Wolfgang Giegerich

Last updated

Wolfgang Giegerich (born 1942) is a German psychologist, trained as a Jungian analyst. He was a practicing clinician for many years and has published books and articles on depth psychology since the mid-1970s.

Contents

Biography

Wolfgang Giegerich was born in Wiesbaden, Hesse. He studied at the University of Würzburg and the University of Göttingen, and obtained his Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley. [1] He received a Diploma from the C. G. Jung Institute–Zurich. After many years in private practice in Stuttgart and later in Wörthsee, near Munich, he now lives in Berlin. He has been a regular speaker at the Eranos conferences, and repeatedly taught as visiting professor at Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. He was on the faculty at Rutgers University from 1969 to 1972. He has lectured and taught in many countries (Germany, Switzerland, Austria, England, Italy, the US, Russia, Japan, and Brazil) and before many professional societies. His approximately 200 publications in the field of psychology, in several languages, include fourteen books. As a training analyst and supervisor, he currently writes, teaches, and works on publishing his collected English papers in psychology.

Redefining psychology

The major goal of this approach is to redefine the notion of psychology (the logos of the soul) as it has emerged as a discipline in Western thought. Giegerich's perspective is influenced by the traditional depth psychologies of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, and more recently James Hillman’s archetypal psychology. Unlike both Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, Giegerich argues that the methodology of the empirical sciences is an inadequate basis for the study of psychology. Rather, he draws on the phenomenology of Martin Heidegger, the notion of the dialectical movement of consciousness from G. W. F. Hegel, and like Jung, he uses various transformational ideas from medieval alchemy. Additionally, in contrast to modern academic psychology and to the various schools of psychotherapy, Giegerich argues for a shift in focus from the individual, whose very definition has changed radically throughout history, to a focus on the cultural mind, evolving zeitgeist, or as he prefers, “the soul,” which is what ultimately gives rise to the changing understandings of what it means to be an ‘individual’. It is this movement of soul or a culture's mode of being-in-the-world, which when viewed within a historical context, is the primary interest.

Accordingly, in Giegerich's theory, the idea of soul does not function as some kind of objective or empirical substrate producing psychological phenomena. Rather it is the logical structure of thought as which any phenomena, viewed psychologically, exist. As Giegerich states, “There is no such thing as a soul that produces psychological phenomena. The phenomena have nothing behind them. They have everything they need within themselves, even their own origin, their author or subject. ‘The soul’ in my parlance thus does not refer to something real outside of, distinct from, and in addition to psychological phenomenology, but is no more than a still mythologizing, personifying, façon de parler , an expression for the inner soul quality, depth, and internal infinity, of the phenomena themselves as well as for their internal ‘teleology’.”. [2]

Psychology as the discipline of interiority

Giegerich defines psychology as the discipline of interiority. Interiority, in this sense, refers to the ‘interior’ of the phenomena themselves. This should not be confused with the interiority or subjectivity of the mind, though of course, the mind is where psychological phenomena inevitably make their appearance.

The interiority of the phenomenon is pursued though various interpretive strategies and a general attitude which allows the phenomenon to “speak for itself.” Theoretical biases and preconceptions as well as motivations that arise from self-interests, other than a simple desire for understanding and insight, are to be avoided. The desired outcome is the emergence in thought, and eventual articulation, of the logical structure or concrete concept as which the phenomena ultimately become intelligible.

In this approach, there is no privileged content such as, for example, when Freud called dreams "the royal road to the unconscious" or as is common in Jungian psychology to privilege dreams, myths, fairy tales, and various other subjective phenomena. The only stipulation is that whatever the phenomenon under consideration is, that it be regarded from a psychological point of view, that is, as an expression of the soul, and that there is a "pressing urge for us to come to a binding commitment concerning its truth.” [3] What is an expression of the soul? Anything of cultural significance—art, science, politics, social and political phenomena—in other words, any place that thought and mind have made an appearance. The interiority that is spoken of is the essential logical structure of such phenomena.

Depth psychology and the unconscious

Giegerich places his approach within the tradition of depth psychology, but diverges significantly from both Freud and Jung. In Freudian psychology, the notion of depth implies the involvement of the unconscious in the form of hidden motivations or psychodynamics. In Jungian psychology depth generally refers to the archetypal images of the collective unconscious. Giegerich is generally disinclined to use the notion of the unconscious as he argues that it has become reified as an empirically objective entity that functions as a positivistic substrate for psychological phenomena, and for a true psychology, any reduction to positivistic levels of explanation is an abandonment of the basic psychological stance. He is critical of Jung for theoretically locating archetypes within the ‘collective unconscious’ since such a move effectively removes the notion of archetypes (which Jung posited as unknowable in themselves) from the arena of what can be subjected to critical evaluation, and instead gives them the status of a “mystification.” The term “unconscious,” when it is used by Giegerich, is an adjective likely to simply mean not conscious, rather than referring to some sort of ‘container’ of repressed or unknown psychological material or a special ‘place’ within the mind.

The objective psyche and the soul

A key idea in this approach is the notion of the “objective psyche,” a term associated with Jung. Giegerich prefers the term soul, which means roughly the same thing. His preference for the word “soul” results from his seeing the term as carrying many of the subtle meanings and connotations from within the historical development of Western philosophy and psychology. Basically, this notion of the soul refers to the collective categories and structures of thought available to a particular culture at a particular time in history, and as such, it is the subject of psychology, in contrast to “personalistic psychology,” which is focused on the psychology that individual people have. As Giegerich says, “For a true psychology, only the soul, which is certainly undemonstrable, merely ‘metaphorical’ and for this reason a seeming nothing, can be the ‘substrate’ and subject of the phenomena. The human being is then their object; he or she is nothing but the place where soul shows itself, just like the world is the place where man shows himself and becomes active. We therefore must shift our standpoint away from ‘the human person’ to the ‘soul.’ ... I am talking of a shift of our standpoint, perspective, or the idea in terms of which we study, just as before, the concrete experience of individuals or peoples.” And it must be kept in mind that ultimately, it is the soul that frames the horizon for the “concrete experience of individuals or peoples.” [4]

Methodology

In order to appreciate the present expressions of soul, a cultural and historical perspective is basic. Since psychology is primarily a Western phenomenon, it requires an understanding of history, particularly Western intellectual history as well as a familiarity with current trends in world culture. Within a mind so constituted, the phenomenon is given its independence, unencumbered as much as possible by the personalistic concerns for adjustment, development, emotional stability, etc. typically characteristic of modern psychology and of individual consumers of pop psychology. As Giegerich says, “To do psychology, you have to have abstracted from your own thinking, to become able to dispassionately hear what the phenomena are saying and to let the thoughts as which they exist think themselves out, no matter where they will take you and without your butting in with your personal valuations and interests.” [5] The corresponding attitude is one of receptivity rather than egoic agency, a fact which for many people has a resonance with Buddhist thinking.

The idea of ‘thoughts thinking themselves’ is understood in terms of a Hegelian dialectic. Whether one starts with a dream, a symptom, or a cultural production, the phenomenon is allowed to present itself to consciousness, and it often does so through a series of positions and negations. Through iterations of this “dialectical analysis” [6] the phenomenon, whatever it is, is revealed in its depth. Another way of saying it is that the phenomenon is hermeneutically “interiorized into itself,” [7] through an examination of multiple layers of positions, negations and re-established positions. It is this kind of an analysis, in which thought penetrates ever more deeply into the logical structure of the matter at hand, which is why psychology is defined as the “discipline of interiority.” [8]

Changing modes of being-in-the-world

Much of Giegerich's analysis of modern cultural phenomena such as the World Wide Web, the nuclear bomb, and television occur against the backdrop of what he sees as major shifts in consciousness. These shifts occur when the dominant logical form of thought changes.

Giegerich describes broad historical manifestations in the soul's mode of being-in-the-world that are dominant at a particular time in history. These include the shamanistic, the mythic-ritualistic, the religious-metaphysical and the scientific-technological modes of being-in-the-world. The latter characterizes the modern world. Obviously, while these different styles of consciousness may co-exist to some extent each has had a time of ascendency. Each was characteristic of the way people thought about life and the world at that particular historical-cultural nexus.

One of the most profound changes in this regard has occurred along a dimension of immediacy vs. reflected thought—a movement from a consciousness that is identified with the immediacy of its imagistic experiences of the natural world, [9] to a consciousness that can hold the natural world conceptually, vis-à-vis itself, as an object of abstract thought. This change underlies both a fundamental change in human beings’ relation to nature as well as marking a milestone in the cultural achievement of an expanded psychological consciousness. [10]

The ego and the goal of psychology

For Giegerich, psychology has no proper goal other than understanding and insight. Any approach motivated by practical concerns, such as those relating to personal development or even creating a better world, though of undeniable concern to human beings, are regarded as lying outside the true discipline of psychology which is concerned only with the ways that the structure of thought have and continue to evolve through history, in other words, with the logical movement of the soul. This is not to deny the importance of human concerns but rather places them outside the discipline of psychology, perhaps more properly in an anthropological framework.

Psychotherapy

The soul appears in clinical practice in the autonomous form of “the third person of psychotherapy.” As Giegerich says, “[the soul] is no longer to be imagined as the individual property of each of the two other persons [in the consulting room, analyst and patient], but must be given independent reality. It is the world of complexes and archetypal images, of views and styles of consciousness, and thus it is also psychology itself, in the widest sense of the word, including all our ideas about the soul, its pathology and therapy, as well as our Weltanschauung .” [11] [12] A similar view is expressed by Jungian analyst Greg Mogenson talking about the soul in psychotherapy, “When, however, the psychological difference is recognized, and the ideas and feelings, situation, images, and dreams are allowed to have their say, the patient may come to know his own particular version of that ego-sublating discourse with the other that St. Paul described when he said that it was not he who lived and spoke, but his interior other, the savior within him.” [13] Through serving the soul, that is, by the therapist seriously receiving the patient's situation as a manifestation of soul, the patient receives his or her due. Giegerich's theoretical premises have no account of clinical efficacy for mental health purposes in psychoanalytic practice, beyond philosophic thought.

Criticism

James Hillman, among the most accomplished and prolific post-Jungian writers remarked on (some of) the work Giegerich was engaged in prior to 1994: “Wolfgang Giegerich’s thought is the most important Jungian thought now going on—maybe the only consistent Jungian thought at all.” [14] Hillman however qualified such praise by claiming that Giegerich's writings are also "vitiated with fallacies" of which Hillman elaborated three; 'the fallacy of historical models'; 'the ontological fallacy' and 'the fallacy of concretism'. [15] Giegerich's work has also been controversial within the Jungian community, where the criticisms generally have been that his focus is too much on the intellect, that his writing style is unnecessarily opaque, and that it is difficult to relate his theory to the practice of psychotherapy. There is no documentation delineating the psychoanalytic efficacy of Giegerich's philosophical views in light of phenomena presenting for the clinical practice of psychology.

Giegerich is criticised as dismissive of the role of emotion plays in generating interest in logical process, thinking and doctrine, [16] and also for conflating "emotion" or "affect" with Jung's definition of "feelings" whilst summarily dismissing all three from any consideration of their influence in the dialectical process. [17] Whilst Giegerich appeals to Jung's definition of feeling as an "ego function" that negatively interferes with objective thought, he fails to elaborate on the role of physiological affect which, by contrast to Jung's feeling-function, is not an ego function and which nevertheless accompanies the human organism at all times in the form of moods that shape perceptions and influence logic in a way that cannot be simply dismissed as Giegerich recommends. Critics have stated that Giegerich's recommendations to "rise above" or to "be free of" emotions amount to the promotion of lack of emotional awareness and outright disaffectation in Joyce McDougall's sense of the term. [18] He has responded to a few of these criticisms in his writings, but not all. [19]

Partial bibliography

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carl Jung</span> Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist (1875–1961)

Carl Gustav Jung was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who founded analytical psychology. He was a prolific author, illustrator, and correspondent, and a complex and controversial character, presumably best known through his "autobiography" Memories, Dreams, Reflections.

The concept of an archetype appears in areas relating to behavior, historical psychology, and literary analysis.

Collective unconscious refers to the unconscious mind and shared mental concepts. It is generally associated with idealism and was coined by Carl Jung. According to Jung, the human collective unconscious is populated by instincts, as well as by archetypes: ancient primal symbols such as The Great Mother, the Wise Old Man, the Shadow, the Tower, Water, and the Tree of Life. Jung considered the collective unconscious to underpin and surround the unconscious mind, distinguishing it from the personal unconscious of Freudian psychoanalysis. He believed that the concept of the collective unconscious helps to explain why similar themes occur in mythologies around the world. He argued that the collective unconscious had a profound influence on the lives of individuals, who lived out its symbols and clothed them in meaning through their experiences. The psychotherapeutic practice of analytical psychology revolves around examining the patient's relationship to the collective unconscious.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Analytical psychology</span> Jungian theories

Analytical psychology is a term coined by Carl Jung, a Swiss psychiatrist, to describe research into his new "empirical science" of the psyche. It was designed to distinguish it from Freud's psychoanalytic theories as their seven-year collaboration on psychoanalysis was drawing to an end between 1912 and 1913. The evolution of his science is contained in his monumental opus, the Collected Works, written over sixty years of his lifetime.

In analytical psychology, the shadow is an unconscious aspect of the personality that does not correspond with the ego ideal, leading the ego to resist and project the shadow, leading to a conflict with it. In short, the shadow is the self's emotional blind spot - the part the ego does not want to acknowledge - projected as archetypes—or, in a metaphorical sense-image complexes, personified within the collective unconscious; e.g., trickster.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marie-Louise von Franz</span> Swiss psychologist and scholar (1915-1998)

Marie-Louise von Franz was a Swiss Jungian psychologist and scholar, known for her psychological interpretations of fairy tales and of alchemical manuscripts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">James Hillman</span> American psychologist (1926–2011)

James Hillman was an American psychologist. He studied at, and then guided studies for, the C.G. Jung Institute in Zürich. He founded a movement toward archetypal psychology and retired into private practice, writing and traveling to lecture, until his death at his home in Connecticut.

The anima and animus are a syzygy of dualistic, Jungian archetypes among the array of other animistic parts within the Self in Jungian psychology, described in analytical psychology and archetypal psychology, under the umbrella of transpersonal psychology. The Jungian parts of the Self are a priori part of the infinite set of archetypes within the collective unconscious. Modern Jungian clinical theory under the analytical/archetypal -psych framework considers a syzygy-without-its-partner to be like yin without yang: countertransference reveals that logos and/or eros are in need of repair through a psychopomp, mediating the identified patient's Self; this theoretical model is similar to positive psychology's understanding of a well-tuned personality through something like a Goldilocks principle.

Depth psychology refers to the practice and research of the science of the unconscious, covering both psychoanalysis and psychology. It is also defined as the psychological theory that explores the relationship between the conscious and the unconscious, as well as the patterns and dynamics of motivation and the mind. The theories of Sigmund Freud, Carl Gustav Jung, and Alfred Adler are all considered its foundations.

Archetypal psychology was initiated as a distinct movement in the early 1970s by James Hillman, a psychologist who trained in analytical psychology and became the first Director of the Jung Institute in Zurich. Hillman reports that archetypal psychology emerged partly from the Jungian tradition whilst drawing also from other traditions and authorities such as Henry Corbin, Giambattista Vico, and Plotinus.

The Jungian interpretation of religion, pioneered by Carl Jung and advanced by his followers, is an attempt to interpret religion in the light of Jungian psychology. Unlike Sigmund Freud and his followers, Jungians tend to treat religious beliefs and behaviors in a positive light, while offering psychological referents to traditional religious terms such as "soul", "evil", "transcendence", "the sacred", and "God". Because beliefs do not have to be facts in order for people to hold them, the Jungian interpretation of religion has been, and continues to be, of interest to psychologists and theists.

Active imagination refers to a process or technique of engaging with the ideas or imaginings of one's mind. It is used as a mental strategy to communicate with the subconscious mind. In Jungian psychology, it is a method for bridging the conscious and unconscious minds. Instead of being linked to the Jungian process, the word "active imagination" in modern psychology is most frequently used to describe a propensity to have a very creative and present imagination. It is thought to be a crucial aid in the process of individuation.

Embodied imagination is a therapeutic and creative form of working with dreams and memories pioneered by Dutch Jungian psychoanalyst Robert Bosnak and based on principles first developed by Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, especially in his work on alchemy, and on the work of American archetypal psychologist James Hillman, who focused on soul as a simultaneous multiplicity of autonomous states.

The idea of polytheistic myth as having psychological value is one theorem of archetypal psychology as defined by James Hillman, and explored in current Jungian mythology literature. According to proponents of this theory, polytheistic myths can provide psychological insight.

Jungian archetypes are a concept from psychology that refers to a universal, inherited idea, pattern of thought, or image that is present in the collective unconscious of all human beings. The psychic counterpart of instinct, archetypes are thought to be the basis of many of the common themes and symbols that appear in stories, myths, and dreams across different cultures and societies. Some examples of archetypes include those of the mother, the child, the trickster, and the flood, among others. The concept of the collective unconscious was first proposed by Carl Jung, a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst.

A Jungian scholar, Mayes has produced the first book-length studies in English on the pedagogical applications of Jungian and post-Jungian psychology, which is based on the work of Carl Gustav Jung (1875–1961). Jungian psychology is also called analytical psychology. Mayes' work, situated in the humanities and depth psychology, is thought to offer an alternative to the social sciences model.

Mitchell Lynn Walker is an American gay activist and Jungian psychologist who has written many influential articles and books on gay-centered psychology.

<i>The Origins and History of Consciousness</i> 1949 book by Erich Neumann

The Origins and History of Consciousness is a 1949 book by the psychologist and philosopher Erich Neumann, in which the author attempts to "outline the archetypal stages in the development of consciousness". It was first published in English in 1954 in a translation by R. F. C. Hull. The work has been seen as an important and enduring contribution to Jungian thought.

Stanton Marlan, Ph.D., ABPP, FABP is an American clinical psychologist, Jungian psychoanalyst, author, and educator. Marlan has authored or edited scores of publications in Analytical Psychology and Archetypal Psychology. Three of his more well-known publications are The Black Sun. The Alchemy and Art of Darkness, C. G. Jung and the Alchemical Imagination, and Jung's Alchemical Philosophy. Marlan is also known for his polemics with German Jungian psychoanalyst Wolfgang Giegerich. Marlan co-founded the Pittsburgh Society of Jungian Analysts and was the first director and training coordinator of the C. G. Jung Institute Analyst Training Program of Pittsburgh. Currently, Marlan is in private practice and serves as adjunct professor of Clinical Psychology at Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

The theories of Carl Jung are grounded in his evolutionary conception of human brain evolution. This had led to a resurgence of research into his work, beginning in the early 2000s, from the perspective of contemporary neuroscience. Much of this work looks at Jung's theories of a genetically inherited 'collective unconscious' common to all of humankind. This hypothesis was postulated by Jung in his efforts to account for similar patterns of behaviour and symbolic expression in myth, dream imagery and religion in various cultures around the world. Jung believed that the 'collective unconscious' was structured by archetypes - that is species typical patterns of behaviour and cognition common to all humans. Contemporary researchers have postulated such recurrent archetypes reside in 'environmentally closed' subcortical brain systems that evolved in the human lineage prior to the emergence of self-consciousness and the uniquely human self-reflective ego.

References

  1. ↑ Singled out by Giegerich as an important influence during his student days at Berkeley was the philosopher and professor of German literature Andrew Jaszi: Wolfgang Giegerich, “Uma Conversa com Wolfgang Gieguerich” Cadernos Junguianos (Associação Junguiana do Brasil), Issue 1 (2015). p. 59ff.
  2. ↑ Wolfgang Giegerich, David Miller & Greg Mogenson, Dialectics and Analytical Psychology, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2005), pp. 43-44.
  3. ↑ Wolfgang Giegerich, The Soul's Logical Life, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001, p. 230.
  4. ↑ Giegerich, Wolfgang. The Neurosis of Psychology: Primary Papers toward a Critical Psychology. New Orleans, Spring Journal Books, 2005, p. 115.
  5. ↑ Wolfgang Giegerich, Technology and the Soul, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2007), p. 19.
  6. ↑ See Wolfgang Giegerich, et al., Dialectics and Analytical Psychology, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2005), pp. 2-3.
  7. ↑ Wolfgang Giegerich, Technology and the Soul, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2007), p. 13.
  8. ↑ Wolfgang Giegerich, et al., Dialectics and Analytical Psychology, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2005), p. 26.
  9. ↑ This phenomenon is also referred to as “participation mystique.” Both Jung and Giegerich have referred to Lucien Lévy-Bruhl’s early work on this subject. See Lucien Lévy Bruhl, Primitive Mentality, (New York, AMS Press, Inc., 1978).
  10. ↑ See “First Shadow, then Anima, or the Advent of the Guest: Shadow Integration and the Rise of Psychology” in Giegerich, Wolfgang. Soul-Violence, Spring Journal Books, New Orleans: 2008.
  11. ↑ Wolfgang Giegerich, The Neurosis of Psychology, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2005), pp. 41-44.
  12. ↑ This idea of the soul as a “person” derives from Jung and in support Giegerich says, "It is from here that we can understand Jung's tendency to personify psychic phenomena: the anima, the old wise man, the gods, spirits, goblins, partial souls. For only thereby is the phenomenon granted the full reality of a subject, the irreducible autonomy of a person with respect to which we are objects." See Wolfgang Giegerich, The Neurosis of Psychology, (New Orleans: Spring Journal Books, 2005), p.113.
  13. ↑ Greg Mogenson, “The Place of Interpretation: Absolute Interiority and the Subject of Psychology,” Spring Journal, Vol. 77, 2007, 64.
  14. ↑ James Hillman, “Once More into the Fray: A Response to Wolfgang Giegerich’s ‘Killings’,” in Spring Journal, 1994, pp. 1-18.
  15. ↑ James Hillman, “Once More into the Fray: A Response to Wolfgang Giegerich’s ‘Killings’,” in Spring Journal, 1994, pp. 1-18.
  16. ↑ Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality, Free Press, 1978. Exclusively of thought is an intellectual defense. Whitehead writes, "Apart from a feeling of interest, you would merely notice the doctrine but not uphold it."
  17. ↑ Romanyshyn, R. 'Wolfgang Giegerich as Therapsts: The Issue of Emotions', in Spring Journal, Vol 84, Fall, 2010. (p.275-)
  18. ↑ Romanyshyn, R. 'Wolfgang Giegerich as Therapsts: The Issue of Emotions', in Spring Journal, Vol 84, Fall, 2010. (p.275-)
  19. ↑ Giegerich, W. 'Dialectics and Analytical Psychology', Spring Journal Books, 2005
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.