The Transcendent Function

[Admin]

[Admin]

Taken from Collected Works 6, Definitions - Symbol, C.G.Jung

The fact that there are two distinct and mutually contradictory views, eagerly advocated on either side, concerning the meaning and the meaninglessness of things, can only show that processes clearly exist which express no particular meaning, being in fact mere consequences, or symptoms; while there are other processes which bear within them a hidden meaning, processes which have not merely arisen from something, but also tend to become something, and are therefore symbols. It is left to our judgment and criticism to decide whether the thing we are dealing with is a symptom or a symbol.



The symbol is always a product of an extremely complex nature, since data from every psychic function have gone into its making. It is, therefore, neither rational nor irrational (qq.v.). It certainly has a side that accords with reason but it has another side that does not; for it is composed not ‘only of rational but also of irrational data supplied by pure inner and outer perception. The profundity and pregnant significance of the symbol appeal just as strongly to thinking as to feeling (qq.v.), while its peculiar plastic imagery, when shaped into sensuous form, stimulates sensation as much as intuition (qq.v.). The living symbol cannot come to birth in a dull or poorly developed mind, for such a mind will be content with the already existing symbols offered by established tradition. Only the passionate yearning of a highly developed mind, for which the traditional symbol is no longer the unified expression of the rational and the irrational, of the highest and the lowest, can create a new symbol. But, inasmuch as the symbol proceeds from his highest and latest mental achievement and must also include the deepest roots of his being, it cannot be a onesided product of the most highly differentiated mental functions, but must at least have an equal source, in the lowest and most primitive motions of his psyche. For this co-operation of antithetic states to be at all possible, they must both stand side by side in fullest conscious opposition. Such a condition necessarily entails a violent disunion with oneself, even to a point where thesis and antithesis mutually deny each other, while the ego is still forced to recognize its absolute participation in both. But, should there exist a subordination of one part, the symbol will be disproportionately the product of the other, and in corresponding degree will be less a symbol than a symptom, viz. the symptom of a repressed antithesis. But, to the extent in which a symbol is merely a symptom, it also lacks the redeeming effect, since it fails to express the full right to existence of every portion of the psyche, constantly calling to mind the suppression of the antithesis, although consciousness may omit to take this into account.



But, when the opposites are given a complete equality of right, attested to by the ego’s unconditioned participation in both thesis and antithesis, a suspension of the will results; for the will can no longer be operative while every motive has an equally strong counter-motive by its side. Since life cannot tolerate suspension, a damming up of vital energy results, which would lead to an insupportable condition from the tension of the opposites did not a new reconciling function arise which could lead above and beyond the opposites. It arises naturally, however, from the regression of the libido effected by its damming up. Since progress is made impossible by the total disunion of the will, the libido streams backwards, the stream flows back as it were to its source, ie, the suspension and inactivity of the conscious brings about an activity of the unconscious where all the differentiated functions have their common, archaic root, and where that promiscuity of contents exists of which the primitive mentality still exhibits numerous remainders.


Through the activity of the unconscious, a content is unearthed which is constellated by thesis and antithesis in equal measure, and is related to both in a compensatory (q.v.) relation. Since this content discloses a relation to both thesis and antithesis, it forms a middle territory, upon which the opposites can be reconciled. Suppose, for example, we conceive the opposition to be sensuality versus spirituality; then, by virtue of its wealth of spiritual associations, the mediatory content born from the unconscious offers a welcome expression to the spiritual thesis, and by virtue of its plastic sensuousness it embraces the sensual antithesis. But the ego rent between thesis and antithesis finds in the uniting middle territory its counterpart, its reconciling and unique expression, and eagerly seizes upon it, in order to be delivered from its division. Hence, the energy created by the tension of the opposites flows into the mediatory expression, protecting it against the conflict of the opposites which forthwith begins both about it and within, since both are striving to resolve the new expression in their own specific sense. Spirituality tries to make something spiritual out of the unconscious expression, while sensuality aims at something sensual: the one wishing to create science and art from the new expression, the other sensual experience. The resolution of the unconscious product into either is successful only when the incompletely divided ego clings rather more to one side than the other.



Should one side succeed in resolving the unconscious product, it does not fall alone to that side, but the ego goes with it; whereupon an identification of the ego with the most-favoured function (v. Inferior Function) inevitably follows. This results in a subsequent repetition of the process of division upon a higher plane. But if, through the resoluteness of the ego, neither thesis nor antithesis can succeed in resolving the unconscious product, this is sufficient demonstration that the unconscious expression is superior to both sides.



The steadfastness of the ego and the superiority of the mediatory expression over thesis and antithesis are to my mind correlates, each mutually conditioning the other. It would appear at times as though the fixity of the inborn individuality were the decisive factor, at times as though the mediatory expression possessed a superior force prompting the ego to absolute steadfastness. But, in reality, it is quite conceivable that the firmness and certainty of the individuality on the one hand, and the superior force of the mediatory product on the other, are merely tokens of one and the same fact. When the mediatory product is preserved in this way, it fashions 'a raw product' which is for construction, not for dissolution, and which becomes a common object for both thesis and antithesis; thus it becomes a new content that governs the whole attitude, putting an end to the division, and forcing the energy of the opposites into a common channel. The suspension of life is, therewith, abolished, and the individual life can compass a greater range with new energy and new goals.



In its totality I have named the process just described the transcendent function, and here I am not using the term ‘function‘ in the sense of a basic function, but rather as a complex-function compounded of other functions, neither with ‘transcendent’ do I wish to designate any metaphysical quality, but merely the fact that by this function a transition is made possible from the one attitude to the other. The raw material, when elaborated by the thesis and antithesis, which in its process of formation reconciles the opposites, is the living symbol. In the essential raw-ness of its material, defying time and dissolution, lies its prospective significance, and in the form which its crude material receives through the influence of the opposites, lies its effective power over all the psychic functions.

[Admin]

Taken from The Transcendent Function: Jung's Model of Psychological Growth Through Dialogue With the Unconscious Jeffrey C. Miller

We can describe the multiple step process set forth by Jung in the following way:

• 1. Opposites are separated by virtue of the nature of consciousness.
• 2. Since consciousness itself is what creates the opposites, it would "be pointless" to call upon consciousness to resolve them.
• 3. Therefore, we must look to the unconscious, "that maternal womb of creative fantasy," for the resources to reconcile or unite the opposites.
• 4. A symbol capable of uniting the opposites is born in the unconscious through fantasy, "in the natural process of elementary psychic activity."
• 5. The creation of the symbol creates the possibility but not the certainty of the symbol rising to consciousness; "the symbol does not of its own accord step into the breach."
• 6. To bring the symbol to consciousness, "energy must be artificially supplied to the unconscious symbol."
• 7. The supplying of energy to the symbol takes place through the "differentiation of the self from the opposites" in which the Self chooses not to give energy (libido) to either of the opposites.
• 8. The energy (libido), instead of being directed to one of the opposites, "is withdrawn into the self."
• 9. Once withdrawn from the opposite poles into the Self, the libido has no object in consciousness upon which to focus, it "becomes wholly objectless" and, therefore, "sinks into the unconscious" where it retrieves the symbol ("takes possession of the waiting fantasy material") which it "activates and forces to the service."
• 10. Once the symbol is grasped in consciousness, the ego then glimpses a greater possible individuality through a union of the opposites, a "sort of preliminary sketch or representation of the onward way between the opposites," that can turn the conflict into a new way of being and some change may be effected.
• 11. The ego is able to absorb some but not all of the change implicated by the symbol/fantasy material and the opposites are partially reinstated.
• 12. The process begins all over again since the "renewed conflict again demands the same treatment."