Symptoms and Complexes
Symptoms[1]
result from obstructions or impediments to the ‘normal’ flow of
energy. Symptoms are
signals to the
conscious that there is lack of psychic
equilibrium somewhere, and that
homeostasis[2]
requires conscious attention in order to fix the problem.
It is, in fact, one of the most important tasks of psychic hygiene to pay continual attention to the symptomatology of unconscious contents and processes, for the good reason that the conscious mind is always in danger of becoming one-sided, of keeping to well-worn paths and getting stuck in blind alleys. The complementary and compensating function of the unconscious ensures that these dangers, which are especially great in neurosis, can in some measure be avoided.
Complexes
are emotionally charged, splintered-off, psychic entities that manifest around
certain archetypes and have
escaped (split off) from
consciousness’ control to lead a separate existence -
in the unconscious.
The negative effects of complexes are
commonly experienced in
the four functions, while the complex dictates the
reactions and responses in
the thought process.
“Complexes interfere with the intentions of the
will and disturb the
conscious
performance; they
produce disturbances of memory and blockages in the flow of
associations; they appear and disappear according to their own laws; they can
temporarily obsess
consciousness, or influence speech and action in an
unconscious way. In a word,
complexes behave like independent beings.”[3]
“Everyone knows nowadays that people “have complexes”.
What is
not so well known, though far more important theoretically, is that –
complexes can have us.”[4]
Complexes[5] are both necessary and helpful. They are naturally occurring, sustain the psyche[6], and they help us recognize that there is something discordant with our psychological balance. Lacking consciousness of their existence though makes us liable to be controlled by them. Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing where the problem is or how to get to it. All one can do is create a ‘receptive’ field of consciousness that is ‘grounded’ enough to receive the unconscious symptoms or complexes (when they are ripe) for processing (working through). If the conscious is incapable of accepting the symptom or complex (i.e. too toxic to ‘digest’) it will be ‘negated’ back into the unconscious via suppression or repression[7].
“A complex can be really overcome only if it is lived out to the full. In other words, if we are to develop further we have to draw to us and drink down to the very dregs what, because of our complexes, we have held at a distance.”[8]
A complex is an agglomeration of associations – a sort of picture of a more or less complicated psychological nature – sometimes of traumatic character, sometimes simply of a painful and highly toned character. Everything that is highly toned is rather difficult to handle. If, for instance, something is very important to me, I begin to hesitate when I attempt to do it … Such disturbances are complex disturbances – even if what I say does not come from a personal complex of mine. It is simply an important affair, and whatever has an intense feeling-tone is difficult to handle because such contents are somehow associated with physiological reactions, with the processes of the heart, the tonus of the blood vessels, the condition of the intestines, the breathing, and the innervation of the skin. Whenever there is a high tonus it is just as if that particular complex had a body of its own, as if it were localized in my body to a certain extent, and that makes it unwieldy because something that irritates my body cannot be easily pushed away because it has its roots in my body and begins to pull at my nerves. Something that has little tonus and little emotional value can be easily brushed aside because it has no roots. It is not adherent or adhesive.
Ladies and Gentlemen, that leads me to something very important – the fact that a complex with its given tension or energy has the tendency to form a little personality of itself. It has a sort of body, a certain amount of its own physiology. It can upset the stomach. It upsets the breathing, it disturbs the heart – in short, it behaves like a partial personality. For instance, when you want to say or do something and unfortunately a complex interferes with this intention, then you say or do something different from what you intended. You are simply interrupted, and your best intention gets upset by the complex, exactly as if you had been interfered with by a human being or by circumstances from outside. Under those conditions we really are forced to speak of the tendencies of complexes to act as if they were characterized by a certain amount of will-power.
(The) so-called unity of
consciousness is an illusion. It is really a
wish-dream. We like to think that we are one; but we are not, most decidedly
not. We are not really masters in our house. We like to believe in our
will-power and in our energy and in what we can do; but when it comes to a real
show-down we find that we can do it only to a certain extent, because we are
hampered by those little devils the complexes. Complexes are autonomous groups
of associations that have a tendency to move by themselves, to live their own
life apart from our intentions. AP 81
The complexes, then, are partial or fragmentary personalities. When we
speak of the ego-complex, we naturally assume that it has a consciousness,
because the relationship of the various contents to the centre, in other words
to the ego, is called consciousness. But we also have a grouping of contents
about a centre, a sort of nucleus, in other complexes. So we may ask the
question: Do complexes have a consciousness of their own? AP 82
(When)
Jung discovered the complexes of the
unconscious, he
(discovered) them as dark spots, namely, as holes in our field of
consciousness.
By making the association experiment he found out that the field of
consciousness was
tightly put together, that we can associate clearly and correctly except when a
complex is touched, and then there is a hole. If a complex is
touched in the association experiment, there are no associations.
That, therefore, is the normal view of the unconscious, namely that
everything is clear except for those disagreeable dark spots of the complexes,
behind which are the
archetypes. TPoPA 161
On
the primitive level it is therefore, self-evident that “demons,” or in our
language “complexes,” have to be removed from the realm of the subject;
integration – that is, a responsible acceptance into the total personality – is
attempted only exceptionally, namely, by certain shamans or medicine men who
kept a few conquered “demons” near them as “spirit helpers.”
The ego also is an agglomeration of highly toned contents, so that in principle there is no difference between the ego-complex and any other complex.
[1]
I.e. anxiety, fear, depression,
guilt, conflict, etc.
Symptom is defined as: Anything that accompanies X and is regarded as an
indication of X’s existence.
[2]
A return to equilibrium
[3]
Psychological Factors in Human
Behaviour.
Par. 253
(Jung Lexicon page 38)
[4] Bennet, E. A. What Jung Really Said, New York: Schocken Books (1983).
[5]
For example:
Inferiority complex, Oedipus complex, God
complex, Messiah complex, Castration complex, Hero complex, and father.
[6]
“In the same way that atoms and
molecules are the invisible components of physical objects, complexes
are the building blocks of the psyche and the source of all human
emotions.
(Jung Lexicon –
Complexes pg. 38)
[7]
RE REPRESSION - “Repression
is not only a factor in the etiology of many neuroses, it also
determines contents of the personal shadow, since the ego generally
represses material that would disturb peace of mind”
(Jung Lexicon
Repression – page 118)
[8]
“Psychological Aspects of the
Mother Archetype”
CW 9i,
par. 184 (Lexicon – Complexes – page 39)