Chacham's Journal: Verbiage: Jung (via Jacobi): neurosis in intellectuals

"The Psychology of C G Jung" By Jolande Jacoby Page 105-105 under "THE `PROSPECTIVE' ASPECT"

Neurosis tends toward something positive; this is the corner-stone of Jung's view. It is not just an ailment for its own sake as it may sometimes appear. For `thanks to the neurosis contrived by the unconscious, [people] are shaken out of their apathy, and this in spite of their own laziness and often desperate resistance'. In the course of the years neurosis may result from the energy dammed up by the one-sidedness of consciousness as well as from a state of unconsciousness poorly adapted to the demands of the environment. However, relatively few individuals succumb to neurosis, though the number is on the rise, especially among so-called intellectuals; particularly in the years before World War II the figure assumed terrifying proportions. `The few who are smitten by such a fate,' says Jung, `are really persons of the "higher" type who, for one reason or another, have remained too long on a primitive level,' no doubt because, under the pressure of the mechanized outside world, they could no longer do justice to the claims of the inner realities. But it should not be supposed that there is any `plan' of the unconscious behind all this. `A perfectly understandable urge toward self-realization would provide a quite satisfactory of the explanation. We could also speak of a retarded maturation of the personality.'

The first

[On Lawn]

The first P v J article I can cling to. Thanks.

Re:The first

[Chacham]

Heh. But this isn't P v J! This is about people who deny their unconcious because they are afraid of it, and thus leads to a form of neurosis. Jung pointed out that many "intellectuals" actually suffer from this. I pointed it out because i see it today as well. That "intellectuallism" is a form of divorcing one from reality. This is probably more of a P trait, but Js are suseptible as well.

Oh, and, your welcome. :)

Re:The first

[On Lawn]

I might have mis-spoken then. I thought he concluded that even entering into the P v J battle (a system based on Jungs archetypes) was shear neurosis.

Re:The first

[Chacham]

I don't know. If (s)he does talks about it, i haven't gotten that far yet. Though, i am under the impression that P/J is a Briggs invention, and not Jungian at all. Well, based on, and with Jung, but not explicitly part of the standard theory. Obviously though, there is implicit mention of it, since he explains the theory that was used by Briggs to create the other three parts of the inventory.