Adler’smostseriousdeviationsfromtherealityofobservationandhisdeepestconfusionofideashaveariseninhisattempttocorrelatethebasicprincipleofhistheorywiththepsychiclifeofthechild,anattemptwhichhasbecomeinevitableinpsychoanalysis。Thebiological,social,andphysiologicalmeaningof"masculine"and"feminine"haveherebecomemixedintoahopelesscomposition。Itisquiteimpossible,anditcaneasilybedisprovedbyobservation,thatthemasculineorfemininechildbuildsitsplanoflifeonanyoriginalundervaluationofthefemininesex;norisitconceivablethatachildcantakeastheguidinglinethewish:"Iwillbearealman。"Inthebeginningnochildhasevenaninklingofthesignificanceofthedifferenceinsex,morelikelyitstartswiththeassumptionthatbothsexespossessthesame(male)genital。Itdoesnotbeginitssexualinvestigationwiththeproblemofsexdifferentiationandisfarfromentertainingthesocialundervaluation[p。47]ofthewoman。
  Therearewomeninwhoseneurosisthewishtobeamanneverplayedanypart。Sofarasthe"masculineprotest"isconcerned,itcaneasilybetracedbacktoadisturbanceoftheoriginalnarcissismcausedbythethreatofcastration;thatis,tothefirsthindranceofsexualactivity。Alldisputeastothepsychogenesisoftheneurosesmustultimatelybedecidedinthesphereofthechildhoodneuroses。Thecarefulanalysisofaneurosisoftheearlyyearsofchildhoodputsanendtoallmistakesinregardtotheetiologyoftheneuroses,andalldoubtsastothepartplayedbythesexualimpulses。ThatiswhyAdlerinhiscriticismofJung’s"ConflictsoftheChild’sMind"wasobligedtoresorttotheimputationthatthematerialofthecasesurelymusthavefollowedauniformnewtendency"fromthefather。"[17]
  IwillnotlingeranylongeroverthebiologicalsideofAdler’stheory,andwillnotexaminewhetherthepalpableinferiorityoforgansorthesubjectivefeelingofthesame(oneoftencannottellwhich)canpossiblybethebasisofAdler’ssystem。Onlypermitmetoremarkthatthiswouldmaketheneurosisaby—productofthegeneralstunting,whileobservationteachesthatanexcessivelylargenumberofhideous,misshapen,crippled,andwretchedcreatureshavefailedtoreacttotheirdeficienciesbydevelopinganeurosis。NorwillIconsidertheinterestinginformationthatthesenseofinferioritygoesbacktoinfantilefeelings。Itshowsusinwhatdisguisethedoctrineofinfantilism,somuchemphasizedinpsychoanalysis,returnsinAdler’sIndividualPsychology。Ontheotherhand,IamobligedtoemphasizehowallpsychologicalacquisitionsofpsychoanalysishavebeendisregardedbyAdler。Inhisbook"TheNervousCharacter,"theunconsciousstillappearsasapsychologicalpeculiarity,butwithoutanyrelationtohissystem。
  Later,hedeclared,quitelogically,thatitwasamatterofindifferencetohimwhetheranyconceptionbeconsciousorunconscious。Fortheprincipleofrepressions,Adlerneverevincedanyunderstanding。WhilereviewingalecturebeforetheViennaSocietyin1911,he[p。48]said:"OnthestrengthofacaseIwishtopointoutthatthepatienthadneverrepressedhislibido,againstwhichhecontinuallytriedtosecurehimself。"[18]SoonthereafteratadiscussioninViennaAdlersaid:"Ifyouaskwhencecomestherepression,youaretold:fromculture。Butifyouaskwhencecomesculture,thereplyis:fromtherepression。Soyouseeitisonlyaquestionofaplayonwords。"AsmallfragmentofthesagacityusedbyAdlertodefendhis"nervouscharacter"mighthavesufficedtoshowhimthewayoutofthispettifoggingargument。Thereisnothingmysteriousaboutit,exceptthatculturedependsupontheactsofrepressionofformergenerations,andthateachnewgenerationisrequiredtoretainthisculturebycarryingoutthesamerepressions。Ihaveheardofachildthatconsidereditselffooledandbegantocry,becausetothequestion:"Wheredoeggscomefrom?"
  itreceivedtheanswer,"Eggscomefromhens,"andtothefurtherquestion:
  "Wheredothehenscomefrom?"theinformationwas"Fromtheeggs,"andyetthiswasnotaplayuponwords。Thechildhadbeentoldwhatwastrue。
  JustasdeplorableanddevoidofsubstanceisallthatAdlerhassaidaboutthedream——thatshibbolethofpsychoanalysis。Atfirstheconsideredthedreamasaturningfromthemasculinetothefeminineline,whichsimplymeanstranslatingthetheoryofwish—fulfillmentindreamsintothelanguageofthe"masculineprotest。"Laterhefoundthattheessenceofthedreamliesinthefactthatitenablesmantorealizeunconsciouslywhatisdeniedhimconsciously。Adlershouldalsobecreditedwiththepriorityofconfoundingthedreamwiththelatentdream—thoughts,onthecognitionofwhichrestshisideaof"prospectivetendency。"Maederfollowedhiminthis,lateron。Indoingsohereadilyoverlooksthefactthateveryinterpretationofthedreamwhichreallytellsnothingcomprehensibleinitsmanifestappearancerestsuponthesamedream—interpretation,whoseassumptionsandconclusionsheisdisputing。ConcerningresistanceAdlerassertsthatitservestostrengthenthepatientagainstthephysician。Thisiscertainlycorrect。Itmeansasmuch[p。49]assayingthatitservestheresistance。
  Butwhencethisresistanceoriginates,andhowithappensthatitsphenomenaservethepatient’sinterest,thesequestions,asifofnointerestfortheego,arenotfurtherdiscussedbyAdler。Thedetailedmechanismsofsymptomsandphenomena,themotivationofthevarietyofdiseasesandmorbidmanifestations,findnoconsiderationatallwithAdler,sinceeverythingisequallysubservienttothe"masculineprotest,"totheself—assertion,andtotheexaltationofthepersonality。Thesystemisfinished,attheexpenseofanextraordinarylaborofnewinterpretation,yetithasnotcontributedasinglenewobservation。IbelievethatIhavesucceededinshowingthathissystemhasnothingwhateverincommonwithpsychoanalysis。
  ThepicturewhichonederivesfromAdler’ssystemisfoundedentirelyupontheimpulseofaggression。Ithasnoplaceatallforlove。Onemightwonderthatsuchacheerlessaspectoflifeshouldhavereceivedanynoticewhatever;butwemustnotforgetthathumanity,oppressedbyitssexualneeds,ispreparedtoacceptanything,ifonlythe"overcomingofsexuality"
  isheldoutasbait。
  ThesecessionofAdler’sfactionwasfinishedbeforetheCongressatWeimarwhichtookplacein1911,whiletheoneoftheSwissSchoolbeganafterthisdate。Strangelyenough,thefirstindicationsofitwerefoundinsomeremarksbyRiklininpopulararticlesprintedinSwissliterature,fromwhichthegeneralpubliclearned,evenbeforeRiklin’sclosestcolleagues,thatpsychoanalysishadsucceededinovercomingsomeregretablemistakeswhichdiscreditedit。In1912Jungboasted,inalettertomefromAmerica,thathismodificationsofpsychoanalysishadovercometheresistancestoitinmanypersons,whohithertowantedtoknownothingaboutit。Irepliedthatthiswasnothingtoboastabout,thatthemorehesacrificedofthehard—wontruthsofpsychoanalysis,thelessresistanceshewouldencounter。
  ThismodificationfortheintroductionofwhichtheSwissaresoproud,againwasnothingmoreorlessthanthetheoreticalsuppressionofthesexualfactor。IadmitthatfromtheverybeginningIhaveregardedthis"progress"asatoo—far—reachingadaptationtothedemandsofactuality。
  [p。50]
  Thesetworetrogressivemovements,tendingawayfrompsychoanalysis,whichIwillnowcompare,alsoresembleeachotherinthefactthattheyareseekingtoobtainafavorableopinionbymeansofcertainloftypointsofview,assubspecieæ;ternitatis。InthecaseofAdler,thisrô;leisplayedbytherelativityofallknowledge,andbytherightsofthepersonalitytoconstrueartificiallyanypieceofknowledgetosuittheindividual;whileJunginsistsontheculturalhistoricalrightsofyouthtothrowoffanyfettersthattyrannicaloldagewithossifiedviewswouldforgeforit。Theseargumentsrequiresomerepudiation。Therelativityofallourknowledgeisaconsiderationwhichmaybeusedasanargumentagainstanyothersciencebesidespsychoanalysis。Thisideaoriginatesfromwell—knownreactionarystreamsofthepresentdayinimicaltoscience,andwishestogivetheappearanceofasuperioritytowhichwearenotentitled。Notoneofuscanguesswhatmaybetheultimatejudgmentofmankindaboutourtheoreticalefforts。Thereareexamplestoshowthatwhatwasrejectedbythenextthreegenerationswascorrectedbythefourthanditsrecognitionthusbroughtabout。Thereisnothingelsefortheindividualtodothantodefend,withallhisstrength,hisconvictionbasedonexperienceafterhehascarefullylistenedtohisowncriticismsandhasgivensomeattentiontothecriticismsofhisopponents。Lethimbecontenttoconducthisaffairhonestlyandnotassumetheofficeofjudge,whichisreservedforaremotefuture。Toaccentuatepersonalarbitrarinessinscientificmattersisbad;itevidentlywishestodenytopsychoanalysisthevalueofascience,which,tobesure,Adlerhasalreadydepreciatedbytheaforementionedremark。Anyonewhohighlyregardsscientificthinkingwillratherseekformeansandmethodsbywhichtorestrict,ifpossible,thefactorofpersonalandartificialarbitrarinesswhereveritstillplaystoolargeapart。Besidesonemustrememberthatallagitationindefendingisoutofplace。Adlerdoesnottaketheseargumentsseriously。Theyareonlyforuseagainsthisopponents,buttheyrespecthisowntheories。TheyhavenotpreventedAdler’sadherentsfromcelebratinghimastheMessiah,forwhoseappearancewaitinghumanityhadbeenprepared[p。51]bysomanyforerunners。TheMessiahissurelynolongeranythingrelative。
  Jung’sargumentadcaptandambenevolentiamrestsontheall—too—optimisticassumptionthattheprogressofhumanity,ofcivilization,andofknowledgehasalwayscontinuedinanunbrokenline,asiftherehadneverbeenanyepigones,reactions,andrestorationsaftereveryrevolution,asiftherehadneverbeenraceswho,becauseofaretrogression,hadtorenouncethegainofformergenerations。Theapproachtothestandpointofthemasses,thegivingupofaninnovationthathasprovedunpopular,allthesemakeitaltogetherunlikelythatJung’scorrectionofpsychoanalysiscouldlayclaimtobeingaliberatingactofyouth。Finallyitisno:theyearsofthedoerthatdecideit,butthecharacterofthedeed。
  Ofthetwomovementswehavehereconsidered,thatheadedbyAdlerisundoubtedlythemoreimportant。Thoughradicallyfalse,itis,nevertheless,characterizedbyconsistencyandcoherenceanditisstillfoundedonthetheoryoftheimpulse。Ontheotherhand,Jung’smodificationhaslessenedtheconnectionbetweenthephenomenaandtheimpulses:besides,asitscritics(Abraham,Ferenczi,Jones)havealreadypointedout,itissounintelligible,muddled,andconfused,thatitisnoteasytotakeanyattitudetowardsit。Whereveronetouchesit,onemustbepreparedtobetoldthatonehasmisunderstoodit,anditisimpossibletoknowhowonecanarriveatacorrectunderstandingofit。Itrepresentsitselfinapeculiarlyvacillatingmanner,sinceatonetimeitcallsitself"aquitetamedeviation,notworthyoftherowwhichhasarisenaboutit"(Jung),yet,atanothertime,itcallsitselfanewsalvationwithwhichanewepochshallbeginforpsychoanalysis,infact,anewaspectoftheuniverseforeverythingelse。
  WhenonethinksofthedisagreementsbetweentheindividualprivateandpublicexpressionsofJung’sutterancesoneisobligedtoasktowhatextentthisisduetohisownlackofclearnessandlackofsincerity。
  Yet,itmustbeadmittedthattherepresentativesofthenewtheoryfindthemselvesinadifficultposition。Theyarenowdisputingthingswhichtheythemselvesformerlydefendedandwhat[p。52]ismore,thisdisputeisnotbasedonnewobservationswhichmighthavetaughtthemsomethingfresh,butratheronadifferentinterpretationwhichcausesthemtoseethingsinadifferentlightfromthatinwhichtheysawthembefore。Itisforthisreasonthattheywillnotgiveuptheirconnectionwithpsychoanalysisastherepresentativesofwhichtheyfirstbecameknownintheworld。Theyprefertoproclaimthatpsychoanalysishaschanged。AttheCongressofMü;nichIwasobligedtoclearupthisconfusionanddidsobydeclaringthatIcouldnotrecognizetheinnovationoftheSwissSchoolasalegitimatecontinuationandfurtherdevelopmentofthePsychoanalysiswhichhadoriginatedwithme。Outsidecritics(likeFurtmü;ller)hadalreadyrecognizedthisstateofaffairsandAbrahamsays,quiterightly,thatJungisinfullretreatawayfrompsychoanalysis。Iamnaturallyentirelywillingtoadmitthatanyonehastherighttothinkandtowritewhathewishes,buthehasnottherighttomakeitouttobesomethingdifferentfromwhatitreallyis。
  JustasAdler’sresearchesbroughtsomethingnewintopsychoanalysis,apieceoftheego—psychology,andpaidonlytoodearlyforthisgiftbyrepudiatingallthefundamentalanalyticprinciples,inthesamewayJungandhisadherentshavebasedtheirfightagainstpsychoanalysisuponanewcontributiontothesame。Theyhavetracedindetail(whatPfisterdidbeforethem)howthematerialofthesexualideasoriginatinginthefamilycomplexandintheincestuousobjectselectioncanbeusedtorepresentthehighestethicalandreligiousinterestsofmankind,thatis,theyhaveexplainedaremarkablecaseofsublimationoftheeroticimpellingforcesandthetransformationofthesameintostrivingsthatcannolongerbecallederotic。Allthisharmonizedverywellwiththeassumptionsofpsychoanalysis,andwouldhaveagreedverywellwiththeconceptionthatinthedreamandintheneurosisoneseestheregressiveelucidationsoftheseandallothersublimations。Buttheworldwouldhaveexclaimedthatethicsandreligionhadbeensexualized。Icannothelpassuming"finally"thattheinvestigatorsfoundthemselvesquiteunequaltothestormtheyhadtoface。[p。53]Perhapsthestormbegantorageintheirownbosoms。TheprevioustheologicalhistoryofsomanyoftheSwissworkersisasimportantintheirattitudetopsychoanalysisasisthesocialisticrecordofAdlerforthedevelopmentofhis"psychology。"
  OneisremindedofMarkTwain’sfamousstoryaboutthefateofhiswatchandtothespeculativeremarkwithwhichheclosedit:"Andheusedtowonderwhatbecameofalltheunsuccessfultinkers,andgunsmiths,andshoemakers,andblacksmiths;butnobodycouldevertellhim。"
  Iwillencroachupontherealmofparablesandwillassumethatinacertainsocietytherelivedaparvenuwhoboastedofdescentfromaverynoblefamilynotlocallyknown。Butitsohappenedthatitwasprovedtohimthathisparentswerelivingsomewhereintheneighborhoodandwereverysimplepeople,indeed。Onlyonewayoutremainedtohimandheseizeduponit。Hecouldnolongerdenyhisparents,butheassertedthattheywereveryaristocraticbyoriginbutmuchcomedownintheworld,andsecuredforthematsomeobligingofficeadocumentshowingtheirdescent。ItseemstomethattheSwissworkershadbeenobligedtoactinasimilarmanner。
  Ifethicsandreligioncouldnotbesexualized,butmustberegardedassomething"higher"fromtheverybeginning,andastheiroriginfromthefamilyandOedipuscomplexesseemedundeniable,thentherewasonlyonewayout;namely,thatthesecomplexesthemselves,fromthebeginning,couldnothavethesignificancewhichtheyappearedtoexpress,butmusthavethathigher"anagogic"sense(touseSilberer’snomenclature)withwhichtheyadaptthemselvesforproperuseintheabstractstreamsofthoughtofethicsandreligiousmysticism。
  IamquitepreparedtobetoldoncemorethatIhavemisunderstoodthecontentsandobjectofthetheoryoftheNew—Zü;richSchool,butherewishtoprotestagainstbeingheldresponsibleforthosecontradictionstomytheoriesthathavearisenasaresultofthepublicationsofthisschoolTheburdenofresponsibilityrestsonthem,notonme。InnootherwaycanImakecomprehensibletomyselftheensembleofJung’sinnovationsorgraspthemintheirassociations。AllthechangeswhichJunghasperpetratedupon[p。54]psychoanalysisoriginatedintheintentionofsettingasideallthatisobjectionableinthefamilycomplexes,inorderthattheseobjectionablefeaturesmaynotbefoundagaininreligionandethics。Thesexuallibidowasreplacedbyanabstractidea,ofwhichitmaybesaidthatitremainedequallymysteriousandincomprehensiblealiketofoolsandtothewise。TheOedipus—complex,wearetold,hasonlya"symbolical"
  sense,themotherthereinrepresentingtheunattainablewhichmustberenouncedintheinterestsofculturaldevelopment。ThefatherwhoiskilledintheOedipusmythrepresentsthe"inner"fatherfromwhoseinfluencewemustfreeourselvesinordertobecomeindependent。Nodoubtotherportionsofthematerialofsexualconceptionswill,intime,receivesimilarlynewinterpretations。Inplaceoftheconflictbetweeneroticstrivingsadversetotheegoandtheself—assertion,wearegiventheconflictbetweenthe"life—task"andthe"psychic—laziness。’’Theneuroticguiltyconsciencecorrespondswiththereproachofnothavingputtogoodaccountone’slife—task。
  Thusanewreligio—ethicalsystemwasfoundedwhich,exactlylikeAdler’s,wasobligedtogivenewinterpretations,todistortorsetasidetheactualresultsofanalysis。Asamatteroffacttheyhavecaughtafewculturalhighernotesfromthesymphonyoftheworld’sby—gones,butonceagainhavefailedtohearthepowerfulmelodyoftheimpulses。
  Inordertoholdthissystemtogetheritwasnecessarytodrawawayentirelyfromtheobservationsandtechniqueofpsychoanalysis。Nowandthentheenthusiasmforthehighercauseevenpermitsatotaldisregardforscientificlogic,asforinstance,whenJungmaintainsthattheOedipuscomplexisnot"specific"enoughfortheetiologyoftheneuroses,andascribedthisspecificitytolaziness,thatis,tothemostuniversalqualityofanimateandinanimatebodies!Moreover,itistoberemarkedthatthe"Oedipuscomplex"onlyrepresentsacapacityonwhichthepsychicforcesoftheindividualmeasurethemselves,andisnotinitselfaforce,likethe"psychiclaziness。"Thestudyoftheindividualmanhasshownandalwayswillshowthatthesexualcomplexesarealiveinhimintheiroriginalsense。Thatiswhythestudyoftheindividualwas[p。55]pushedbackbyJungandreplacedbythejudgmentoftheessentialfactsfromthestudyoftheraces。Asthestudyoftheearlychildhoodofeverymanexposedonetothedangerofstrikingagainsttheoriginalandundisguisedmeaningofthesemisinterpretedcomplexes,itwas,therefore,thoughtbesttomakeitaruletotarryaslittleaspossibleatthispastandtoplacethegreatestemphasisonthereturntotheconflict。Here,moreover,theessentialthingsarenotatalltheincidentalandpersonal,butratherthegeneral,thatistosay,the"non—fulfilmentofthelife—task。"Nevertheless,weknowthattheactualconflictoftheneuroticbecomescomprehensibleandsolvableonlyifitcanbetracedbackintothepatient’spasthistory,onlybyfollowingalongthewaythathislibidotookwhenhismaladybegan。
  HowtheNewZü;richtherapyhasshapeditselfundersuchtendenciesIcanconveybymeansofreportsofapatientwhowashimselfobligedtoexperienceit。
  "Nottheslightesteffortwasmadetoconsiderthepastorthetransferences。
  WheneverIthoughtthatthelatterweretouched,theywereexplainedasameresymbolofthelibido。ThemoralinstructionswereverybeautifulandIfollowedthemfaithfully,butIdidnotadvanceonestep。Thiswasmoredistressingtomethantothephysician,buthowcouldIhelpit?
  ——Insteadoffreeingmeanalytically,eachsessionmadenewandtremendousdemandsonme,onthefulfilmentofwhichtheovercomingoftheneurosiswassupposedtodepend。Someofthesedemandswere:innerconcentrationbymeansofintroversion,religiousmeditation,livingtogetherwithmywifeinlovingdevotion,etc。Itwasalmostbeyondmypower,sinceitreallyamountedtoaradicaltransformationofthewholespiritualman。Ilefttheanalysisasapoorsinnerwiththestrongestfeelingsofcontritionandtheverybestresolutions,butatthesametimewiththedeepestdiscouragement。
  Allthatthisphysicianrecommendedanypastorwouldhaveadvised,butwherewasItogetthestrength?"
  Itistruethatthepatienthadalsoheardthatananalysisofthepastandofthetransferenceshouldprecedetheprocess。He,however,wastoldthathehadenoughofit。Butasithadnothelped[p。56]him,itseemstomethatitisjusttoconcludethatthepatienthadnothadenoughofthisfirstsortofanalysis。Notinanycasehasthesuperimposedtreatmentwhichnolongerhastheslightestclaimtocallitselfpsychoanalysis,helped。ItisamatterofwonderthatthemenofZü;richhadneedtomakethelongdetourviaViennatoreachBern,soclosetothem,whereDuboiscuresneurosesbyethicalencouragementinthemostindulgentfashion。[19]
  Theutterdisagreementofthisnewmovementwithpsychoanalysisnaturallyshowsitselfalsoinitsattitudetowardsrepression,whichishardlymentionedanymoreinthewritingsofJung;intheuttermisconstructionofthedreamwhichAdler,ignoringthedream—psychology,confuseswiththelatentdream—thoughts,andalsointhelackofunderstandingoftheunconscious。Infactthisdisagreementcanbeseeninalltheessentialpointsofpsychoanalysis。
  WhenJungtellsusthattheincest—complexisonly"symbolic,"thatithas"norealexistence,"thatthesavagefeelsnodesiretowardstheoldhagbutprefersayoungandprettywoman,thenoneistemptedtoassumeinordertodisposeofapparentcontradictionthat"symbolic"and"norealexistence"onlysignifywhatisdesignatedas"existingunconsciously。"
  Ifonemaintainsthatthedreamissomethingdifferentfromthelatentdream—thoughts,whichitelaborates,onewillnotwonderthatthepatientsdreamofthosethingswithwhichtheirmindhasbeenfilledduringthetreatment,whetheritbethe"life—task"orbeing"above"or"below。"Certainlythedreamsofthoseanalyzedareguidableinasimilarmannerasdreamscanbeinfluencedbytheapplicationofexperimentalstimuli。Onemaydetermineapartofthematerialthatoccursinthedream,butthischangesnothinginthenatureandmechanismofthedream。NordoIbelievethattheso—called"biographical"dreamoccursoutsideoftheanalysis。On[p。57]theotherhand,ifweanalyzedreamsthatoccurredbeforethetreatmentbegan,orifattentionispaidtowhatthedreameraddstothestimulisuppliedtohimduringthetreatment,orifweavoidgivinghimanysuchtask,thenwecanconvinceourselveshowfarthedreamisfromofferingtentativesolutionsofthelife—task。Forthedreamisonlyanotherformofthinking;
  theunderstandingofthisformcanneverbegainedfromthecontentofitsthoughts,onlytheconsiderationofthedream—workwillleadtoit。
  TheeffectiverefutationofJung’smisconceptionsofpsychoanalysisandhisdeviationsfromitisnotdifficult。Anyanalysiscarriedoutinaccordancewiththerules,especiallyanyanalysisofachild,strengthenstheconvictionsonwhichthetheoryofpsychoanalysisrests,andrepudiatesthenewinterpretationsofAdler’sandJung’ssystems。Junghimself,beforehebecameenlightened,carriedoutsuchananalysisofachildandpublishedit。[20]Itremainstobeseenifhewillundertakeanewinterpretationofthiscasewiththehelpofanother"uniformnewtendencyofthefacts,"togiveAdler’sexpressionusedinthisconnection。
  Theopinionthatthesexualrepresentationof"higher"ideasinthedreamandintheneurosisisnothingbutanarchaicmannerofexpression,isnaturallyirreconcilablewiththefactthatthesesexualcomplexesprovetobeintheneurosisthecarriersofthosequantitiesoflibidowhichhavebeenwithdrawnfromthereallife。Ifitwereonlyaquestionofsexualjargon,nothingcouldtherebybealteredintheeconomyofthelibidoitself。
  Junghimselfadmitsthisinhis"DarstellungderpsychoanalytischenTheorie,"
  andformulates,asatherapeutictask,thatthelibidoinvestingthecomplexesshouldbewithdrawnfromthem。Butthiscanneverbeaccomplishedbyrejectingthecomplexesandforcingthemtowardssublimation,butonlybythemostexhaustiveoccupationwiththem,andbymakingthemfullyconscious。Thefirstbitofrealitywithwhichthepatienthastodealishismaladyitself。
  Anyefforttosparehimthistaskpointstoanincapacityofthephysiciantohelp[p。58]himinovercominghisresistances,ortoafearonthepartofthephysicianastotheresultsofthiswork。
  IwouldliketosayinconclusionthatJung,byhis"modifications"
  hasfurnishedpsychoanalysiswithacounterparttothefamousknifeofLichtenbergHehaschangedthehilt,hasinsertedintoitanewblade,andbecausethesametrademarkisengravedonitherequiresofusthatweregardtheinstrumentastheformerone。
  Onthecontrary,IbelieveIhaveshownthatthenewtheorywhichdesirestosubstitutepsychoanalysissignifiesanabandonmentofanalysisandasecessionfromit。Somemaybeinclinedtofearthatthisdefectionmaybemoreunfortunateforthefateofpsychoanalysisthananyotherbecauseitemanatesfrompersonswhoonceplayedsogreatapartinthepsychoanalyticmovementanddidsomuchtofurtherit。Idonotsharethisapprehension。
  Menarestrongsolongastheyrepresentastrongidea。Theybecomepowerlesswhentheyopposeit。Psychoanalysiswillbeabletobearthislossandwillgainnewadherentsforthoselost。
  Icanonlyconcludewiththewishthatthefatesmayprepareeasyascensionforthosewhofoundtheirsojournintheunderworldofpsychoanalysisuncomfortable。
  Mayitbevouchsafedtotheotherstobringtoahappyconclusiontheirworksinthedeep。Footnotes[1]"OnPsychoanalysis。"FivelecturesgivenontheoccasionofthetwentiethanniversaryofClarkUniversity,Worcester,Mass。,dedicatedtoStanleyHall。Secondedition,1912。PublishedsimultaneouslyinEnglishintheAmericanJournalofPsychology,March,1910;translatedintoDutch,Hungarian,PolishandRussian。
  [2]BreuerandFreud,"Studienü;berHysterie,"
  p。15,Deuticke,1895。
  [3]Zentralblattfü;rPsychoanalyse,1911,Vol。
  I,p。69。
  [4]TheClinicofPsychiatry,Zü;rich。
  [5]HavelockEllis,"TheDoctrinesoftheFreudianSchool。"
  [6]G。Greve,"SobrePsicologiayPsicoterapiadeciertosEstadosangustiosos。"SeeZentralblattfü;rPsychoanalyse,Vol。I,p。594·;
  [7]Thecollectedpublicationsofthesetwoauthorshaveappearedinbookform:Brill,"Psychoanalysis,itsTheoriesandPracticalApplications,"1912,2dedition,1914,Saunders,Philadelphia,andE。Jones’s"PapersonPsychoanalysis,"1913,WoodandCompany,NewYork。
  [8]ThefirstofficialrecognitionthatpsychoanalysisanddreaminterpretationreceivedwasextendedtothembythePsychiatristJelgersma,rectoroftheUniversityofLeyden,inhisrectorshipaddressFebruary1,1914。
  [9]AnEnglishtranslationhasjustappearedintheNervousandMentalDiseaseMonographSeries,No。23。
  [10]Cf。"DerWahnunddieTrä;ume"inW。Jensen’s"Gradiva。"
  [11]Rank,"DerKü;nstler,"analysesofpoetsbySadger,Reik,andothers,mylittlemonographonaKindheitserinnerungdesLeonardodaVinci;alsoAbraham’s"AnalysesvonSegantini。"
  [12]Atranslationisinpreparation。
  [13]WitandItsRelationtotheUnconscious,translatedbyA。A。Brill,Moffat,Yard&;Co。,NewYork。
  [14]"DiePsychoanalytischeMethode,"1913,Vol。I
  ofthePedagogium,MeumannandMessner。EnglishTranslationbyDr。C。R。
  Payne。Moffat,Yard&;Co。,N。Y。
  [15]Cf。mytwoessaysinScientia,Vol。XIV,1913,"DasInteresseanderPsychoanalyse。"
  [15a]DreamsandMyths,Wish—fulfillmentandFairyTales,MythoftheBirthoftheHero,inthisseriesaretranslatedintheMonographSeries。
  [15b]Adler’sInferiorityofOrgans,translatedbyJelliffe,appearsasMonograph24。His,"NervousCharacter,"translatedbyGlueckandLind,publishedbyMoffat,Yard&;Co。,N。Y。
  [16]Cf。TheInterpretationofDreams,p。389,translatedbyA。A。Brill,TheMacmillanCo。,NewYork,andAlien,London。
  [17]Zentalbl。,Vol。I,p。122。See"AnalyticalPsychology,"
  Moffat,Yard&;Co。,N。Y。
  [18]Korrespondenzbl。,No。5,Zurich,April,1911。
  [19]Iknowtheobjectionswhichstandinthewayofusingapatient’sstatements,andI,therefore,expresslystatethatmyinformantisasworthyofcredenceasheiscapableofjudgingthismatter。Hegavemethisinformationwithoutmyrequest,andImakeuseofhiscommunicationwithoutaskinghisconsent,becauseIcannotadmitthatanypsychoanalyticaltechniqueshouldlayclaimtotheprotectionofdiscretion。
  [20]ExperiencesConcerningthePsychicLifeoftheChild,translatedbyA。A。Brill,AmericanJournalofPsychology,April,1910。