Introduction At the beginning of the 20th century. a new radical manner of understanding the head had a great impact. non merely in the scientific discipline of psychological science. but in all Western civilization and in most of the facets of society. Psychoanalysis adopted an of import function. which still remains in our modern life. and Sigmund Freud was the responsible for it. Nevertheless. during this clip. Carl Gustav Jung developed an of import theory. doing an huge part to psychological science.
Jung didn’t merely knock depth psychology in order to better it but he besides provided different positions and new thoughts with the purpose of seeking to understand in a more complete sense the human being. its abysmal inside universe and its dealingss with the outside universe. Jung established the pillars of the school of “Analytical Psychology” . In the undermentioned paragraphs different facets of the theories of these two of import figures in the history of psychological science will be revised and contrasted.
Finally. the chief failing of Freud’s and Jung’s thoughts will be presented in order to explicate why it is complicated to see their work and theories as scientific discipline in its proper sense. Theories and contrasts Freud developed a dynamic psychological science in which the person is seen as an energy system. He named the energy dedicated for mental procedures and psychological work: ‘psychic energy’ and completed his theory by set uping a construction of the personality. composed by three systems ( Id. Ego and Superego ) through which the psychic energy is transformed and exchanged.
Therefore. to Freud. a mentally healthy individual was an single with a “unified and harmonious organization” ( Hall. 1964. p. 43 ) of these three constructions. The Id. Ego and Superego co-operate leting the person to pass through satisfactorily through its environment in order to accomplish his/her desires and demands. Jung focused his work in the apprehension and development of what he called the arquetypes. as he considered them truly of import to a proper human growing.
These are familial sensitivities of huge emotional significance. which shape the manner in which the human consciousness can see the universe and its self-perception. Jung developed this construct after an intensive survey. He looked for forms in dreams and myths of many civilizations and societies through history. associating them and happening a significance in common. Finally. he began to “personify” the chief originals of single personality. giving significance and specific features to each one of them.
Jung has been barely criticized for bodying constructs of the unconscious: “Very few people find it necessary to personify… unconscious mental activities in the manner that Jung did any more than they find it necessary to body physical parts of themselves like the liver or kidneys. which function independently of the will. ” ( Storr. 1995. p. 13 ) The unconscious Even though Freud and Jung ended developing really different theories to understand the human head. both writers were interested in researching the construct of the unconscious.
They focused their probe on understanding what the unconscious is and how it influences the person. Both wanted to give a scientific account to this construct. so they based their theoretical accounts of unconsciousness on empirical research of their patients. Freud was interested in the pent-up memories of the unconscious. He believed that persons encounter ideas and feelings with such a painful content that they have to be maintained in the unconscious in order to do it possible to get by with day-to-day state of affairss.
To him. wants and frights are the most of import content of the unconscious. They are frequently repressed due to the anxiousness caused by a struggle generated by the individual’s inherent aptitudes. Hence. to Freud. the purpose for psychological science is to look for factors in personality of which we are nescient. Therefore. when naming them into consciousness the single experiences a decrease of tenseness: “our scientific work in psychological science will dwell in interpreting unconscious procedures into witting 1s. and therefore filling in the spreads in witting perceptions” ( Freud. 1938. p. 102 ) .
Jung did non reject Freud’s thoughts of the unconscious but he created a much more complex theoretical account of it. He thought it was composed of: the personal unconscious ( which is related to Freud’s thoughts as Jung didn’t do much accent on depicting it ) and the corporate unconscious. The content of the corporate unconscious is inherited. cosmopolitan and impersonal. being common for all worlds. The arquetypes are found in it. He besides gave an of import function to myths in his psychological science.
Asexplained before. myths and originals are closely related and the 2nd one evolved from Jung’s surveies on the first 1. To him. myths had a positive and of import map. leting the person to hold “life self-respect. significance and purpose” ( Storr. 1995. p. 43 ) . Myth is considered as an adaptative mechanism and the corporate unconscious is the “myth-creating degree of mind” . Despite the spiritual intensions that Jung gave to the myth construct. it was besides attached to the originative energy of the head. being the beginning of inspiration to all the artistic Fieldss.
So the corporate unconscious becomes the responsible of the production of visions. spiritual thoughts. myths and some dreams common to different civilizations and times through history. Treatment The differences between their theories led them to concentrate on different points when handling their patients. Freud focused on the past and childhood developmental phases of the patient. His chief purpose was to allow the patient discovery traumatic experiences or merely unbearable events that are repressed and maintained in the unconscious.
As mentioned before. when doing these experiences and ideas witting. their pathological symptoms will be reduced. At the beginning of his work. hypnosis and katharsis were the most used signifiers of intervention but subsequently on he gave these two techniques less precedence. Free association and the reading of dreams become the most popular and utile techniques for Freud. In contrast. Jung was concerned with the maturity developmental phase. The integrating and balance of the originals within the single head were cardinal to the procedure of growing and development of personality.
He explored the footings of individualization and transcendency. Jung believed that these two procedures are the most of import 1s for advancement in the individual’s mental life. The beginning of struggle in persons is found when a portion of the mind is ignored. Jung looked for the struggle through symbol reading and new developed techniques as elaboration. active imaginativeness or dream series method. Then he strengthened the single uneasiness and motivated them to develop their ain single personality as being distinguishable from the others.
The scientific discipline contention Why has depth psychology lost power and importance in the most important psychological schools of our clip? Why Jung’s analytical psychological science does non hold a proper function in the existent psychological science? Since its beginning. psychological science has fought to be considered as a scientific discipline. Jung and Freud were every bit concerned with this issue. They both based their theories in empirical research with their patients: by observation and correlativity of informations they drew their decisions. They considered themselves scientists but both of them developed theories and intervention techniques whose nature contradicts the kernel of scientific discipline.
The first noticeable issue is that each one of them developed their theories from their ain experience: Most of Freud’s patients were mental cases and Jung’s were psychotics so it is complicated to use their ideas and positions of handling unwellness to the existent particular and big categorization of mental upsets. Freud’s construction of personality ( Id. Ego and Superego ) . his position of the unconscious. witting and preconscious’ temperaments and even more basic constructs of his psychological science. as the libido or charge. can’t be proved.
Any of them can’t be presented in an nonsubjective manner. Jung’s originals and construct of corporate unconscious have precisely the same job. They both based their theories on subjective readings. Jung. in his early work. used and developed new techniques for nonsubjective measurement of different mental operation but. as Freud. their chief techniques were based on subjective readings: Dreams/ symbols analysis. free association technique. …
Jung’s surveies on chemistry and his spiritual ideas ( which influenced him vastly ) along with Freud’s psychological science which is focused in childhood sexual development are the most of import causes for the lessening in popularity of these theories within psychologists today. As now. more than of all time. psychological science has its scientific bounds established. Decision There is no uncertainty: Freud and Jung made an huge part to psychological science. The unconscious retook popularity and was explored in different and new ways.
Besides. they developed and expanded many of the cardinal constructs that help to understand modern intervention: the defence mechanisms of the person ( designation. supplanting. sublimation. repression. projection. reaction formation. arrested development and arrested development ) . composites. transcendency. individualization procedure. transference. the function of gender and the inherent aptitudes. art as portion of treatment… But it is besides apparent that the theoretical footing of depth psychology and analytical psychological science. as Freud and Jung established them. failed in the application of the scientific method. at least as we consider the method in our yearss.
It is the intangible kernel of these theories what doesn’t enable them to busy a bigger and more important topographic point in our modern and empirical psychological science.