Revisiting our Webinar Chat with John GianniniAug 29th, 2013
In our first webinar chat with John Giannini a few days ago, he referred to what Jung’s wrote in the epilogue of Psychological Types; this led me to read the epilogue and the appendix, as I normally stop reading when I arrive at those sections. In paragraph 891 of the appendix I found this statement that appears very convoluted and paradoxical:
Since it is impossible to deny the pertinence of the affective state to the ego, it follows that the ego is the same ego whether in the affective state or in the so-called "authentic” state, even though it displays a differential attitude to these psychological happenings. In the affective state it is unfree, driven, coerced. By contrast, the normal state is a state of free will, with all one’s powers at one disposal. In other words, the affective state is unproblematic, while the normal state is problematic: it comprises both the problem and possibility of free choice. In this latter state an understanding becomes possible, because in it alone can one discern one’s motives and gain self-knowledge.
What is Jung telling us? I believe he is saying that when a function is controlled by emotion one is driven to respond or use the function in a certain way, and it is only by freeing the function from these emotions does one gain the ability to control the function. This means I have to free my functions from their attached emotional energies to have self-knowledge and exercise self-control. To me this is what the individuation or development journey is about, and it requires my willingness to own my emotional baggage each and every step of the way. What does Jung’s statement mean to you? >>>Post your comments>>