The Foundations of Jungian Psychology

21.11.24

In this article, I’ll share 3 important keys to unlock a deeper understanding of Carl Jung’s work: His unique empiricism and why Jung never invented a theory, learned nominalism, and the notion of psychic reality.

Facts first and theories later!

Let’s start by exploring Carl Jung’s empiricism: “Although I have often been called a philosopher, I am an empiricist and adhere as such to the phenomenological standpoint. […] As this statement indicates, I approach psychological matters from a scientific and not from a philosophical standpoint. Inasmuch as religion has a very important psychological aspect, I deal with it from a purely empirical point of view, that is, I restrict myself to the observation of phenomena and I eschew any metaphysical or philosophical considerations” (C.G. Jung – V11 – §2).

The first thing we have to understand about Carl Jung’s methodology is that he had an empirical approach and was completely averse to metaphysical claims. Furthermore, he used the comparative and descriptive method, in other words, he was interested in describing the phenomenon instead of formulating theories. In that sense, a theory would be a closed and fixed system, where you reduce the phenomena to a definite cause and strive to create a formula that can be generally applied.

When Jung started developing his own ideas and epistemology, he was mainly moving away from psychoanalysis and Freud’s sexual theory. Jung regarded Freud’s ideas as one possible explanation among many and what drove them apart was Freud’s desire to raise his sexual theory to a religious level. When you operate with a fixed system, everything will be filtered through these lenses, consequently, this will always give you the same answers and promote a reductionistic attitude that strives to fit everything in a tiny box.

A grotesque example would be a few somatic approaches that claim that if you have pain in the right side of your body, you have problems with your father and the masculine, but if the pain is in the left side of your body, you have problems with your mother and the feminine. We also have theories that want to explain someone’s personality through their body shape and even blood type. Of course, this sounds sketchy, but this is what happens when you try to create a formula, it’s something that appears to give proper answers, but in reality, it doesn’t. Furthermore, a generally valid formula will always disregard individuality, that’s why Jung was interested in describing the nature of psychological processes, rather than formulating a fixed theory.

With his epistemology, Carl Jung also criticized positivism and the statistical method, without completely abandoning it, as he was always striving to conciliate the paradox between the collective and the individual truth. To do so, Jung proposed the use of the dialectical method in the therapeutic setting. In his eyes, this is the only method that can fully respect individuality, as the dialectic doesn’t work with preconceived notions and fixed rules, and seeks to unravel the internal logic within the phenomena, also considering the peculiarities of the individual context. Finally, the dialectic is a method that strives to unite opposing tendencies in the psyche and produce a new synthesis, which Jung calls the symbol formation process, the core of Jungian Psychology. But don’t worry about this now, there’s a whole chapter dedicated to it.

The Psychophysical and Personal Equations

Carl Jung also disregards the notion of a passive and “pure observation” of the phenomena postulated by classic empiricism. Being influenced by Kant, Jung believes that the subject is active in the process of knowing and that our pre-dispositions influence our interpretation of reality. Furthermore, Jung differs from the monist and physicalist approach that considers the psyche a mere fruit of brain activity*.* Being a dualist, he considers an interdependence between psyche and body, giving each one their own dignity. In that sense, Jung’s empiricism was founded on a psychophysical equation and a personal equation.

**Classic empiricism postulates that humans are a tabula rasa to be marked by experience and that all knowledge is mediated by the five senses. However, in Psychological Types Jung explains that consciousness has four functions, namely thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition. The sensation function is the one linked with sensory experience, however, perception isn’t limited by it, we still have intuition, which is a form of perception via the unconscious.

Thus, intuition perceives all the elements that come from the unconscious which consciousness perceives as psychic images. Therefore, Jung considers perception the sum of sensation and intuition, which constitutes the psychophysical equation. It’s important to realize that these psychic images aren’t invented by the conscious mind, rather they spontaneously appear independent of conscious will, which leads Jung to consider the existence of an objective psyche*,* i.e., which can’t be reduced to mere subjectivity, namely the impersonal or collective unconscious.

The second layer of Carl Jung’s empiricism is the personal equation, as he considers the subject active in the process of knowing and severely doubts the possibility of “pure observation”. Jung indicates that our subjectivity already interferes in the very process of observation, as he puts it, one sees what one can best see oneself. This process will become clearer when we cover the concept of conscious attitude and the psychological types, which will be done in the second and fourth chapters respectively.

Learned Nominalism

In the second part of our exploration, we have to cover something that’s absolutely a game changer. In Psychological Types, Carl Jung referred to himself as a learned nominalist, which is neither a realist nor nominalist attitude, but rather something in between. Under this light, Jung’s work consisted in cataloging his findings, once he realized there were patterns, he’d group and label them, like the shadow or the animus and anima. However, it’s imperative to understand that the name itself doesn’t explain what the thing is, as this would be a metaphysical statement, these labels are simply a map to help us better navigate the nature of the phenomenon. That’s why you’ll never see Jung stating what the shadow is, rather, he’ll describe its qualities and how it generally behaves.

In Jung’s words, “In view of the enormous complexity of psychic phenomena, a purely phenomenological point of view is, and will be for a long time, the only possible one and the only one with any prospect of success. “Whence” things come and “what” they are, these, particularly in the field of psychology, are questions which are apt to call forth untimely attempts at explanation. Such speculations are moreover based far more on unconscious philosophical premises than on the nature of the phenomena themselves. Psychic phenomena occasioned by unconscious processes are so rich and so multifarious that I prefer to describe my findings and observations and, where possible, to classify them—that is, to arrange them under certain definite types” (C.G. Jung – V9 – §308).

Apart from embracing many of Kant’s views, Jung was also heavily influenced by William James and his pragmatic approach to psychology, from which he adopted the notion of cash-value and conceptual short-cuts. The first one refers to how our beliefs shape our immediate experience in the world. For instance, if I believe I can fly, one of the immediate impacts in my life is that I might actually try to do it by jumping off a cliff. It’s interesting to realize that these beliefs may or may not be rooted in objective reality, raising the importance of our individual interpretations and how this impacts the quality of our experience.

Moreover, Jung doesn’t consider truth something static and universally valid, instead, he relates to truth in a dynamic and processual way. Truth appears in the process of validating an idea. In Two Essays On Analytical Psychology, Jung analyzes one particular case through two opposing points of view, Freud’s sexual theory and Adler’s will to power. It’s incredibly interesting to see how different the conclusions are when you adopt each one of these lenses, as the treatment will be the exact opposite.

As you might have guessed, Carl Jung concludes by saying that both points of view are partially valid and what will determine its applicability is the individual context. May I add, from my experience as a therapist, it’s important to work with opposing truths at all times, as there’s a variability not only in the individuals but also in their own experiences, which requires different lenses for different situations, and more often than not, a combination of opposing perspectives. In that sense, truth is an instrument and not an end in itself. Once again, we can see why different from Freud and Adler, Jung didn’t have a theory.

The second notion, conceptual short-cuts, is related to the applicability of Carl Jung’s concepts, which he also referred to as empirical concepts or experimental concepts. Rather than saying what the thing is, he wants to give us a map to navigate the psyche. In other words, when you can name a certain pattern, like a complex, it gives you an orientation on how to treat it, how the phenomenon usually behaves, what to expect, and what is the best course of action. That’s why just knowing a fancy name means nothing, it’s just substituting the reality of the phenomena with words.

For instance, I see this lazy interpretation all the time, when a man dreams with a woman, people immediately say “Oh wow, you just dreamed with your anima”. Knowing the name of something gives you the illusion that you understood it, but in reality, this is meaningless and it’s not an interpretation. Even though it might be an anima figure, you have no idea what it means for the dreamer, why it appeared, or how to proceed. Knowing the concepts is just the first step, as they’re tools that point in the right direction so our exploration can begin.

Psychic Reality

Now, we’re ready to explore Carl Jung’s most misunderstood idea, the notion of psychic reality and further our understanding of his attitude toward metaphysics. In Jung’s words, “It is really my purpose to push aside, without mercy, the metaphysical claims of all esoteric teaching […] To understand metaphysically is impossible; it can only be done psychologically I therefore strip things of their metaphysical wrappings in order to make them objects of psychology” (C. G. Jung – The Secret of The Golden Flower – p. 129).

In Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, Carl Jung explains that our experience happens in between two realms, the objective and concrete reality mediated by the senses and the subjective and spiritual reality of the soul. However, Jung proposes that regardless of these two opposing realms, every experience we have is mediated by psychic images. To Jung, “The only form of existence of which we have immediate knowledge is psychic. We might well say, on the contrary, that physical existence is a mere inference, since we know of matter only in so far as we perceive psychic images mediated by the senses” (C. G. Jung – V11 – §16).

Furthermore, Jung appeals to Kant saying that we can’t ever know what a thing is. Even if we’re discussing objective experiences mediated by the senses, like witnessing a fire, the most we can do is explain its chemical reactions. But that’s it, no one can know what fire is in itself, or its “ultimate essence”, as this would also be a metaphysical statement.

In Jung’s words, “The fact that I restrict myself to what can be psychically experienced, and repudiate the metaphysical, does not mean, as anyone with insight can understand, a gesture of scepticism or agnosticism pointed against faith or trust in higher powers, but what I intend to say is approximately the same thing Kant meant when he called “das Ding an sich” (the thing in itself), a “purely negative, borderline concept”. Every statement about the transcendental ought to be avoided because it is invariably a laughable presumption on the part of the human mind, unconscious of its limitations“ (C. G. Jung – The Secret of The Golden Flower – p. 135).

Before these limitations, through an empirical and pragmatic approach, Jung proposes the psychological standpoint in hopes of ending the discussion between psyche and matter and uniting this paradox. Carl Jung states, “I would only like to unite these extreme opposites by an esse in anima, which is the psychological standpoint. We live immediately only in the world of images“ (C. G. Jung – V8 – §624).

As we can see, no metaphysical question has a definite answer, as we’re structurally incapable of knowing these realities for themselves. In that sense, Carl Jung adopts a Kantian agnostic attitude, and rejects any pretensions to metaphysics, making statements exclusively in the psychological field. Therefore, when Jung speaks of God, he is not speaking of a really existent metaphysical being, but of the psychic image of what constitutes the greatest amount of libido, the highest value operative in a human soul, the imago Dei.

Even if this entity exists, he would only be perceived psychologically, as a psychic image, we would never see him as he really is outside of us, only as an inner manifestation in our psyche. As Jung says, “There are men “whose God is the belly” (Phil. 3 : 19), and others for whom God is money, science, power, sex, etc.” (C. G. Jung – V6 – §67). Lastly, Jung summarizes this notion with the elegant and pragmatic definition that “Everything that works, that affects is real”.

Rafael Krüger – Live an Audacious Life

Whenever you’re ready, there are 3 ways I can help you:

• Katabasis – The Shadow Integration Manual – My best-selling and accessible course will introduce you to all you need to know to disrupt the unconscious patterns keeping you stuck.
• Audacity University – Master Jungian Psychology in 1 year. Become your own analyst or integrate these tools into your professional practice.
• Mentorship – Catalyze your personal transformation with 1 on 1 sessions. Master your psychology, relationships, and business.