Reviews for Theories of Psychology: A Handbook - Ann F. Neel - Hardcover - REVISED

The average rating for Theories of Psychology: A Handbook - Ann F. Neel - Hardcover - REVISED based on 2 reviews is 3 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2011-07-18 00:00:00 Christy Britton This primer lays out Jung’s thinking in a systematic and cohesive way. In a nutshell, the authors say of Jung that we are born whole but, as we develop and operate in the world, we stray from our true self. We emphasize certain parts of our psyche too much and our personality becomes “lopsided.” Jung’s goal is to restore balance by rediscovering the wholeness that was once there but has been lost. This is about self-realization. It’s a “drawing out…of something that is already there in a nascent state.” (1) This is the process of transcendence. Dreams and symbols are the key tools to draw these dynamics out of ourselves, into awareness, so that we can rebalance ourselves. When unaware, we are driven by hidden forces within. Through therapeutic intervention, deep reflection, and periodic retreats from the world, we regain our lost wholeness. Determinism gives way to teleological causation in which we choose to be who we are meant to be. (2) The psyche operates at three levels. Most are only aware our conscious self, which has ego as its gatekeeper, reflecting what is dominant within the psyche’s four main ways of functioning (thinking, feeling, sensing, intuiting). Underneath lies the personal unconsciousness. It is filled with complexes (clusters or constellations of tendencies) that have a hold over us and push us in various directions. But these rest on the deeper foundation of the collective unconscious that is genetic and universal in nature, constituting our “race” or species memory. It is filled with “primordial images,” “archetypes” that tie inner disposition to see the world in certain ways with objects in the world that correspond to inner need. The archetypes shape “our personalities and behavior.” (3) The persona is our mask, the ideal we present to the world, but it hides our inner self. The anima and animus are our male/female characteristics. The shadow is our animal nature, and the self is “the archetype of order, organization, and unification.” It’s our attempt to be one and whole. We become unbalanced when we, for example, deny the male and female sides of our nature. When we suppress our animal side by accentuating our persona, we decrease “the motive power for spontaneity, creativity, strong emotions, and deep insights.” When we repress our shadow (animal) impulses, we project them unto others. There are many parallels between Jung’s thinking and that of Darwin (biology) and Schopenhauer (Jung’s favorite philosopher the authors say). The foundation for Jung’s theory, the collective unconscious, is not inconsistent with Darwinian theory (species memories created by mutation and natural selection). Jung’s observations on inborn, variable character-personality types align with Darwin's own thinking. Energy (for Jung, libido is psychic energy in general), energy imbalances, distribution of energy to the various psychic structures, equilibrium, disturbances via energy intake from the world, etc., all might be seen as the tangible evidence of Schopenhauer’s Will as it operates within the psyche. Though Jung does not use this terminology, the individual’s interaction with the world is dialectical. We operate out of need to do what we must, to be who we need to be. We encounter opposition and conflict (the failure to adapt), which creates tension within as well as without, prompting, ideally, the individual to move toward wholeness (“psychosynthesis”). And some of the Jungian archetypes reflect basic, biological needs. The “shadow” is our animal self (Freud’s id), which contains the needs we seek to satisfy. Because of the shadow self’s conflicts with society, we present ourself to others through our “persona” to conform, thereby masking our shadow self to conform to societal expectations. The mother archetype (and father) represents our need for nurture and protection, and the demon archetype represents all that’s “out there,” real or imagined, that constitutes a threat to what we have and who we need to be. I think that Jung’s idea of self-realization that presumes a good result for others is wrong. Given our variable, inborn nature, and the role of power to promote or protect the self, he minimizes aggressive tendencies. Aggression for Jung comes from the lack of inner balance whereas for Freud it is inherent to who a good many of us are. In some cases (e.g., sociopaths), it could be that self-fulfillment is completely antithetical to social harmony. This is the best summary of Jung's thought that I've come across. (1) The authors write: “Man does not strive for wholeness; he already has it, he is born with it. What he must do throughout his life span, Jung says, is to develop this inherent wholeness to the greatest degree of differentiation, coherence, and harmony possible, and to guard against it breaking up into separate, autonomous, and conflicting systems. A dissociated personality is a deformed personality.” (2) This is not free choice per se. Rather, it is a choice to be who we really are and who we are meant to be. An inherent end point draws the individual toward itself. Again, as the authors state elsewhere, “The individual begins his life in a state of undifferentiated wholeness. Then, just as a seed grows into a plant, the individual develops into a fully differentiated, balanced, and unified personality.” (3) While the authors believe that the formation of the collective archetypes can occur through normal evolutionary processes (mutation and natural selection), they comment that Jung believed these were created through Lamarckian processes (experiences acquired in a personal lifetime could be passed along genetically), which could account (via the conflation of personal and collective unconscious) for the extensive number of archetypes Jung saw.

Review # 2 was written on 2011-07-18 00:00:00 James Landis Having brushed up on my Freud, I moved on to Jung, who always strikes me as the psychological equivalent of a tarot card reader. That said, I'm far more willing to buy into his theories of balanced opposing forces than I am into Freud's grand conviction that I spent my childhood wanting to make out with my Dad. As with his Primer of Freudian Psychology, Hall (this time with co-author Vernon Nordby, which has to be one of the great unused hero names of 19th century novels) provides a brief overview of Jung's personal and professional life before launching into a dispassionate examination of his psychological theories and his impact on "modern" (as of 1972 anyway) psychology. Perhaps I'm more inclined to ascribe to Jung's beliefs (well, more inclined than I am to Freud's) since he comes off, even in this brief overview, as far more erudite than Freud, open to both other lines of inquiry and to life experience in a way that Freud, locked in his office in Vienna, never seemed to be. I'm also inclined to wonder just how Jung would feel about the continued popularity of the Myers-Briggs personality types, which are a rank bastardization of his work. Overall, this is another great intro by Hall (and Sir Vernon Nordby!), well-organized and lucidly written, but only the tip of the Jungian iceberg. Best for beginners, or those simply looking for a brush-up.