集体潜意识论
集体潜意识
• 阿妮玛（Anima） 和阿妮姆斯（Animus）：又称 男女两性意象。阿妮玛指男性心灵中女性成分或意 象，是在漫长的岁月里男女交往所得到的经验而产 生的，它有两个作用：一使男性具有女性特征；二 提供男女之间交往的模式。 • 阿妮姆斯是女性心灵中的男性成分或意象，其作用 有二：一使女性具有一定的男性特征；二获得与男 性交往的模式。 • 阿妮玛为男性提供了心灵中理想的女性，阿妮姆斯 为女性塑造了心目中理想的男性。
• 里比多称之为心理能量（Psychic energy）,是 一种普通的生命力，是人格的动力，在意识中它表 现为运动或力量，在无意识中它表现为一种状态， 共同推动人格发展，遵循守恒定律即能量永远不会 在心录是消失只是由一种心理活动转到别的心理活 动，而且心理能量的分布和流动是有方向的，这就 是熵增加原理。这种方向表现为前行或退行，前行 指人利用日常生活经验来满足环境的需要；
• 阴影(Shadow)：人的心灵中遗传下来的最黑暗、隐 秘、最深层的邪恶攻击、狂暴的倾向以妖魔鬼怪或 仇敌的形象投射到外部世界。包括动物所有本能， 是我们本能的原始部分。 • 自性（Self）：是集体潜意识的核心，其作用是协 调人格中的其它部分代表人类达到人格统一和整合 的力量，即自我实现。
• (三)荣格的人格动力理论
• 荣誉： • 1932年，聘为苏黎世联邦综合技术大学教授，获苏 黎世城文学奖 • 1938年，选为英国皇家医学会名誉会员 • 1944年，瑞士医学科学院名誉会员 • 1944年，巴塞尔大学医学心理学教授 • 1948年，苏黎世建立荣格学院，后扩展至伦敦、纽 约、旧金山和洛杉矾相继建立荣格学院；被称为 “苏黎世圣哲” • 1916年6月6日，逝世于瑞士库斯那赫特，享年86 岁
• 二、荣格的分析心理学 • （一）简介
心理学案例分析题解析之集体潜意识
心理学案例分析题解析之集体潜意识2011年下半年心理咨询师考试报名进行中，松鼠哥特编辑整理心理咨询师考试相关资料、试题，希望对您的考试有所帮助！5月，接受广东电视台记者采访，说着富士康的九连跳的心理动力，采访结束时打开电脑发现已经十连跳了，真快！当晚，广工一名已经签约富士康的应届毕业生不慎坠楼身亡（非自杀），真巧！员工跳楼自杀算是事件，但能在同一家公司并在5个月内发生十起，可以算作灾难了吧。
一家公司发生的，是小灾难，但在相同时间段，在同一个国家的不同地方发生，就算大灾难了。
自杀是一种极端的对自己的攻击，极端的对别人的攻击呢？短短50天，6起同一类校园凶杀案，砍死10人、砍伤76人。
这和跳楼事件难道毫无关联吗？还有，今年发生在咱们国家的矿难、旱灾、地震、水灾，这些灾难的伤亡数量远比富士康员工跳楼和校园凶杀案大得多呀！试试看，把镜头拉远一点，这一切就仿佛是同一个灾难，并且你或许还能发现这其中的联系。
如果，我们再把镜头拉远一点，看看世界范围发生的事情，也许会看得更清楚一些。
仅2010年以来，海地地震、智利地震、美国暴风雪、土耳其地震、印尼地震、台湾地震，以及排着队争先恐后的九起空难数百人丧生（印度又坠机，死158人）。
如果我说所有的这一切都是同一场灾难，你有什么看法？每一次看到这类事情的报道，我的心里都有一种难以形容的难受。
不论是天灾还是人祸，都发生在地球上、都发生在人身上、都和生存有关、都和生命有关。
都和人类有关！也许，人类不能只在每个个体里面解决问题了，甚至人类不能只在人类内部解决问题。
富士康员工跳楼和最近频繁发生的校园幼儿园凶杀案，已经不是心理学工作者所能解决、所能预防的。
这是全社会、全人类的事情了！地球上所发生的每件事，都是在对人类传递着每种信息。
打开《广州日报》头版，几乎占据整个版面的是两幅大型标题新闻。
第一条是江西火车出轨19人死，第二条是辽宁大巴被撞32人亡。
灾难已经成为各大新闻媒体的头等报道，如果那天报纸上没说地震、旱涝、火山、杀人、跳楼，那就不正常了。
集体潜意识
指人在公共场合中表现出来的人格方面，其目的在于表现对自己有利的良好形象以便得到社会认可。人格面 具能够使人在社会中获益，但过分人格面具必然要牺牲人格结构中的其他部分，从而对心理健康造成危害。
评价
对集体潜意识的发现使荣格成为20世纪最卓越的学者之一，荣格也由此成为一个有争议的人物。荣格在世界 各国的世俗、宗教信仰甚至神秘事件中发现了某些共同的跨文化现象。例如，不同国家和地区的神话传说中，常 常出现主题类似或者情节相似的故事，或者是有相似的人物形象。在为来访者作精神分析时，不同来访者的经验 和梦中也时常出现与神话不谋而合的象征。甚至某些精神分裂来访者的幻想或者观念也可以在神话中找到对应。 而这一部分的人类本性，荣格称之为“集体潜意识”。集体潜意识为荣格首创，是荣格最独特的发现，是荣格理 论中最为新颖的部分，也是最深奥费解和引起最大争论的一个概念。
集体潜意识
荣格分析心理学术语
01 概念
03 原型 05Βιβλιοθήκη 目录02 潜意识 04 评价
集体潜意识，又译作“集体无意识”，是荣格分析心理学术语。指人类祖先进化过程中，集体经验心灵底层 的精神沉积物，处于人类精神的最低层，为人类所普遍拥有。在个体一生中从未被意识到，经由遗传获得来。由 全部本能及其相关的原型组成。本能体现精神的动力方面，原型体现本能的意义，是本能在人精神中的存在形式， 决定人的行为的未来倾向和可能性，两者协调一致。具有先验性、普遍性、自主性、自律性、动力性和目的性等， 是人类精神中最重要和最有影响的部分，对个体的思想行为和创造力起制约作用。虽处于潜意识的最低层，但无 时不在寻求表现，若其内容未被意识同化，则会通过宗教、神话、艺术、梦幻和象征等表现出来。
原型
原型（Archetype、Prototype）是集体潜意识中形象的总汇。它是一种本原的模型，其他各种存在都根据 这种原型而成形。它深深的埋在心灵之中，因此当它们不能在意识中表现时，就会在梦、幻想、幻觉和神经症中 以原型和象征的形式表现出来。
社会心理学中的潜意识研究
社会心理学中的潜意识研究一、概述社会心理学是研究个体与群体之间相互作用的学科，其中潜意识是一个重要研究领域。
潜意识是指在个体的意识或自我意识之外感知和产生影响的一种心理现象，常以无意识的形式表现出来，对个体行为起着至关重要的作用。
本文将重点介绍社会心理学中潜意识的研究内容及其应用。
二、潜意识的定义与类型潜意识是指人类心理的强大但难以察觉的一面，是一个人思考、情感和行为中的无声无息的动力。
潜意识体验和影响个体的状态、过去情境、印象、经验和知识。
潜意识分为两大类型，分别是个人潜意识和集体潜意识。
在个人潜意识之中，具体又可分作以下三种：1、个人无意识：即意识范畴之外的本质心理过程。
这些过程在个人的行为和心理状态方面发挥着重要的作用，比如前意识期信念、经验、情绪和冲动等。
2、个人潜意识：它是人的无意识心理活动体验与意识相对应的特殊形式，是我们没有直接体验到但毫无疑问存在着的个人经验。
比如，人们在母体内的情况就是个人潜意识的一个例子。
3、个人前意识：即那些意识还没有被完全形成、却又渐渐形成的心理活动体验。
前意识的体验能够实现成为意识的内容，但在某些情况下也会不再成为意识的存在。
三、潜意识与行为的关系潜意识的影响渗透到个体的行为中，而且也在很多情况下强于显意识的作用。
潜意识和行为之间没有必然增量关系，但是潜意识的存在是行为的必要条件，它对于个体行为与反应产生了重要的影响。
1、潜意识和行为的关系个体并不总是自主控制自己的行为和态度，潜意识在个体中占有非常重要的地位。
潜意识与行为之间的关系是通过潜意识产生影响，进而动用个体的行为和态度的方式来实现。
比如，人们在无意识中分辨出贵公司家族还是便利店还是巴克对于自己的品位有什么不同、他们自己是怎样一种人的价值、他们是否享有权力和成功等，并通过对这些信息的处理激发出更加精细的行为。
2、如何测量潜意识潜意识有时很难通过自报问卷或接受人际交往来准确测量。
使用“心理反应测试”技术，也就是受试者在做某种简单的任务时，对于某些不相关的刺激或信息做出非自我意识下的反应，从而了解其不-analog结果，能帮助研究员了解潜意识中隐藏的信息。
荣格 集体潜意识的概念
The Concept of the Collective Unconscious CARL JUNGCarl G. Jung (1875-1961) was a Swiss psychologist whose principles have been found to be applicable to nearly all academic disciplines from mythology to religion to quantum physics, and to nearly all aspects of modern life. In the following selection, Jung discusses his most well-known (and controversial) concept, the collective uncon-scious, that aspect of the unconscious mind which manifests inherited, universal themes which run through all human life. The contents of the collective unconscious are archetypes, primordial images that reflect basic patterns or common to us all, and which have existed universally since the dawn of time.PROBABLY NONE OF MY empirical concepts has met with so much misunderstanding as the idea of the collective unconscious. In what followsI shall try to give (1) a definition of the concept,(2) a description of what it means for psychology,(3) an explanation of the method of proof, and(4) an example.1. DefinitionThe collective unconscious is a part of the psyche which can be negatively distinguished from a personal unconscious by the fact that it does not, like the latter, owe its existence to personal experi-ence and consequently is not a personal acquisition. While the personal unconscious is made up essentially of contents which have at one time been conscious but which have disappeared from consciousness through having been forgotten or repressed, the contents of the collective uncon-scious have never been in consciousness, and therefore have never been individually acquired, but owe their existence exclusively to heredity. Whereas the personal unconscious consists for the most part of complexes, the content of the collective unconscious is made up essentially of archetypes.The concept of the archetype, which is an indispensable correlate of the idea of the collective unconscious, indicates the existence of definite forms in the psyche which seem to be present always and everywhere. Mythological research calls them “motifs”; in the psychology of primitives they correspond to Levy-Bruhl’s concept of “representations collectives,” and in the field of comparative religion they have been defined by Hubert and Mauss as “categories of the imagina-tion.” Adolf Bastian long ago called them “el-ementary” or “primordial thoughts.” From these references it should be clear enough that my idea of the archetype—literally a pre-existent form—does not stand alone but is something that is recognized and named in other fields of knowl-edge.My thesis, then, is as follows: In addition to our immediate consciousness, which is of a thoroughly personal nature and which we believe to be the only empirical psyche (even if we tack on the personal unconscious as an appendix), there exists a second psychic system of a collective, universal, and impersonal nature which is identical in all individuals. This collective unconscious does not develop individually but is inherited. It consists of pre-existent forms, the archetypes, which can only become conscious secondarily and which give definite form to certain psychic contents.2. The Psychological Meaning of theCollective UnconsciousMedical psychology, growing as it did out of professional practice, insists on the personal nature of the psyche. By this I mean the views of Freud and Adler. It is a psychology of the person, and its aetiological or causal factors are regarded almost wholly as personal in nature. Nonetheless, even this psychology is based on certain general biological99100Understanding Dreamsfactors, for instance on the sexual instinct or on the urge for self-assertion, which are by no means merely personal peculiarities. It is forced to do this because it lays claim to being an explanatory science. Neither of these views would deny the existence of a priori instincts common to man and animals alike, or that they have a significant influ-ence on personal psychology. Yet instincts are impersonal, universally distributed, hereditary factors of a dynamic or motivating character, which very often fail so completely to reach consciousness that modern psychotherapy is faced with the task of helping the patient to become conscious of them. Moreover, the instincts are not vague and indefinite by nature, but are specifically formed motive forces which, long before there is any consciousness, and in spite of any degree of consciousness later on, pursue their inherent goals. Consequently they form very close analogies to the archetypes, so close, in fact, that there is good reason for supposing that the archetypes are the unconscious images of the instincts themselves, in other words, that they are patterns of instinctual behaviour.The hypothesis of the collective unconscious is, therefore, no more daring than to assume there are instincts. One admits readily that human activity is influenced to a high degree by instincts, quite apart from the rational motivations of the con-scious mind. So if the assertion is made that our imagination, perception, and thinking are likewise influenced by in-born and universally present formal elements, it seems to me that a normally functioning intelligence can discover in this idea just as much or just as little mysticism as in the theory of instincts. Although this reproach of mysticism has frequently been leveled at my concept, I must emphasize yet again that the concept of the collective unconscious is neither a speculative nor a philosophical but an empirical matter. The question is simply this: are there or are there not uncon-scious, universal forms of this kind? If they exist, then there is a region of the psyche which one can call the collective unconscious. It is true that the diagnosis of the collective unconscious is not always an easy task. It is not sufficient to point out the often obviously archetypal nature of uncon-scious products, for these can just as well be derived from acquisitions through language and education. Cryptomnesia should also be ruled out, which it is almost impossible to do in certain cases. In spite of all these difficulties, there remain enough individual instances showing the autoch-thonous revival of mythological motifs to put the matter beyond any reasonable doubt. But if such an unconscious exists at all, psychological explana-tion must take account of it and submit certain alleged personal aetiologies to sharper criticism.What I mean can perhaps best be made clear by a concrete example. You have probably read Freud’s discussion1 of a certain picture by Leonardo da Vinci: St. Anne with the Virgin Mary and the Christ-child. Freud interprets this remark-able picture in terms of the fact that Leonardo himself had two mothers. This causality is per-sonal. We shall not linger over the fact that this picture is far from unique, nor over the minor inaccuracy that St. Anne happens to be the grand-mother of Christ and not, as required by Freud’s interpretation, the mother, but shall simply point out that interwoven with the apparently personal psychology there is an impersonal motif well known to us from other fields. This is the motif of the dual mother, an archetype to be found in many variants in the field of mythology and comparative religion and forming the basis of numerous “representations collectives.” I might mention, for instance, the motif of the dual descent, that is, descent from human and divine parents, as in the case of Heracles, who received immortality through being unwittingly adopted by Hera. What was a myth in Greece was actually a ritual in Egypt: Pharaoh was both human and divine by nature. In the birth chambers of the Egyptian temples Pharaoh’s second, divine conception and birth is depicted on the walls; he is “twice-born.”It is an idea that underlies all rebirth mysteries, Christianity included. Christ himself is “twice-born”: through his baptism in the Jordan he was regenerated and reborn from water and spirit. Consequently, in the Roman liturgy the font is designated the “uterus ecclesiae,” and, as you can read in the Roman missal, it is called this even today, in the “benediction of the font” on Holy Saturday before Easter. Further, according to an early Christian-Gnostic idea, the spirit which appeared in the form of a dove was interpreted as Sophia-Sapientia—Wisdom and the Mother of101Christ. Thanks to this motif of the dual birth, children today, instead of having good and evil fairies who magically “adopt” them at birth with blessings or curses, are given sponsors—a “god-father” and a “godmother.”The idea of a second birth is found at all times and in all places. In the earliest beginnings of medicine it was a magical means of healing; in many religions it is the central mystical experience; it is the key idea in medieval, occult philosophy, and, last but not least, it is an infantile fantasy occurring in numberless children, large and small, who believe that their parents are not their real parents but merely foster-parents to whom they were handed over. Benvenuto Cellini also had this idea, as he himself relates in his autobiography.Now it is absolutely out of the question that all the individuals who believe in a dual descent have in reality always had two mothers, or con-versely that those few who shared Leonardo’s fate have infected the rest of humanity with their complex. Rather, one cannot avoid the assumption that the universal occurrence of the dual-birth motif together with the fantasy of the two mothers answers an omnipresent human need which is reflected in these motifs. If Leonardo da Vinci did in fact portray his two mothers in St. Anne and Mary—which I doubt—he nonetheless was only expressing something which countless millions of people before and after him have believed. The vulture symbol (which Freud also discusses in the work mentioned) makes this view all the more plausible. With some justification he quotes as the source of the symbol the Hieroglyphica of Horapollo, a book much in use in Leonardo’s time. There you read that vultures are female only and symbolize the mother. They conceive through the wind (pneuma). This word took on the meaning of “spirit” chiefly under the influence of Christian-ity. Even in the account of the miracle at Pentecost the pneuma still has the double meaning of wind and spirit. This fact, in my opinion, points without doubt to Mary, who, a virgin by nature, conceived through the pneuma, like a vulture. Furthermore, according to Horapollo, the vulture also symbol-izes Athene, who sprang, unbegotten, directly from the head of Zeus, was a virgin, and knew only spiritual motherhood. All this is really an allusion to Mary and the rebirth motif. There is not a shadow of evidence that Leonardo meant anything else by his picture. Even if it is correct to assume that he identified himself with the Christ-child, he was in all probability representing the mythological dual-mother motif and by no means his own personal prehistory. And what about all the other artists who painted the same theme? Surely not all of them had two mothers?Let us now transpose Leonardo’s case to the field of the neuroses, and assume that a patient with a mother complex is suffering from the delusion that the cause of his neurosis lies in his having really had two mothers. The personal interpretation would have to admit that he is right—and yet it would be quite wrong. For in reality the cause of his neurosis would lie in the reactivation of the dual-mother archetype, quite regardless of whether he had one mother or two mothers, because, as we have seen, this archetype functions individually and historically without any reference to the relatively rare occurrence of dual motherhood.In such a case, it is of course tempting to presuppose so simple and personal a cause, yet the hypothesis is not only inexact but totally false. It is admittedly difficult to understand how a dual-mother motif—unknown to a physician trained only in medicine—could have so great a determin-ing power as to produce the effect of a traumatic condition. But if we consider the tremendous powers that lie hidden in the mythological and religious sphere in man, the aetiological significance of the archetype appears less fantastic. In numer-ous cases of neurosis the cause of the disturbance lies in the very fact that the psychic life of the patient lacks the co-operation of these motive forces. Nevertheless a purely personalistic psy-chology, by reducing everything to personal causes, tries its level best to deny the existence of arche-typal motifs and even seeks to destroy them by personal analysis. I consider this a rather dangerous procedure which cannot be justified medically. Today you can judge better than you could twenty years ago the nature of the forces involved. Can we not see how a whole nation is reviving an archaic symbol, yes, even archaic religious forms, and how this mass emotion is influencing and revolutionizing the life of the individual in a catastrophic manner? The man of the past is aliveCarl Jung102Understanding Dreamsin us today to a degree undreamt of before the war, and in the last analysis what is the fate of great nations but a summation of the psychic changes in individuals?So far as a neurosis is really only a private affair, having its roots exclusively in personal causes, archetypes play no role at all. But if it is a question of a general incompatibility or an other-wise injurious condition productive of neuroses in relatively large numbers of individuals, then we must assume the presence of constellated arche-types. Since neuroses are in most cases not just private concerns, but social phenomena, we must assume that archetypes are constellated in these cases too. The archetype corresponding to the situation is activated, and as a result those explosive and dangerous forces hidden in the archetype come into action, frequently with unpredictable consequences. There is no lunacy people under the domination of an archetype will not fall a prey to. If thirty years ago anyone had dared to predict that our psychological development was tending towards a revival of the medieval persecutions of the Jews, that Europe would again tremble before the Roman fasces and the tramp of legions, that people would once more give the Roman salute, as two thousand years ago, and that instead of the Christian Cross an archaic swastika would lure onward millions of warriors ready for death—why, that man would have been hooted at as a mystical fool. And today? Surprising as it may seem, all this absurdity is a horrible reality. Private life, private aetiologies, and private neuroses have become almost a fiction in the world of today. The man of the past who lived in a world of archaic “representations collectives” has risen again into very visible and painfully real life, and this not only in a few unbalanced individuals but in many millions of people.There are as many archetypes as there are typical situations in life. Endless repetition has engraved these experiences into our psychic constitution, not in the form of images filled with content, but at first only as forms without content, representing merely the possibility of a certain type of perception and action. When a situation occurs which corresponds to a given archetype, that archetype becomes activated and a compulsiveness appears, which, like an instinctual drive, gains its way against all reason and will, or else produces a conflict of pathological dimensions, that is to say, a neurosis.3. Method of ProofWe must now turn to the question of how the existence of archetypes can be proved. Since archetypes are supposed to produce certain psychic forms, we must discuss how and where one can get hold of the material demonstrating these forms. The main source, then, is dreams, which have the advantage of being involuntary, spontaneous products of the unconscious psyche and are therefore pure products of nature not falsified by any conscious purpose. By questioning the individual one can ascertain which of the motifs appearing in the dream are known to him. From those which are unknown to him we must naturally exclude all motifs which might be known to him, as for instance—to revert to the case of Leonardo—the vulture symbol. We are not sure whether Leonardo took this symbol from Horapollo or not, although it would have been perfectly possible for an educated person of that time, because in those days artists were distin-guished for their wide knowledge of the humani-ties. Therefore, although the bird motif is an archetype par excellence, its existence in Leonardo’s fantasy would still prove nothing. Consequently, we must look for motifs which could not possibly be known to the dreamer and yet behave functionally in his dream in such a manner as to coincide with the functioning of the archetype known from historical sources.Another source for the material we need is to he found in “active imagination.” By this I mean a sequence of fantasies produced by deliberate concentration. I have found that the existence of unrealized, unconscious fantasies increases the frequency and intensity of dreams, and that when these fantasies are made conscious the dreams change their character and become weaker and less frequent. From this I have drawn the conclusion that dreams often contain fantasies which “want”to become conscious. The sources of dreams are often repressed instincts which have a natural tendency to influence the conscious mind. In cases of this sort, the patient is simply given the task of contemplating any one fragment of fantasy that103seems significant to him—a chance idea, perhaps, or something he has become conscious of in a dream—until its context becomes visible, that is to say, the relevant associative material in which it is embedded. It is not a question of the “free association” recommended by Freud for the purpose of dream-analysis, but of elaborating the fantasy by observing the further fantasy material that adds itself to the fragment in a natural manner.This is not the place to enter upon a technical discussion of the method. Suffice it to say that the resultant sequence of fantasies relieves the uncon-scious and produces material rich in archetypal images and associations. Obviously, this is a method that can only be used in certain carefully selected cases. The method is not entirely without danger, because it may carry the patient too far away from reality. A warning against thoughtless application is therefore in place.Finally, very interesting sources of archetypal material are to be found in the delusions of paranoiacs, the fantasies observed in trance-states, and the dreams of early childhood, from the third to the fifth year. Such material is available in profusion, but it is valueless unless one can adduce convincing mythological parallels. It does not, of course, suffice simply to connect a dream about a snake with the mythological occurrence of snakes, for who is to guarantee that the functional meaning of the snake in the dream is the same as in the mythological setting? In order to draw a valid parallel, it is necessary to know the functional meaning of the individual symbol, and then to find out whether the apparently parallel mythological symbol has a similar context and therefore the same functional meaning. Establishing such facts not only requires lengthy and wearisome re-searches, but is also an ungrateful subject for demonstration. As the symbols must not be torn out of their context, one has to launch forth into exhaustive descriptions, personal as well as symbological, and this is practically impossible in the framework of a lecture. I have repeatedly tried it at the risk of sending one half of my audience to sleep.4. An ExampleI am choosing as an example a case which, though already published, I use again because its brevity makes it peculiarly suitable for illustration. Moreover, I can add certain remarks which were omitted in the previous publication.2About 1906 I came across a very curious delusion in a paranoid schizophrenic who had been interned for many years. The patient had suffered since his youth and was incurable. He had been educated at a State school and been em-ployed as a clerk in an office. He had no special gifts, and I myself knew nothing of mythology or archaeology in those days, so the situation was not in any way suspect. One day I found the patient standing at the window, wagging his head and blinking into the sun. He told me to do the same, for then I would see something very interesting. When I asked him what he saw, he was astonished that I could see nothing, and said: “Surely you see the sun’s penis—when I move my head to and fro, it moves too, and that is where the wind comes from.” Naturally I did not under-stand this strange idea in the least, but I made a note of it. Then about four years later, during my mythological studies, I came upon a book by the late Albrecht Dieterich,3 the well-known philologist, which threw light on this fantasy. The work, published in 1910, deals with a Greek papyrus in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. Dieterich believed he had discovered a Mithraic ritual in one part of the text. The text is undoubtedly a religious prescrip-tion for carrying out certain incantations in which Mithras is named. It comes from the Alexandrian school of mysticism and shows affinities with certain passages in the Leiden papyri and the Corpus Hermeticum. In Dieterich’s text we read the following directions:Draw breath from the rays, draw in three times as strongly as you can and you will feelyourself raised up and walking towards theheight, and you will seem to be in the middleof the aerial region. . . . The path of the visiblegods will appear through the disc of the sun,who is God my father. Likewise the so-calledtube, the origin of the ministering wind. Foryou will see hanging down from the disc ofthe sun something that looks like a tube. Andtowards the regions westward it is as thoughthere were an infinite east wind. But if theother wind should prevail towards the regionsof the east, you will in like manner see thevision veering in that directions.4Carl Jung104Understanding DreamsIt is obviously the author’s intention to enable the reader to experience the vision which he had, or which at least he believes in. The reader is to be initiated into the inner religious experience either of the author, or—what seems more likely—of one of those mystic communities of which Philo Judaeus gives contemporary accounts. The fire- or sun-god here invoked is a figure which has close historical parallels, for instance with the Christ-figure of the Apocalypse. It is therefore a “representation collective,” as are also the ritual actions described, such as the imitating of animal noises, etc. The vision is embedded in a religious context of a distinctly ecstatic nature and describes a kind of initiation into mystic experience of the Deity.Our patient was about ten years older than I. In his megalomania, he thought he was God and Christ in one person. His attitude towards me was patronizing; he liked me probably because I was the only person with any sympathy for his abstruse ideas. His delusions were mainly religious, and when he invited me to blink into the sun like he did and waggle my head he obviously wanted to let me share his vision. He played the role of the mystic sage and I was the neophyte. He felt he was the sun-god himself, creating the wind by wagging his head to and fro. The ritual transformation into the Deity is attested by Apuleius in the Isis myster-ies, and moreover in the form of a Helios apo-theosis. The meaning of the “ministering wind” is probably the same as the procreative pneuma, which streams from the sun-god into the soul and fructifies it. The association of sun and wind frequently occurs in ancient symbolism.It must now be shown that this is not a purely chance coincidence of two isolated cases. We must therefore show that the idea of a wind-tube connected with God or the sun exists inde-pendently of these two testimonies and that it occurs at other times and in other places. Now there are, as a matter of fact, medieval paintings that depict the fructification of Mary with a tube or hose-pipe coming down from the throne of God and passing into her body, and we can see the dove or the Christ-child flying down it. The dove represents the fructifying agent, the wind of the Holy Ghost.Now it is quite out of the question that the patient could have had any knowledge whatever of a Greek papyrus published four years later, and it is in the highest degree unlikely that his vision had anything to do with the rare medieval representa-tions of the Conception, even if through some incredibly improbable chance he had ever seen a copy of such a painting. The patient was certified in his early twenties. He had never traveled. And there is no such picture in the public art gallery in Zurich, his native town.I mention this case not in order to prove that the vision is an archetype but only to show you my method of procedure in the simplest possible form. If we had only such cases, the task of investigation would be relatively easy, but in reality the proof is much more complicated. First of all, certain symbols have to be isolated clearly enough to be recognizable as typical phenomena, not just matters of chance. This is done by examining a series of dreams, say a few hundred, for typical figures, and by observing their development in the series. The same method can be applied to the products of active imagination. In this way it is possible to establish certain continuities or modula-tions of one and the same figure. You can select any figure which gives the impression of being an archetype by its behaviour in the series of dreams or visions. If the material at one’s disposal has been well observed and is sufficiently ample, one can discover interesting facts about the variations undergone by a single type. Not only the type itself but its variants too can be substantiated by evi-dence from comparative mythology and ethnol-ogy. I have described the method of investigation elsewhere5 and have also furnished the necessary case material.NOTES1.Sigmund Freud, Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of His Childhood, sec. IV.2.Wandlungen and Symbole der Libido (orig. 1912). [Cf. the revised edition, Symbols of Transfor-mation, pars. 149ff., 223.]3.Eine Mithrasliturgie.4.Ibid., pp 6 ff.5.Psychology and Alchemy, Part II.。
【精读】【楠蓉书香】荣格的集体潜意识
【精读】【楠蓉书香】荣格的集体潜意识在荣格看来人格由意识、个体潜意识和集体潜意识组成。
意识是人格结构的最顶层，是心灵中能够被人觉知的部分；个体潜意识是人格的第二层，它是潜意识的表层部分，包括一切被遗忘的记忆，知觉和被压抑的经验，以及属于个体性质的梦、幻等，这和弗洛依德的前意识很相似，是可以进入意识的；集体潜意识是人格结构中最底层的部分它是人类在漫长的历史演变过程中积累下来的沉淀物，包括人类的活动方式和人脑结构中的遗传痕迹。
如人对黑暗的恐惧。
个体潜意识的内容是曾经有被意识过但被压抑后从意识中消失，而集体潜意识的内容从来没在意识中出现过，是完全通过遗传而得来的。
集体潜意识主要组成部分是原型，即一种本原的模型。
荣格认为原型是遗传的先天倾向，不需要任何帮助，就可使一个人的行动在一定的情况下与人类祖先的行动相似。
原型有多种，但是最重要，最突出的有四种：人格面具（Persona）、阿妮玛（Anima）和阿妮姆斯（Animus）、暗影（Shadow）.Persona：人格面具（persona），这个词来源于希腊文，本义是指使演员能在一出剧中扮演某个特殊角色而戴的面具，也被荣格称为从众求同原型（conformity archetype）。
人格面具的形成是普遍必要的，对现代人的生活来说更是重要的，其产生与教育背景有着非常密切的关系。
它保证了我们能够与人，甚至是与那些我们并不喜欢的人和睦相处。
为各种社会交际提供了多重可能性，人格面具是社会生活和公共生活的基础，人格面具的产生不仅仅是为了认识社会，更是为了寻求社会认同。
也就是说，人格面具是以公众道德为标准的，以集体生活价值为基础的表面人格，具有符号性和趋同性。
在荣格眼中，人格面具在人格中的作用既可能是有利的，也可能是有害的。
如果一个人过分地热衷和沉湎于自己扮演的角色，如果他把自己仅仅认同于自己扮演的角色，人格的其它方面就会受到排斥。
像这样受人格面具支配的人就会逐渐与自己的天性相疏远而生活在一种紧张的状态中。
人格心理学荣格的理论
金庸小说中常有一些调皮、刁 钻甚至带狠毒欺诈和邪气的女 人，如黄蓉、殷素素、赵敏、 阿紫等等人物。但是主人公却 爱她们，这也说明她们是主人 公——或是金庸的阿尼玛。
围城中的唐晓芙
阿尼姆斯（animus）
Animus是女性心中的男性形象。 阿尼姆斯一般体现为英勇无畏，智力发达、
有艺术气质等特点，有时也和控制和权力 相结合。
集体潜意识的内容，主要以原型的形式存 在。
人 类 的 进 化 历 程
原型
原型“并非遗传的观念，而是心理显现的 本能，是一种形式而非内容”。每一个人 都潜存着无数的原型，且当我们的经验与 原始的潜在意象接近时，原型就会被激发， 影响个人的生活。
最有名的原型，包括：
人格面具（persona） 阴影（shadow） anima（男性中的阴柔面） animus(女性中的阳刚面) 自性化（self） 智慧老人
影片最后有一个场景，此时周围的人物都一对一对的 在一起聊天逛街，彼此之间显得很和谐，和开始的时候 那种不和谐形成鲜明的对比，看起来就像是这个世界都 变了一样。其实，这是因为周星驰的内心世界变了，他 的周围的人物世界也就发生了变化，也就是佛家讲的 “心生则种种法生”，经过了一番“心灵蜕变”，周星 驰的积极健康的“爱心”生出来了，所以他的世界也变 得很有爱心，很和谐。
《功夫》主人公的原型
人格面具：斧头帮帮主 阴影：火云邪神 阿妮玛：哑女 智慧老人：乞丐 自性原型：如来
阿星的人格面具：黑帮帮主
阿星的阴影：火云邪神
阿星的阿尼玛：哑女
与阿尼玛情感交流
排斥阿尼玛
阿尼玛的支பைடு நூலகம்力量
整合阿尼玛
阿星的自性原型：如来
“想学吗，我教你啊” 降伏阴影
集体潜意识
荣格突出心理结构的整体性，提出“集体潜意识”等概念。
他也认为人格结构由三个层次组成：意识（自我）、个人潜意识（情结）和集体潜意识（原型），这和弗洛伊德的提法有所不同。
个人潜意识“个人潜意识”是人格结构的第二层，作用要比意识大。
它包括一切被遗忘的记忆、知觉和被压抑的经验，以及梦和幻想等。
荣格认为个人无意识的内容是情结。
情结往往具有情绪色彩，是一组一组被压抑的心理内容聚集在一起而形成的无意识丛，如恋父情结、批评情结、权力情结等。
个体无意识是一个容器，蕴含和容纳着所有与意识的个体化机能不相一致的心灵活动和种种曾经一时是意识经验，不过由于各种各样的原因受到压抑或遭到忽视的内容，如令人痛苦的思想、悬而未决的问题、人际间冲突和道德焦虑等等。
还有一些经验，它们与人们不甚相干或显得无足轻重，由于本身强度太弱，当人们经历它们时达不到意识层，或者不能留驻在意识之中，因而都被贮藏在个体无意识里。
所有这些构成了个人无意识的内容，当需要时，这些内容通常会很容易地到达意识层面。
集体潜意识“集体潜意识”是人格结构最底层的无意识，包括祖先在内的世世代代的活动方式和经验库存在人脑中的遗传痕迹。
集体无意识和个人无意识的区别在于：它不是被遗忘的部分，而是我们一直都意识不到的东西。
荣格曾用岛打了个比方，露出水面的那些小岛是人能感知到的意识；由于潮来潮去而显露出来的水面下的地面部分，就是个人无意识；而岛的最底层是作为基地的海床，就是我们的集体潜意识。
原型编辑本段回目录原型是集体潜意识中形象的总汇。
荣格亦将他们称呼为显性、无意识意象、虚构或原始印象，以及一些其它的名字。
但原型似乎最被接受。
所谓的原型，是藉由特定的方法去体验事情的天生倾向。
原型本身没有自己的形式，但它表现就有如我们所见、所为的“组织原理”。
它遵循Freud理论中的直觉法则行事：首先，当一个婴儿想要吃时，他不知道他想要的东西是什么。
他有着相当不明确的渴望，然而，某些特定的东西可以满足他。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
集体潜意识
自性：（self）,即整合、统 一，是集体潜意识的核心原型 ，把其他原型吸引到自己的周 围，使他们处于一种和谐状态。 如曼陀罗 作用
协调人格的各组成部分，使 之达到整合、统一，使人具有 稳定感和一体感。
荣格的生平 荣格人格结构
小结
意识 （自我）
个体潜意识（情结） 集体潜意识（原型）
参考文献
《记忆、梦、反思》 《分析心理学的理论 与实践》
谢谢
荣格与字词联想测验：1900年成为著名精神 病学家尤金.布洛伊勒领导的苏黎世大学伯格 尔茨利精神诊所的一名助理医生，并开始了 字词联想实验的研究。
荣格与弗洛伊德:1907年，第一次见面。弗洛 伊德将其视为自己的继承人，并委任其为国 际心理分析学会第一届会长。1913年荣格发 表了《精神分析理论》，公开反对弗洛伊德 把力比多能量解释为原始性欲的观点，由于 两个人的分歧，1914年荣格宣布脱离精神分 析学会，并结束了与弗洛伊德的友谊和交往。
个体潜意识
个体潜意识：
由哪些曾一度被意识到但后来被忘却了的心理内 容组成。是潜意识的表层，这些东西发生在个体出 生之后，并和个体经验相联系。个体潜意识与意识 存在双向流动或交换。 表现形式：情结（Complex）是一组一组的心理内容 （包括观念和情感的）聚集在一起，缠绕在一起， 形成的一簇难以解开的心理丛和心理结。如成功情 结、俄狄浦斯情结、自卑情结等。其具有积极（灵 感、创造性）和消极作用（干扰、阻碍）。其根源 于集体潜意识。
集体潜意识
集体潜意识：
也是一个记忆的储存库，他所储存的不是 个体后天的经验，而是其祖先（包括人类祖 先和动物祖先）在漫长的生物演化过程中世 代积累的经验，这些经验以原始的意象形式 保持下来。（精神不在今日，在百万年来的 世世代代之中） 集体潜意识的主要内容：原型
集体潜意识
原型：是一种形式，没有具体的内容。需要后天经验显影的 照片底片，深埋在心灵之中，会在梦、幻想、幻觉和神经症 中以象征的形式表现出来。
意识
意识：
是人的心灵中唯一能够被个体感知的那个 部分。两种倾向性决定意识活动方向，随着 四种心理机能的应用而不断增强。
意识的作用：促进个性化，在个性化的过程中产生 了一个重要的人格因素，即自我，是意识的中心。
自我：是个体自觉意识的心理组织，由能够 自觉到的感知、记忆、思维与情感组成。
自我的作用：过滤器
原型的种类：人生有多少典型的情境，就有多少个原型。主 要有四种：
人格面具（persona）———人格的外部形象 阿妮玛(anima)
—人格的内部形象 阿妮姆斯(animus) 阴影(shadow) 自性(self)
集体潜意识
人格面具：（persona）是指一个人生来 就具有的一种倾向性，倾向于在公共场合中 展示自己，扮演好某种社会角色，其目的在 于给别人一个好印象，得到社会的承认和赞 许。 作用 人格面具积极作用：促使我们与其他人和睦相处 人格面具消极作用：面具膨胀，过分关注人格面具必然要牺牲
集体无意பைடு நூலகம்论
四川大学 ：陈惠惠 应用心理学硕士
集体潜意识论
荣格的生平 分析心理学的人格理论
1、荣格人格结构论 2、荣格人格动力论 3、荣格人格发展论 4、荣格心理类型学
荣格
卡尔.古斯塔夫.荣格 （Carl Gustav Jung1875-1961）
分析心理学、荣格心理学 深层心理学、原型心理学
1913年开始陷入危机、梦、幻象-疯狂的边缘
1913年 梦：洪水
梦：永恒的冬日
梦 血流成河
从1914年到1928年，他经过了痛苦的自我探 索时期，并形成了他之后的理论基点。
荣格的理论-人格结构理论
人格结构：
意识、个体潜意识与集体潜意识 整体的人格结构理论，人格作为一个整体 就被称为心灵或灵魂。心灵（或人格）包括 人所有的思想、感情和行为，不管是意识到 的还是无意识的。心灵的作用是调节和控制 个体，使其适应周围的自然与社会环境。
人格结构中的其他组成部分，对心理健康造成危害。
集体潜意识
阿尼玛和阿尼姆斯：异性原型， 阿尼玛是指男人心灵中的女性成 分。-，蒙娜丽莎 阿尼姆斯是指女人心灵中的男性 成分-基督 亚瑟王 作用：更有利于我们与异性交 往，利于我们理解异性。
集体潜意识
阴影：（shadow）也称同性原型，代表一个人的性 别，并影响到其他同性关系。阴影容纳者人的最基 本的动物性和兽性的一面。
我的一生是无意识的自我实现的一生 适用于一切的生活处方并不存在 I We=Fully I，（我 我们=完整的我） 一切均可，但切不可步人之后-座右铭
荣格的生平
荣格的家庭环境：宗教氛围很浓的家庭；父 母不和；父子隔阂；9岁前是独子-孤僻内倾 的性格。
荣格的学生时代：大量的阅读神学、哲学、 考古学、生物学、地质学等。1895年，考入 巴塞尔大学医学院，偶然机会阅读艾宾的 《精神病学教科书》决心投身精神病学的研 究。