Jung's Model of the Psyche Applied to the Hand

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Hi Patti,

Jung never presented any 'hand model' for the psyche, therefore I think your title can induce some confusion... because this actually concerns your model for the hand (based on your perception of Jungian psychology).

.

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Hi Patti,



(You presented this model as a response to my 'speculative' hand model which I presented in response to your)

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Okay Patti, thanks for describing what made you create your picture.

By the way, I hope you will respond to my main point of feedback regarding the location of the Persona inside your picture.

Patti wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Okay Patti, thanks for describing what made you create your picture.

By the way, I hope you will respond to my main point of feedback regarding the location of the Persona inside your picture.

I see the energy of the hand as non-linear and multi-dimensional. The persona is the mask to the outer world.

Martijn (admin) wrote:
In Jung's mind model for the mind are the following 4 component the key-features that describe how a character can develop, from inner to outer:

- PERSONA - EGO -
- SHADOW - SELF -



One can associate there with the 4 section of the hand

- UPPER ULNAR SECTION - UPPER RADIAL SECTION -
- LOWER ULNAR SECTION - LOWER RADIAL SECTION -



Or... this alternative shows better how the shadow can play a role in
how the libido becomes involved in intimate relationships:




And... the picture below shows that the SHADOW and
the PERSONA are most accessible for others (= the outer world)!

(More details are described here: http://www.jung.org/jungs%20model%20of%20the%20psyche_gad.html)

Jung describes the persona as that which one is not, but which oneself and others think one is (CW 9/1, par. 221). It is a functional complex that comes into existence for reasons of adaptation or personal convenience but is by no means identical with the personality. The persona is exclusively concerned with the relation to objects.

The shadow is everything an individual refuses to acknowledge about himself (CW 9/1, par. 513). Qualities perceived as undesirable, unacceptable, or reprehensible are repressed or hidden from view in the shadow, the polar opposite of the persona.

Patti wrote:
From the link you shared above:

Jung describes the persona as that which one is not, but which oneself and others think one is (CW 9/1, par. 221). It is a functional complex that comes into existence for reasons of adaptation or personal convenience but is by no means identical with the personality. The persona is exclusively concerned with the relation to objects.

The shadow is everything an individual refuses to acknowledge about himself (CW 9/1, par. 513). Qualities perceived as undesirable, unacceptable, or reprehensible are repressed or hidden from view in the shadow, the polar opposite of the persona.

I understand this to indicate that the persona is the outward face or mask. It's task is working with the outer world. In the paradox of Jungian theory, opposites have the seed of the other inside themselves. Remember the yin/yang symbol.

Here the author writes that the opposite of the Persona is the Shadow, but I think the opposite of the Persona is both the Anima/Animus and the Shadow. The things of the Personal Unconscious and the Collective Unconscious are not out in the open and visible. The Persona hides all the layers beneath it, some of those layers already hidden behind the self in the Unconscious and the Collective Unconscious. A result of the tension between these polarities might be 'behavior'.

Yes Patti, I can understand that you make the connection between Persona & Shadow from the square-pictures. However, the Persona was described by Jung more like the opposite of the Ego (of the opposite of the Self):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_(psychology)

"In Jungian psychology, the shadow or "shadow aspect" may refer to (1) the entirety of the unconscious, i.e., everything of which a person is not fully conscious, or (2) an unconscious aspect of the personality which the conscious ego does not recognize in itself."


Wow, this comment of Jung is also interesting:

"Jung also believed that "in spite of its function as a reservoir for human darkness—or perhaps because of this—the shadow is the seat of creativity; so that for some, it may be, 'the dark side of his being, his sinister shadow...represents the true spirit of life as against the arid scholar'"

I think this illustrates that my choice to associate the shadow with the hypothenar (mount of moon) makes at least sense regarding the aspect of creativity (imagination) - because while creativity often gets associated with the ring finger... I associated the seeds of creativity with the mount of moon (and the expression with the ring finger).

And nice to see you associate it with the hypothenar as well!

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:
From the link you shared above:

Jung describes the persona as that which one is not, but which oneself and others think one is (CW 9/1, par. 221). It is a functional complex that comes into existence for reasons of adaptation or personal convenience but is by no means identical with the personality. The persona is exclusively concerned with the relation to objects.

The shadow is everything an individual refuses to acknowledge about himself (CW 9/1, par. 513). Qualities perceived as undesirable, unacceptable, or reprehensible are repressed or hidden from view in the shadow, the polar opposite of the persona.

I understand this to indicate that the persona is the outward face or mask. It's task is working with the outer world. In the paradox of Jungian theory, opposites have the seed of the other inside themselves. Remember the yin/yang symbol.

Here the author writes that the opposite of the Persona is the Shadow, but I think the opposite of the Persona is both the Anima/Animus and the Shadow. The things of the Personal Unconscious and the Collective Unconscious are not out in the open and visible. The Persona hides all the layers beneath it, some of those layers already hidden behind the self in the Unconscious and the Collective Unconscious. A result of the tension between these polarities might be 'behavior'.

Yes Patti, I can understand that you make the connection between Persona & Shadow from the square-pictures. However, the Persona was described by Jung more like the opposite of the Ego (of the opposite of the Self):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_(psychology)

"In Jungian psychology, the shadow or "shadow aspect" may refer to (1) the entirety of the unconscious, i.e., everything of which a person is not fully conscious, or (2) an unconscious aspect of the personality which the conscious ego does not recognize in itself."


Wow, this comment of Jung is also interesting:

"Jung also believed that "in spite of its function as a reservoir for human darkness—or perhaps because of this—the shadow is the seat of creativity; so that for some, it may be, 'the dark side of his being, his sinister shadow...represents the true spirit of life as against the arid scholar'"

I think this illustrates that my choice to associate the shadow with the hypothenar (mount of moon) makes at least sense regarding the aspect of creativity (imagination) - because while creativity often gets associated with the ring finger... I associated the seeds of creativity with the mount of moon (and the expression with the ring finger).

And nice to see you associate it with the hypothenar as well!

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti, one more question regarding your picture:

You have described where the 'collective unconscious' begins (at the wrist/heel of the palm)... but where do you perceive it to end?

Patti wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti, one more question regarding your picture:

You have described where the 'collective unconscious' begins (at the wrist/heel of the palm)... but where do you perceive it to end?

It's ancestral and collective. It could be cultural collective as well. It extends into this past and common human resource that is likely endless.

Here is a sketch drawn by Jung illustrating the Collective Unconscious.



http://www.jung.org/jungs%20model%20of%20the%20psyche_gad.html

He described it as the fire within, a resource.

So, to answer your question, I don't see it as ending and that is why I placed it partially beyond the persona at the base of the palm and wrist.

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti, thank your for your answer.

Regarding the content of your answer: if you don't see the Collective Conscious as ending.... this implicates that in your view the collective unconscious is everywhere where the conscious- and unconscious elements are.

Sorry Patti, but that is now how Jung described the Collective Unconsious (and the 'landscape' picture also does not suggest this at all).

Even though all important words used by Jung are present inside your picture, the topography of these features inside your picture do not reflect how Jung has described them.

For example, Jung e.g. described the collective unconscious as a different entity from the personal unconscious (quoted from Jung):

"A more or less superficial layer of the unconscious is undoubtedly personal. I call it the "personal unconscious". But this personal layer rests upon a deeper layer, which does not derive from personal experience and is not a personal acquisition but is inborn. This deeper layer I call the "collective unconscious". I have chosen the term "collective" because this part of the unconscious is not individual but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has contents and modes of behaviour that are more or less the same everywhere and in all individuals."

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Carl_Jung#The_Archetypes_and_the_Collective_Unconscious_.281934.29


So, the collective unconsciouis includes the archetypes (Self, Shadow, Animus, Anima)... but it does not include the 'personal psyche' as suggested by your picture!

Therefore your picture is misleading... in the sense that your picture suggests various interactions between features that were actually defined by Jung to represent SEPERATE features of the psyche. For example: you picture suggests that the collective unconscious can manifest in the persona or vice versa... but that is not what Jung described at all.[/color]

Martijn (admin) wrote:

For example, Jung e.g. described the collective unconscious as a different entity from the personal unconscious (quoted from Jung):

"A more or less superficial layer of the unconscious is undoubtedly personal. I call it the "personal unconscious". But this personal layer rests upon a deeper layer, which does not derive from personal experience and is not a personal acquisition but is inborn. This deeper layer I call the "collective unconscious". I have chosen the term "collective" because this part of the unconscious is not individual but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has contents and modes of behaviour that are more or less the same everywhere and in all individuals."

Patti wrote:Another quote from Carl Jung:

"Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar's gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart throughout the world." - CARL JUNG, "New Paths in Psychology"

Jung's theory is not one that a person can argue with facts, but needs to be felt with the heart.

... we are not really discussing how to interpreate Jung's theory, I have only tried to discuss your interpretation of Jung's theory via the details inside your picture.

But apparently it's enough for you that your picture feels okay for you inside your heart.


So, to me it appears that you allow yourself to put subjective validation above Jung's descriptions - because I have described that various features inside your picture do not match the 'landscape of the mind' as described by Jung.

I preceive your reference to the heart as a reflection that you've put locks at the doors of your mind... and meanwhile your descriptions do not explain your choices regarding your picture at all. You've only managed to describe things in terms of: this is here, and that is there - with no direct reference to Jung's theory at all.

So basically, you've used Jung vocabulary inside your picture, but the landscape in your picture does not represent Jung's theory at all... because it appears to violate some of the hierarchic principles described in Jung's theory.

It's a bit hard to accept that you didn't acknowledge anything that I have described in my feedback, and I want you to know that after my efforts I can therefore only perceive this topic as a (conscious or unconscious) attempt to substantiate your 'belief' that the thumb represents the inner outer world.

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:Another quote from Carl Jung:

"Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar's gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart throughout the world." - CARL JUNG, "New Paths in Psychology"

Jung's theory is not one that a person can argue with facts, but needs to be felt with the heart.

... we am not really discussing how to interpreate Jung's theory, I have only tried to discuss your interpretation of Jung's theory via the details inside your picture.

But apparently it's enough for you that your picture feels okay for you inside your heart.


So, to me it appears that you allow yourself to put subjective validation above Jung's descriptions - because I have described that various features inside your picture do not match the 'landscape of the mind' as described by Jung.

I preceive your reference to the heart as a reflection that you've put locks at the doors of your mind... and meanwhile your descriptions do not explain your choices regarding your picture at all. You've only managed to describe things in terms of: this is here, and that is there - with no direct reference to Jung's theory at all.

So basically, you've used Jung vocabulary inside your picture, but the landscape in your picture does not represent Jung's theory at all... because it appears to violate some of the hierarchic principles described in Jung's theory.

It's a bit hard to accept that you didn't acknowledge anything that I have described in my feedback, and I want you to know that after my efforts I can therefore only perceive this topic as a (conscious or unconscious) attempt to substantiate your 'belief' that the thumb represents the inner world.