JUNG'S COURAGEOUS RECANTATION

As spokesman of the Zurich group of psycho-analysts, Dr. Jung has lately

protested against these arbitrary translations, which he calls Freud's

"reductive method."[6] In formulating a more scientific method of his own,

which he calls the "constructive method," Jung reveals a change of views so

extensive as to suggest, on several points, almost a conversion to the ideas

that Dr. Morton Prince expressed in 1910, as to the insecurity of the

psycho-analytic ideas of symbolism.[7] At that time, Jung valiantly defended

the Freudian preference for stereotyped meanings as against the Principian

idea of highly variable meanings.[8] Now, in going to the other extreme from

Freud's cipher-like method, Jung has succumbed to the attractions of that

other popular method, equally decried by his former master: the symbolical

method of Joseph and Daniel.[9] But at least he has bravely called in

question views which he once espoused with exaggerated positiveness.

Jung's principal amendment to the Freudian dream-analysis consists in

subjecting the literal implications of the established Freudian symbols,

such as snakes and staircases, to a further, more allegorical mode of

treatment in which the sexual meaning is greatly altered. The evidence,

which Freudians continually find in dreams, for a pre-occupation concerning

infantile and sexual needs[10] is explained away, as merely incidental

reviewing of past experiences, in the attempt to solve problems of the

future by analogy with the past. In other ways also Jung alters his views,

notably by following Prince in explaining the dream on a broad biological

foundation, viewing it as part and parcel of the individual's life-struggle.

Yet it is difficult to see wherein the so-called constructive method really

applies, to the concrete dream, those biological conceptions of which it

makes ostentation. The practical consideration of telling the patient what

is good for him, and of keeping sexuality in the background seems to

dominate the technique.[6] The interpretations are no more accurate than

before. There is not much to choose between the reductive and the

constructive method from the standpoint of the application of logic.

The Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Volume 10 · 第 122 / 162 题