is born with the great inheritance of the race, the
collective unconscious, in which is stored the wisdom of the ages as
well as the great instincts, and what Jung calls “the residues of our
animal ancestry.”

How do we know this? Because the mind of a man today, a man even
ignorant and unread, will, on certain occasions, produce the same
myths, the same supernatural figures, the same psychic phenomena as
those produced thousands of years ago, and the same in every part of
the earth among the most widely separated nations and races.

In short, the unconscious contains typical _images_ and typical
_stories_. And whence did these arise? It is quite natural that the
presence in our own unconscious of a wisdom greater than ours and at
the same time of animal instincts sometimes overwhelming in their
destructiveness, should give the savage, for instance, a sense of the
nearness of supernatural powers of good and evil, of some supernatural
wisdom that helped him (in the form of revelation or inspiration) and
of some demonic lust or passion, which, if it swept over him, led
to the orgy, the murder or insanity. Hence, these experiences would
be pictured as the work of beings like those he knew, only greater.
Wisdom was a Great Mother or a Great Father, a God, in short; evil was
a Devil, a Demon, like a bad man, only greater and worse. And certain
experiences would be pictured in the form of monsters, great strange
animals, sometimes animals part human and part beast.

Thus we see an explanation for the origin of the many religions on
earth, all of which have certain things in common. Some sensitive
man experienced his own unconscious in the form of dreams and
hallucinations. Moses for instance heard the voice of God and saw
the burning bush. Psychologically, this would mean that what Moses
thought was outside himself, came from within himself, came from the
unconscious and was, in the technical language, _projected_, the
vision of fire upon the bush, the voice into the air. He heard and saw
something out of his own depths.

Every religion makes this projection. Heaven is up in the sky, hell
under the earth; the Gods are on high, the Devils below. It has
remained for modern psychology not only to locate these phenomena
as in the brain itself, but also to divest them of their miraculous
coating, and to explain them as something having a direct meaning in
the patient’s life.

According to Jung, the collective unconscious is more or less dormant
in all of us, except under certain circumstances or after certain
experiences. The average man goes on unaware of his own demonic and
divine attributes. But in a lynching-bee or in battle the devil will
suddenly awake and transform him from something human into something
monstrous. On the other hand, the youth falling headlong in love,
the man who sustains the death of his loved one and similar great
experiences of life, will encounter the presence of ineffable wisdom
and power, so that he feels he is visited by something beyond the human.

But the process of analysis also leads to the experience of the
collective unconscious. Psycho-analysis is self-discovery. One goes
deeper and deeper into oneself. One goes back on the track of the
years to one’s childhood. One exhausts in the process one’s personal
memories. One goes down, as it were, beyond the personal layers of the
unconscious, to the impersonal. At this point the manifestations of
the collective unconscious begin, and the dreams are now loaded with
mythological conceptions, and images of the supernatural.

This deep entering into oneself Jung defines as _introversion_, a self
descent, and a means of development, a discipline not only in the
wisdom of all time, but in overcoming the undeveloped tendencies in
oneself. It is at this point that the hero is devoured by the monster,
the unconscious, and makes that voyage that leads to his rebirth.

Dante depicts this in his Divine Comedy. The hero, Dante, is led
by Virgil, down through the depth of Inferno (the evil side of the
unconscious), up the mount of Purgatory (the overcoming) and finally
reaches Paradise, where he finds Beatrice, an image of his soul, and a
new wisdom, a new life are his.

Naturally one cannot do justice to so deep a conception within
the space allotted. But we can see at a glance that much that is
otherwise inexplicable, save on the ground of something miraculous
and supernatural, is now given a more natural explanation. We
can understand the genius as one who has the gift of tapping his
unconscious and bringing forth works which are impossible to the run
of men. We can understand why man has always needed a religion. We can
understand those intuitions which lead to new discoveries in science.
Man has a storehouse of wisdom in himself.

We can also understand the strange aberrations of insanity, of those
unfortunates who are caught, as it were, in the collective unconscious,
and live only in a world of demons and divinities and uncanny myths.
We can understand too the demonic outbreaks in war, and the cause of
many crimes. I know of the case of a man who was a clergyman, and who,
each time he had finished an impassioned sermon which passed through
the audience like a rousing electricity, immediately went to a brothel
and indulged in an orgy of drink and sexuality. He was a man under the
complete dominance of the collective unconscious. First the divine side
appeared, with its marvelous inspirations; then the demonic, dragging
him in the mud.

It must not be thought, from the foregoing, that Jung rejected
the sexual theory of Freud. What he did was to modify this theory,
holding that not all cases of neurosis registered sexual repression
or maladjustment. He fully agreed however, that the Oedipus complex
appears as one of the great problems, but instead of interpreting
dreams of this nature to mean that the son actually had incestuous
longings for the mother, he took such dreams, like all others, to be
symbolic. If a man dreams that a monster devours him, it does not mean
that he is literally eaten by a large animal. It means that he has
made a deep introversion. So too a dream of incest means that the son
has reunited himself with the mother. But what does the mother mean?
She may symbolize that period of his life when he actually was united
with her spiritually, the time of early childhood, a time when he was
irresponsible, taken care of, sheltered, helped. His dream may mean
then that he longs to be like a child again; he longs to escape from
the hardships of adaptation and his present problems.

On the other hand the mother may have a deeper meaning. She may appear
with a supernatural air about her, and stand for the collective
unconscious itself, which is the source (or mother) of our conscious
life. The longing of the son for the mother, from this standpoint,
is the longing for descent into self, for deep introversion. It has
the meaning of the sun-myth where the setting sun is devoured by the
monster and starts on his journey toward rebirth.

Since there is great danger in the withdrawal from life, in an
introversion that in a way shuts one in oneself, whether one
does this as an escape from responsibility or from a longing for
self-development, it is natural that the myth should represent this
incest-longing as taboo, as forbidden, just as real incest is, and that
it is only the hero who can overcome this taboo and make that great
descent which Dante pictures in his Inferno, and which in Faust is
shown as the perilous descent to the Mothers.




V.

THE INTROVERT VS. THE EXTRAVERT.


If the reader has compared Freud’s sexual theory with Adler’s power
theory, he must have been struck by the fact that _both theories sound
plausible_. It is certainly true that the conventional morality of
civilization causes us to suppress certain instinctive desires. If
a man is by nature polygamous, and is taught the ideal of monogamy
in such a way as to believe that even the thought of illicit love is
a sin, it is reasonable to think that he may repress his polygamous
tendencies, thus paving the way for an unconscious conflict and a
neurosis.

But, on the other hand, who has not, at least at times, had the painful
feeling of inferiority and not been stirred by an ambition to get on
top? What seems more natural than that the stammerer, Demosthenes,
should strive to achieve greatness as an orator, or that a club-footed
Byron should attempt to make himself a conqueror of women and a famous
poet? Certainly the struggle for power is as widespread and clearly
discernible in life as the instinctive drive for sexuality and a full
love-life.

It is at this point that the greatness of Jung emerges. He had, in
the course of his investigations, come upon a startling divergence
of reaction among his patients, so that he was forced to conclude
that there were two kinds of human being, as different, if not more
different, from each other, than the two sexes. These two types he
named the _extravert_ and the _introvert_.

He next discovered that these two types had long been noted by men of
genius under such designations as objective and subjective, romantic
and classical, realistic and idealistic, materialistic and spiritual.
William James called them the tough-minded and the tender-minded.
William Blake, the English poet, said of them:

“There are two classes of men: the _prolific_ and the _devouring_.
Religion is an endeavor to reconcile the two.”

Jung interprets prolific here to mean, “the fruitful, who brings forth
out of himself”; and “the devouring, as the man who swallows up and
takes into himself.”

Needless to say the prolific type, which has appeared under the
designations of the objective, romantic, realistic, materialistic
and tough-minded, is, more exactly defined, the extravert, and the
devouring type which was also called the subjective, classical,
idealistic, spiritual and tender-minded, is the introvert.

What characterizes the extravert is that _his interest is normally
centered on things outside himself_. An excellent example was our
own Theodore Roosevelt. He was thoroughly extraverted, with instant
response to the world about him. His attention was given wholeheartedly
to anything that caught it. He was a man with an immense diversity of
interests, from birds and flowers, to simplified spelling, from a local
political fight to an international war; poetry, Greek coins, history,
hunting, sports, finance,--the list was almost endless. And into
each of these interests he could throw himself full force, and with
astonishing power. He was as interested in men as in things, and his
friends included people from every walk of life. He was well adapted
to life, and made himself at home almost anywhere. What characterized
him chiefly was that he gave himself without stint, went into action
at a moment’s notice, had a tendency to practicality and common sense
which kept him from being an extremist; was, in short, an excellent
opportunist, knowing, very often, just when to strike, just what to
say, with a decisiveness that won through. He was the fighting man, the
man of action, the man of his own time, his own age, his own country.

He was, in other words, a man “orientated by the object.” That is to
say, his life was determined by things and thoughts and ideas coming to
him from the _outside_, in the main. If an enemy showed his head, he
struck; if a friend, he clasped hands; if a popular movement appeared,
he led it; if there was a war he wanted to be in it; if someone else
originated a good idea (not too radical) he took it over and made it
his.

It will be seen from this that the extravert is normally a man who
is a harmonious part of the world _as it is_. This does not mean, of
course, that he will be merely a conservative; for the world is in
constant change, and an intelligent extravert will be one-to-one with
the forward tide. But since he is, to a large extent, bound up in the
things outside himself, he is, mainly, a reflection of the world. He
could almost say of himself, “I am--what I love.”

His shortcomings are obvious. He covers a lot of ground, but
necessarily in a shallow way. He cannot be deep, because depth implies
a certain slowness, a certain amount of meditation and constant
study, a brooding and solitude. He originates but little, for it is
the thoughts and ideas of others which interest him. He is an enemy
to anything really new, anything pregnant with the future, because
it collides with the world as it is, which is the world he loves.
Finally, he lacks an inner life, the more creative and profound life;
a fact which the keen-sighted Roosevelt knew very well, for he said of
himself, “My danger is that I forget I have a soul.”

Such is a brief sketch of the extravert as he appears in a pronounced,
perhaps an extreme form. The value of using an extreme case is, of
course, that he covers the whole territory, and we can see in him the
various sides of the type. Hence, it will be valuable to consider an
extreme introvert, the direct opposite of Roosevelt, so that we may
come to an understanding of the contrasting type.

If the extravert is characterized by the fact that his interest
is normally centered in things outside himself, the introvert is
characterized by the fact that his interest is normally centered on
things _inside_ himself. From the extravert’s standpoint this would
mean that the introvert was a man who thought of nothing but himself,
was consumed with his own aches and pains, his own fears and hopes, and
perhaps certain erratic and absurd or dangerous ideas. For everything
that the extravert holds most dear, as action, fitting in, being a
“good fellow,” getting on, the introvert looks upon as rather shallow
and cheap, and vice versa, everything most valuable to the introvert
seems foolish, absurd, ridiculous, dangerous to the extravert.

Naturally, to be interested in the things inside oneself need not be
anything trivial. Within oneself is the world of thought and ideas, the
world of imagination, the world out of which every art, every religion,
every philosophy, every invention, every fresh discovery of science,
every new idea for the advancement and development of the race has
sprung. Kant, oblivious of the world, sat and brooded, until out of
himself sprang a great philosophy which wrought a change in the mind of
Europe. A Jesus from his solitary brooding brings forth a new religion.
A Michaelangelo in his isolation gives birth to colossal art.

We find in Friedrich Nietzsche an example of the extreme introvert.
His life, like those of most introverts who were extreme, was devoid of
action and hence without history. There is very little to say about it,
for the real drama took place within him. He served for a short time
in a war, but was discharged because of sickness. He taught philology
for a time in a university. But finally, on a small income, he retired,
and led a secluded life, producing his works, until, while still in
the prime of life, he became insane. He did not marry; he had but few
friends; he was a solitary.

Where Roosevelt presents the picture of a man at home in the world,
Nietzsche is seen as a stranger in it, an alien. Where Roosevelt
went straight out and acted, Nietzsche withdrew into his shell.
Where Roosevelt forgot himself in others, in causes, in the glamour
and absorption of _things_, Nietzsche remained in a state of _acute
self-consciousness_. A Roosevelt glories in the world and thinks it is
good and the people in it excellent and interesting; a Nietzsche sees
it as full of horrible and terrible things and is filled with revulsion
at the sight of human cowardice, slothfulness and depravity. Where
a Roosevelt spreads himself all over, interested in a multitude of
objects, a Nietzsche concentrates more and more on a few things, a few
ideas, a life which shuts out as much as possible anything that will
disturb his predetermined path.

This is the normal attitude of the introvert. He is ill adapted to
the outer world, because he is absorbed in the inner world. And this
absorption leads, in the case of a Nietzsche, to great discoveries and
great works.

If we remember Jung’s conception of the collective unconscious as the
summation of the past, the storehouse of wisdom, the creative source,
we may readily understand that the collective unconscious is the
psychic stream of life itself and that it not only bears the past in
it, but also the budding future. That which is to be lies creatively
within it, and is revealed to the great artist, the great thinker in
majestic symbols and so-called visions. That is why we say that great
art and great thought are always ahead of the world. For the extreme
introvert, absorbed in himself, lives in that world of imagination
where the products of the collective unconscious become known to
him. He has deep intuitions, he actually may have symbols and ideas
presented to him in dream and phantasy, even in hallucination. The
English mystic, Blake, actually saw the forms and shapes which he drew,
and claimed, also, that some of his poems were dictated to him by a
voice. I have already spoken of Moses’ experience with the burning bush
and the voice of God.

It was quite natural therefore that Nietzsche should have been a
forerunner. Out of his years of solitude there came at last an eruption
from the unconscious which was nothing short of amazing. Each part of
Thus Spake Zarathustra, and each part is about a hundred pages long,
was written in ten days. The thoughts and words came so fast that
Nietzsche could not keep up with them. If he was walking, he had to
write on scraps of paper. The experience was so overwhelming that he
compared it with that of the Biblical prophets, and said that not in
two thousand years had there been another such case of inspiration.

What is Thus Spake Zarathustra? It is an incomparable picture of the
collective unconscious, as Jung points out, and foreshadows the new
psychology, which by the slow, painfully cumulative method of science
has come to some of the same discoveries that Nietzsche grasped
intuitively. It also is an indictment of Christian civilization and
foreshadows its breaking up by the erection of a new principle, the
Anti-Christ, the principle of power.

It is, therefore, a revolutionary document, so far in advance of the
time when it was written that Nietzsche dared to show it only to
seven people, most of whom rejected it. He felt that he was in utter
isolation, a “voice crying in the wilderness.”

What Nietzsche celebrates (as shown in the section on Adler) is
_will-to-power_. The doctrine of Christianity is love, and the rule of
love has certain implications. It means that everyone is included, for
in the eyes of love the object is always valuable. To a loving mother
the child who is an idiot is as precious (if not more so) than his more
normal brothers and sisters. She loves him: that gives him value. Hence
the rule of love means equality, fraternity, democracy. It leads to the
idea of the greatest good for the greatest number. It leads, in short,
to the idea of numbers; the rule of the many.

Its dangers are obvious. Everything new, original, different is
pulled down to the common level. It breeds the spirit of conformity,
and finally eventuates in the Babbitts, the ideals of Main Street, the
formation of Ku Klux Klans. Such are the final fruits of a rampant rule
of love. If your neighbors are as valuable (really more valuable) than
yourself (for love always places the object above oneself) then you
should submit to your neighbors, live and do as they live and do, and
give up your own individual path, your own way, and anything original
or new that may be created by you.

It is against this that Nietzsche comes with a voice which is far
deeper than a personal voice. It is the protest of the collective
unconscious itself; it is a deep racial movement against a violation
of man’s own future. Hence, Nietzsche sets the individual against
the race; he raises an aristocratic ideal against the democratic;
he celebrates new values, original things, the exceptional and the
different. As against love, he rears the doctrine of power. And by
power he means the setting of oneself against the race, and the triumph
of oneself, for in this triumph, the new is born, the new art, new
idea, new thinking, and the race is forced into new paths of greatness.

But, seen in another light, the meaning of Zarathustra is the _revolt
of the introvert against the extravert_.

Western civilization is the civilization of the extravert. A
civilization built up on the principle of love is one which puts the
accent on others, on things outside ourself. As the saying goes, it
takes two to love; there is always the other, and that other is more
important than oneself, if it is really love. Hence, love is the root
of the extraverted attitude. As I said of Roosevelt, he might have put
it of himself: “I am--what I love.”

Such a civilization, therefore, tends toward action, democracy, the
rule of the many, invention, business (the exchange between people),
and since the power of a civilization over the individual is almost
overwhelming, it means that a Christian civilization has thwarted,
twisted, deformed all those whose natures were not in accord with it.
Christianity has been a violation of the introvert.

For, naturally, what Nietzsche depicts in his superman and his
will-to-power, is himself. He depicts the psychology of the introvert.
The introvert is governed by the power principle. Where the extravert
finds relief, and only functions happily, by losing himself in others,
by giving himself to the world outside him; the introvert finds relief
only by remembering himself, by refusing to allow others to absorb
him, by withdrawing from the outer world. The introvert is constantly
striving to preserve the integrity of his ego. He seeks an inner
freedom. He feels bound by the demands of others. Action takes him away
from the stream of his ideas, his inner brooding, and he will not have
much of it. Serving others often seems to him a shallow thing, a waste
of time, compared with the great discovery he is tracking, or the art
he is aiming to achieve.

Power vs. love--introvert vs. extravert.

And how is it that two such dissimilar human beings appear in the
same world? We have only to go back to the root-instincts in man
to come to some sort of understanding. As we know, the two great
instincts are that of self-preservation and that of race-preservation.
Self-preservation leads us to think of ourselves, to turn the eye
inward. It is selfish, hence, it is power, not love. Race-preservation
leads us to think of others, of wife and family, of neighbors, of the
world, to turn the eye outward. It concerns interest in others; hence,
it is more love than power.

The symbol of self-preservation is eating, devouring (we eat just for
ourselves); the symbol of race-preservation is sexuality (the motive in
sexuality is, unconsciously, to beget offspring).

One sees now how this discovery of the types by Jung settles the
question as to the puzzling opposition between the theories of Freud
and Adler.

Freud’s theory is the sexual, Adler’s the will-to-power. In other
words, as Jung has pointed out, Freud is an extravert, and his theory
reflects himself; Adler is an introvert, and his theory is typical of
his type.

Both theories are, in a sense, true; only we must never apply the
Freudian theory to an introvert, nor the Adler theory to an extravert.

It will be seen now how the theory of the collective unconscious
includes both the theory of Freud and the theory of Adler and
transcends them both. In the collective unconscious are both the
summed up wisdom of the race with its creative forward push and also
the instincts. The roots of both ego and sex are to be found there,
flowering in one individual more along the ego path, in another more
along the sex path.

The trouble with both Freud and Adler, according to Jung, is that
they stop at this point. Their theories are _reductive_. The one
reduces human nature back to sex, the other to power. We are _nothing
but_--this or that. But, actually, we are also all we have experienced,
and not only that, but also all the race has experienced. We are also
creative. We cannot explain man only in terms of the past, in the
things from which he originated (finally, the instincts), we must also
explain him in terms of the future, his possibilities, the new life he
is seeking, the greatness which is to be.

In short, we cannot cure a neurosis merely by explaining to a man that
he has an Oedipus complex or a homosexual tendency; neither can we cure
him by showing him that he has an inferiority complex and hence an
abnormal will-to-power. We can only cure him by giving him a future to
live; he must go out and feel that he has something to live for.

Just how psycho-analysis arrives at such a result must be reserved for
a later chapter.




VI.

TYPES.


In picturing Roosevelt as an extravert and Nietzsche as an introvert,
I did not mean to imply, of course, that either lacked the opposite
mechanism. All of us are born with both the sexual-instinct and the
ego-instinct, the gift of love and the will-to-power. However, because
we are loaded more one way than the other, the one tendency tends to
suppress the other, and the other remains therefore, not erased, but
relatively undeveloped, and shows itself in inadequate and perhaps
twisted expression.

There was, of course, an extravert in Nietzsche. But that extravert
lived a shadowy life beside the great introvert, and showed himself in
a clumsy relationship with others, an inadequate response to the world,
an inability to get along. So too was there an introvert in Roosevelt,
but he was a poor one, with doubtless strange ideas sometimes breaking
forth into impulsive and wrong-headed action.

All that we can say is that life forces us to accept one side more than
the other, until we become, as it were, specialists along the side of
extraversion or of introversion.

This specialization, of course, makes us one-sided, and this
one-sidedness reaches an even greater narrowness through a still
further specialization, which is that of _function_.

According to Jung, the human psyche is composed of four functions.
These are _thinking_, _feeling_, _intuition_ and _sensation_.

I do not intend to burden the reader with explanations of these terms,
for we would go far afield in a maze of technicalities. I will merely
try to give a hint of their meaning.

_Thinking_ is readily recognizable. It is, in its pure form, an act of
will, and it may begin with an idea, which it proceeds to illustrate
and to prove, or it may begin with many separated facts and proceeds to
bind them together into a theory or idea.

_Feeling_ is a reaction of like or dislike to an object. It must not
be confused with _emotion_. Both thinking and feeling, according to
Jung, are adapted functions; that is, functions which have developed
through the discipline of life, and which did not exist in their pure
forms when we were born. _Emotion_, however, is something allied to
our instinctive life and something we share with the animals. It is
psychologically what Jung calls a feeling-sensation; that is to say,
it is partly physical and partly mental. We see this clearly when we
find an emotion of shame bringing a blush to the cheek, or one of fear
setting the heart pounding, or one of joy making the pulses leap. In
each case we were aware of something mental, sense of joy, fear, etc.,
and something physical, heart pounding, cheeks blushing, etc.

Feeling is separated from sensation and developed into something by
itself. The feeling person is one who has a highly developed sense of
the values of things registered through reactions of like and dislike.
His immediate liking is not accidental, but due to a high sensitiveness
to the really good qualities of the object; his disliking is equally a
deep and a true thing.

If thinking and feeling are conscious functions, that is, more or less
under the direction of the will (one makes oneself think, one learns to
like and dislike), intuition and sensation are unconscious functions.
There is no control of them. They simply happen.

_Intuition_ is a sort of instant insight. It has something of the
lightning flash in it. It is a seeing-into. And this seeing-into may
be of something near or of something far. A man may have a hunch
that a certain horse is going to win a race; a woman may have an
intuition that her husband, in spite of his protests, has been untrue
to her. Intuitions may also be of a deeper sort. The intuition of the
painter leads him to paint the soul, the inner life of the sitter. The
intuition of the inventor by a blinding flash reveals the solution of
the problem.

_Sensation_, according to Jung, is sensing, a function which transmits
a physical stimulus to perception. We see, hear, feel (contact), etc.
It is our conscious sensing of the world about us through images,
sounds, etc., just as intuition is an unconscious sensing of the world
about us. Hence, sensation relates more closely to the physical life,
the body, than any of the other functions.

Now what Jung maintains, and amply proves in his great work on
Psychological Types, is that each of us is not only either an introvert
or an extravert, but also that each of us _develops one of these four
functions at the expense of the others_. There are therefore thinking
types, feeling types, intuitive types and sensational types, and since
any of these types is also either extraverted or introverted we have
eight types.

I will merely give a few examples to show what the types are like:

_Extraverted thinking type._ A good example is Darwin. He was a slow,
patient thinker; thinking was most obviously his most highly developed
function; but this function was extraverted. That is to say, like all
extraverts his attention and interest was in outer things and the ideas
of others. Hence he was one who built up a theory on observed data,
whether this was a direct study of plants and animals or in reading the
works of others. His thoughts proceeded from the outside in.

_Introverted thinking type._ Kant is a good example. He was a great
philosopher. Instead of proceeding from facts to theory, he proceeded
from ideas to facts. That is to say, through his introversion, he
received ideas from the unconscious, great ideas of a timeless nature,
conceptions of time, space, etc., and these he proceeded to elaborate
and prove.

_Extraverted feeling type._ A good example of this type is Mary
Pickford. It is obvious that she is not a thinker; neither is she one
of those intuitive persons who see into others and know life deeply.
She feels others. She responds by like and dislike; and by the fitness
of things. She is well extraverted and well adapted.

_Introverted feeling type._ Eleanore Duse is an example. She was a
great actress; but one felt her to be one of those silent women whose
feelings are all within, who nurse deep moods, who cannot express their
personal selves, who have great difficulty in their relationships and
tend, as a rule, to shun the world and live in seclusion.

According to Jung thinking is more a masculine function; both
extraverted and introverted it is found more in men than in women;
feeling is more feminine, and is usually found in women.

_Extraverted intuitive type._ Lloyd George, of England, is of this
type. A friend of mine who met him during the war said that as soon as
Lloyd George looked at him, he felt he was completely understood, that
the statesman saw through him. His gift has been to see the tide even
before it turned, to see the possibilities in the people about them,
to leap to his conclusions with a sure agility. If the thinking and
feeling types are more or less steady, pursuing a definite and logical
course, the intuitive type (and sensational) is changeable, erratic,
swift, fickle. This is due to the fact that wherever they see a new
possibility, they leap to it, forgetting what they hitherto pursued.

_Introverted intuitive type._ An excellent example is that given
in the last chapter, that of Nietzsche. His intuitions were of the
introverted kind. He saw inwardly, into the unconscious. This type
is usually very badly adapted to the world. It is close to the
unconscious, and its great intuitions of change, disaster and the new
order of the future put it at variance with society to such an extent
as to make life very difficult. Undoubtedly such men have always been
the great mystics, the great prophets, as Jung quotes, “the voice of
one crying in the wilderness.”

_Extraverted sensation type._ We see examples of this type very often
among actors, dancers, circus people. They are people of a very
sensuous nature, depending more on the sharp stimulus of sensation than
on any other function. We also see examples among men who are epicures
at eating, spend much of their time on fine dressing, and who seek
sensation for its own sake, sensuous surroundings, the more sybaritic
forms of sexuality, etc. Among women we see an inordinate love of
luxury, a theatrical exhibitionism, and self-indulgence in many forms.
Since this type is the least noble (as the intuitive is the most noble)
examples need not be given.

_Introverted sensation type._ This is a type extremely hard to
define. I will merely suggest it. It is probable that the poet Poe
was of this type. He was certainly introverted, but his work is not
marked specifically by deep thought, by feeling or by intuition.
If we consider his poetry we see that he gives us strange pictures
of a No Man’s Land of the imagination; and that he senses these
imaginative realms of the dead and the ghostly. We feel a reality in
these dark pictures. But they have no meaning in the way of giving us
to understand life more deeply or leading us to great ideas or high
flights of feeling. What they do give us is a sense of “out of space,
out of time,” as he himself put it. Introverted sensation gives us just
that. It is a sensing of the eternal images of the unconscious.

Such, by a series of swift strokes, are the eight types. I cannot, of
course, in this space, do full justice to them. They are included in
this survey because they represent an important element in Jung’s work
and serve to show how dark and deep are the psychological problems of
the race. With eight types (possibly more) living in the world about
us, there is indeed much room for misunderstanding and for human
conflict.

It is also obvious that Nietzsche was psychologically correct when
he said that he saw only fragments of human beings about him, and
nowhere a man. Here he saw an arm, there a leg, there an eye and here
an ear, there a mouth and here a breast. In short, he saw a world of
specialization, where one man becomes, like Darwin, a good thinker, but
also is callous to art and to the beauty and joy of life; and where
another develops neither his thinking nor his insight, but spends his
existence in a vain round of the senses.

It is no wonder, then, that there is so much mental sickness. Too
great a one-sidedness is a violation of man’s nature, which is full of
various needs and must, if it develops freely, live a rounded life.
Hence, according to Jung, the basis of the neurosis is not merely a
sexual problem or a problem of power; it is due to the conflict between
the developed and the undeveloped functions. There comes a time for the
thinker, for instance, when his outraged feeling life must manifest
itself. It is at such a moment that the neurosis begins.




VII.

THE CONFLICT AND ITS SOLUTION.


If we want to put the matter in its broadest sense, we can say that
the great conflict of this age is between the extraverted attitude and
the introverted, between Christ and Anti-Christ, between Christianity
with its democracy, its insistence on good works, its life of activity
and service, its concentration, actually, on business, machinery and
getting on, and on the other hand, the claims of the individual and the
demands of the inner life for an enhancement of art, of research, of
philosophy, of spiritual development, of freedom.

It is a conflict between the principle of love and the principle of
power, and naturally, it is not only an external thing, but something
that takes place in every individual who has made any sort of high
development. For it is a psychic law that if we carry anything to an
extreme, we meet the opposite.

This is clearly illustrated in Goethe’s Faust. The hero, Faust, has
carried his introverted side to a very high development; indeed, so
far, that everything he studied and all that he knows now appears
lifeless and uninteresting. He is sick of himself, sick of life. It
is all nothing. His search for knowledge has led nowhere. In the end
all that we know is--that we cannot know. What a pity then that he has
squandered his youth on study and meditation and medicine. A kind of
death comes over him; which means, psychologically, that he has reached
the end of one line of development, and is preparing himself to change
over to another and new line.

This soon appears, in the form of a poodle dog who soon shows himself
as the Devil. Both these symbols are inevitable. A dog, as shown
before, relates to our more extraverted side, and it is this side for
which Faust now longs. He has reached the end of his development (for
the time being) as an introvert; the longing that now is awakened is
for _life_--that is, for youth, activity, sexuality, love, ardent
adventure, etc. Hence, the symbol of the dog as representing the side
of himself he has not developed. But this really is also the Devil.
That is to say that which is undeveloped is still in a primitive state,
and through its long repression, bears the aspect of something ugly
and evil. In order, therefore, to reach the “other side,” in order to
begin to live out the unlived possibilities of his nature, he must sell
himself to the Devil.

That is to say, that when the undeveloped side shows itself and takes
command, it cannot be lived unless one is willing to go a path which
may often appear evil and which is in direct defiance to what one has
previously lived and thought good.

This selling out to the Devil appears as a great danger. It means
that he will never be “saved,” never go to heaven. But actually in
the prologue of the play, God allows the Devil to make this compact
with Faust because the Devil is “a part of that power which wills the
bad, but somehow works the good.” That is to say, if one is willing to
step over into the undeveloped side, and live it in spite of its evil
beginnings, one can only develop oneself and finally come to a higher
good.

Such the drama shows. By magic Faust gains wealth and power. He seduces
Gretchen, and her end is insanity, infanticide and a death that
narrowly escapes the gallows. But Faust goes on, and the whole play
shows how, by following the Devil, he brings the neglected side up to
the developed side of himself, so that in the end the Devil is defeated
and Faust gains that heaven where the two sides of his nature may now
be united in harmony.

If Faust outlines the problem, another great work, the “Prometheus and
Epimetheus” of Spitteler, shows its solution. Jung is at great pains to
analyze this long poem in his book on Psychological Types. Prometheus
and Epimetheus stand respectively for introvert and extravert.
Prometheus is the idealist who withdraws from the world into himself to
love and serve his soul; but Epimetheus is the man of the world, who
has common sense, who obeys the conventions and who becomes a king.
Epimetheus cannot wean his foolish brother from his obviously perverted
way of living. A conflict arises between them, which drives Prometheus
all the deeper in himself. Thus a great sickness falls not only upon
him, but upon his God (the collective unconscious). His soul then
brings him a jewel, a thing of magic, a wonder-child, which will save
the world. But this jewel is rejected by the king and by the world, and
as a result there is destruction, the king losing his throne.

“The final extinction of Good is prevented by the intervention of
Prometheus. He rescues Messias, the last of the sons of God, out
of the power of his enemy. Messias becomes the heir to the Divine
Kingdom, while Prometheus and Epimetheus, the personifications of the
severed opposites, become united in the seclusion of their native
valley.... Which means, extraversion and introversion cease to dominate
as one-sided lines of direction.... In their stead, a new function
appears, symbolically represented by a child named Messias. He is the
mediator, the symbol of the new attitude that shall reconcile the
opposites.”

What is the exact meaning of this? To begin with, Prometheus and
Epimetheus must be thought of, not as two men, but as the two sides of
one man, the conflict, in short, between introversion and extraversion.
In the normal course of development, like Faust, one develops first one
side, then the other. Naturally the time must come when the conflict
breaks out in full force: shall one follow the principle of power,
of introversion, or that of love, of extraversion? This conflict
produces a deadlock, and in this deadlock, a solution is offered by the
unconscious in the form of a symbol (the jewel, the wonder-child.) But
this is not understood, and there is a breakdown and collapse. However,
now a new path is found which leads out.

This path Jung calls the _transcendent function_; this indeed is the
Messias of the poem. It is part of the analytic process, and emerges
only at the end of a deep analysis. What it amounts to is an _inner
guidance_.

I have already shown that the collective unconscious is creative, that
it is ahead of the race, and projects at times, through geniuses, a
vision of what is to be, what is becoming. Just as it does this for the
race, it also to a certain extent, and at certain times, is prospective
for the individual, laying out the next step he is to take, and
forecasting the next phase of his development.

This prospective quality is rarely found in the dream, though sometimes
it appears there. It is usually found in the _phantasy_. The phantasy
is a product analogous to the dream, but whereas when we dream we are
fully asleep, and hence, unconscious, the phantasy appears between
waking and sleeping, when we are really half-asleep. It appears as a
sort of dream, sometimes as a clear plastic image, and we know, when we
apprehend it, that we are not asleep.

As Jung works out in great detail, the phantasy has a greater
value than the dream, for the dream is merely the product of the
unconscious, whereas the phantasy is the product of both the conscious
and unconscious minds working simultaneously at that moment when we
are half-conscious, or between the two. Hence, it contains in symbolic
form, our deepest insight, our deepest wish, our clearest foreknowledge
of what to do, being in this respect also superior to our conscious
working out of the problem.

It is by following the insight gained from our phantasies that we
work out the problem of the deep conflict; for if we follow these
phantasies, we take the next necessary step and so learn gradually to
reconcile the claims of extraversion with those of introversion.

In the great religion of the Hindoos, and in fact, in a religion of
the Chinese, we hear much of a Middle Path. The problem as set forth
by those religions is that life consists of a pair of opposites; such
for instance as spirituality vs. materialism, feminine vs. masculine,
love vs. power, divine vs. demonic, etc., and they see clearly that
neither extreme can bring peace. If we live one extreme then soon we
thirst and hunger for the other, and this brings discord and conflict.
The true wisdom of life then is to find a Middle Path, a way between
the opposites. This way is not something that can be thought out
and entered by violence. It is something found gradually through
development in religious ritual.

It is this great thought, this truth which emerges again in modern
psychology. But it comes now with a difference. Psycho-analysis is a
highly specialized scientific technic. It does not deal with ritual
and dogma, it does not lay down general laws to the individual. It
recognizes that his problem is different from that of all other
individuals, and seeks to guide him, not from without, but from within.
From the material which rises naturally from his own psyche, from dream
and phantasy and intuition, he gains the insight which he must follow.

Hence, religion ceases to be a mass-matter, but becomes an individual
matter. As Jung puts it, every creed attempts to make us all live the
phantasies of the founder of the religion. His phantasies may have been
very great and very deep; but they were, in the main, his own. Every
human being is constantly producing phantasies, and in these lies his
own path, and not in those of someone’s else.

What is the goal then of this immense struggle in the human being,
this psychic conflict which sometimes goes on to a point of shattering
the individual, this inner division that cries out for healing, and
which goads us forward to our development? The word that Jung gives
us is _individuation_. We aim, he says, to be individuals in the true
sense of the word. Certainly, however, the fragments that Nietzsche
saw are not individuals, for an individual is one who contains the
many-sidedness of human nature in a state of inner harmony. If then
this one-sidedness precludes individuality, the psyche must be
constantly urging us on to develop that which has been neglected in
order that the undeveloped side may rise level to the developed side,
and so that in the end one may be a complete, rounded, harmonious human
being.

This is the light which the new psychology offers to the race at
a moment of its greatest darkness. It has just fought the bloodiest
and most devastating war of all history; it has fought that war
in the twilight of the Gods. Its old Gods are disintegrating and
vanishing. Everywhere we see the harsh conflict going on, and at the
very moment when man has reached his highest point of extraversion,
with his machines, his radios and phonographs and aeroplanes, his
automobiles and newspapers and movies, his triumph over nature, we see
everywhere the sadness and suffering of humanity, the breakdown of
white civilization in Europe, the restless stirrings of the East, and
an immense increase in neurosis and insanity. A great change is due;
a new light has come. This new light however, is not a religion, it
is nothing to broadcast and apply _en masse_. It is a technic which
must reach individual by individual, making him known to himself,
discovering for him his type with its needs and limitation, showing him
his possibilities, directing him to the path of his own development.
Naturally such development will be different for each individual.
There are not many, as Jung shows, who must go to the painful lengths
depicted in the story of Prometheus and Epimetheus, or even in the
story of Faust. For the majority, a deeper self-understanding,
a knowledge of the types, an ability to understand some of the
products of the unconscious, a lifting off of the repressions, a full
recognition of one’s own needs and desires, will be enough to bring
about a more harmonious, a more fruitful life. But for the few, a
higher, deeper suffering is necessary, possibly because of their gifts,
which may thus be developed and become a heritage for the race.




VIII.

NOTE.


This booklet has aimed to give a glimpse of a vast territory, merely
enough to set the reader toward the complete works on the subject.
It has been necessary to condense and suggest, where a deeper
understanding would be reached by elaboration and numerous examples.
For those who care to study the matter more deeply it is suggested
that they begin Jung by reading the second edition of his Papers in
Analytical Psychology. This is a difficult book because it contains a
series of articles which show his growth, step by step toward a new
insight. Much that he writes there he has since discarded. However, it
is well to read whatever of it one finds interesting.

The next step is to read The Psychology of the Unconscious, which
uncovers the theory of the collective unconscious; and finally Jung’s
master-work up to this time, his Psychological Types.

If I have stimulated the reader to the point where he desires to go on
to these works, then the purpose with which I wrote this little book is
fulfilled.




Transcriber’s Note


Italicized text is surrounded by underscores: _italics_.

Erroneously placed or missing quotation marks or punctuation have been
silently corrected.

The following printer errors or inconsistencies have been changed:

p. 5: “bads” changed to “bad” (receiving bad news)

p. 16: “homo-sexual” changed to “homosexual” (homosexual interest)

p. 18: “psychoanalytic” changed to “psycho-analytic” (In the course of
his psycho-analytic practice)

p. 56: “Epitheus” changed to “Epimetheus” (while Prometheus and
Epimetheus, the personifications)

p. 57: “analagous” changed to “analogous” (The phantasy is a product
analogous to the dream)



*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PSYCHOLOGY OF JUNG ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.