I. THE TA VISTOCK LECTURES 
tain thing like the unconscious of Freud. As for the word "unconscious," it is becoming more or less known to everybody. It has therefore a certain social or illustrative value, but Jung refuses to recognize the word "unconscious" in the meaning Freud gives to it and uses "unconscious" in a way that we have come to consider as what Freud calls the "Id." 
Professor lung: 
	124 	The word "unconscious" is not Freud's invention. It was 
known in German philosophy long before, by Kant and Leibniz and others, and each of them gives his definition of that term. I am perfectly well aware that there are many different conceptions of the unconscious, and what I was trying humbly to do was to say what I think about it. It is not that I undervalue the merits of Leibniz, Kant, von Hartmann, or any other great man, including Freud and Adler and so on. I was only explaining what I mean by the unconscious, and I presuppose that you are all aware of what Freud means by it. I did not think it was my task to explain things in such a way that somebody who is convinced of Freud's theory and prefers that point of view would be upset in his belief. I have no tendency to destroy your convictions or points of view. I simply exhibit my own point of view, and if anybody should be tempted to think that this also is reasonable, that is all I want. It is perfectly indifferent to me what one thinks about the unconscious in general, otherwise I should begin a long dissertation on the concept of the unconscious as understood by Leibniz, Kant, and von Hartmann. 
Dr. Suttie: 
	125 	Dr. Strauss asked about the relationship of the unconscious 
as conceived by you and by Freud. Is it possible to bring them into precise and definite relationship? 
Professor lung: 
	126 	Dr. Graham Howe has answered the question. Freud is see- 
ing the mental processes as static, while I speak in terms of dynamics and relationship. To me all is relative. There is nothing definitely unconscious; it is only not present to the conscious mind under a certain light. You can have very different ideas of why a thing is known under one aspect and not known under another aspect. The only exception I make is the mythological 
62 

LECTURE 11 (DISCUSSION) 
pattern, which is profoundly unconscious, as I can prove by the facts. 
Dr. Straws: 
	127 	Surely there is a difference between using your association 
test as a crime detector and for finding, let us say, unconscious guilt. Your criminal is conscious of his guilt and he is conscious that he is afraid of its being discovered. Your neurotic is unaware of his guilt and unaware that he is afraid of his guilt. Can the same kind of technique be used in these two very different kinds of cases? 
The Chairman: 
	128 	This woman was not conscious of her guilt though she had 
allowed the child to suck the sponge. 
Professor lung: 
	129 	I will show you the difference experimentally. In Figure 7 
you have a short illustration of respiration during the association test. You see four series of seven respirations registered after the stimulus words. The diagrams are condensations of respirations after indifferent and critical stimulus words in a greater number of test persons. 
	13° 	"A" gives respirations after indifferent stimulus words. The 
first inspirations after the stimulus words are restricted, while the following inspirations are of normal size. 
	131 	In "B" where the stimulus word was a critical one the vol- 
ume of breathing is definitely restricted, sometimes by more than half the normal size. 
	132 	In "C" we have the behaviour of breathing after a stimulus 
word relating to a complex that was conscious to the test persons. The first inspiration is almost normal, and only later you find a certain restriction. 
	133 	In "D" the respiration is after a stimulus word that was re- 
lated to a complex of which the test persons were unconscious. In this case the first inspiration is remarkably small and the following are rather below normal. 
	134 	These diagrams illustrate very clearly the difference of reac- 
tion between conscious and unconscious complexes. In "C," for instance, the complex is conscious. The stimulus word hits the test person, and there is a deep inspiration. But when the stimulus word hits an unconscious complex, the volume of breathing 
63 

~~ 

LECTURE II (DISCUSSION) 
is restricted, as shown in "D" I. There is a spasm in the thorax, so that almost no breathing takes place. In that way one has empirical proof of the physiological difference between conscious and unconscious reaction.14 
Dr. Wilfred R. Bion: 
	135 	You gave an analogy between archaic forms of the body and 
archaic forms of the mind. Is it purely an analogy or is there in fact a closer relationship? Last night you said something which suggested that you consider there is a connection between the mind and the brain, and there has lately been published in the British Medical Journal a diagnosis of yours from a dream of a physical disorder.15 If that case was correctly reported it makes a very important suggestion, and I wondered whether you considered there was some closer connection between the two forms of archaic survival. 
Professor Jung: 
	136 	You touch again on the controversial problem of psycho- 
physical parallelism for which I know of no answer, because it is beyond the reach of man's cognition. As I tried to explain yesterday, the two things-the psychic fact and the physiological fact-come together in a peculiar way. They happen together and are, so I assume, simply two different aspects to our mind, but not in reality. We see them as two on account of the utter incapacity of our mind to think them together. Because of that possible unity of the two things, we must expect to find dreams which are more on the physiological side than on the psychological, as we have other dreams that are more on the psycholog- 
I. THE TA VISTOCK LECTURES 

I 
	IT ill TIl Jl :i2I 	:szrr 
A.	Respiration after indifferent stimuli 
~ 

I 
	IT ill TIl Jl :i2I 	:szrr 
C.	Respiration after conscious complex stimuli 
	I IT ill TIl Jl :i2I 	:szrr 
B.	Respiration after complex stimuli 
~ 

14 [Cf. supra, par. 48, n. 15.] 
15 [Cf. T. M. Davie, "Comments upon a Case of 'Periventricular Epilepsy,' •. British Medical Journal, no. 3893 (Aug. 17, 1935) , 293-297. The dream is reported by a patient of Davie as follows: "Someone beside me kept on asking me something about oiling some machinery. Milk was suggested as the best lubricant. Apparently I thought that oozy slime was preferable. Then a pond was drained, and amid the slime there were two extinct animals. One was a minute mastodon. 1 forgot what the other one was." 
Davie's comment: "I thought it would be of interest to submit this dream to Jung to ask what his interpretation would be. He had no hesitation in saying that it indicated some organic disturbance, and that the illness was not primarily a psychological one, although there were numerous psychological derivatives in the dream. The drainage of the pond he interpreted as the damming-up of the cere. brospinal fluid circulation."] 
I 
	IT ill TIl Jl :i2I 	:szrr 
D.	Respiration after unconscious complex stimuli 
FIG. 7. Association Test: Respiration 
64 
65 

I. THE TA VISTOCK LECTURES 
ical than on the physical side. The dream to which you refer was very clearly a representation of an organic disorder. These "organic representations" are well known in ancient literature. The doctors of antiquity and of the Middle Ages used dreams for their diagnosis. I did not conduct a physical examination on the man you refer to. I only heard his history and was told the dream, and I gave my opinion on it. I have had other cases, for instance a very doubtful case of progressive muscular atrophy in a young girl. I asked about dreams and she had two dreams which were very colourful. A colleague, a man who knew something of psychology, thought it might be a case of hysteria. There were indeed hysterical symptoms, and it was still doubtful if it was progressive muscular atrophy or not; but on account of the dreams I came to the conclusion that it must be an organic disease, and the end proved my diagnosis. It was an organic disturbance, and the dreams were definitely referring to the organic condition.16 According to my idea of the community of the psyche and the living body it should be like that, and it would be marvellous if it were not so. 
Dr. Bion: 
	137 	Will you be talking of that later when you speak on dreams? 
Professor lung: 
	138 	I am afraid that I cannot go into such detail; it is too special. 
It is really a matter of special experience, and its presentation would be a very difficult job. It would not be possible to describe to you briefly the criteria by which I judge such dreams. The dream you mentioned, you may remember, was a dream of the little mastodon. To explain what that mastodon really means in an organic respect and why I must take that dream as an organic symptom would start such an argument that you would accuse me of the most terrible obscurantism. These things really are obscure. I had to speak in terms of the basic mind, which thinks in archetypal patterns. When I speak of archetypal patterns those who are aware of these things understand, but if you are not aware you think, "This fellow is absolutely crazy because he talks of mastodons and their difference from snakes and horses." I should have to give you a course of about four semesters about symbology first so that you could appreciate what I said. 
16 [The Practice of Psychotherapy (C.W., vo!. 16), pars. 344f.] 66 

LECTURE 11 (DISCUSSION) 
	139 	That is the great trouble: there is such a gap between what 
is usually known of these things and what I have worked on all these years. If I were to speak of this even before a medical audience I should have to talk of the peculiarities of the niveau mental) to quote Janet, and I might as well talk Chinese. For instance, I would say that the abaissement du niveau mental sank in a certain case to the level of the manipura chakrap that is, to the level of the navel. We Europeans are not the only people on the earth. We are just a peninsula of Asia, and on that continent there are old civilizations where people have trained their minds in introspective psychology for thousands of years, whereas we began with our psychology not even yesterday but only this morning. These people have an insight that is simply fabulous, and I had to study Eastern things to understand certain facts of the unconscious. I had to go back to understand Oriental symbolism. I am about to publish a little book on one symbolic motif only,18 and you will find it hair-raising. I had to study not only Chinese and Hindu but Sanskrit literature and medieval Latin manuscripts which are not even known to specialists, so that one must go to the British Museum to find the references. Only when you possess that apparatus of parallelism can you begin to make diagnoses and say that this dream is organic and that one is not. Until people have acquired that knowledge I am-just a sorcerer. They say it is un tour de passe-passe. They said it in the Middle Ages. They said, "How can you see that Jupiter has satellites?" If you reply that you have a telescope, what is a telescope to a medieval audience? 
	140 	I do not mean to boast about this. I am always perplexed 
when my colleagues ask: "How do you establish such a diagnosis or come to this conclusion?" I reply: "I will explain if you will allow me to explain what you ought to know to be able to understand it." I experienced this myself when the famous Einstein was Professor at Zurich. I often saw him, and it was when 
17 [Cf. supra, par. 17, n. 4.] 
18 [The mandala motif, in a lecture, "Traumsymbole des Individuationsprozesses," that Jung delivered a few weeks previously at the Eranos Tagung. It was published the next year in Eranos-Jahrbuch I935; in translation, as "Dream Symbols of the Process of Individuation," The Integration of the Personality, 1939; revised as Part 11 of Psychologie und Alchemie, 1944 (= C:W., vo!. 12). See also infra, par. 406, n. 15.] 
67 

1. THE TA VISTOCK LECTURES 
he was beginning to work on his theory of relativity. He was often in my house, and I pumped him about his relativity theory. I am not gifted in mathematics and you should have seen all the trouble the poor man had to explain relativity to me. He did not know how to do it. I went fourteen feet deep into the floor and felt quite small when I saw how he was troubled. But one day he asked me something about psychology. Then I had my revenge. 
	141 	Special knowledge is a terrible disadvantage. It leads you in a 
way too far, so that you cannot explain any more. You must allow me to talk to you about seemingly elementary things, but if you will accept them I think you will understand why I draw such and such conclusions. I am sorry that we do not have more time and that I cannot tell you everything. When I come to dreams I have to give myself away and to risk your thinking me a perfect fool, because I am not able to put before you all the historical evidence which led to my conclusions. I should have to quote bit after bit from Chinese and Hindu literature, medieval texts and all the things which you do not know. How could you? I am working with specialists in other fields of knowledge and they help me. There was my late friend Professor Wilhelm, the sinologist; I worked with him. He had translated a Taoist text, and he asked me to comment on it, which I did from the psychological side.19 I am a terrible novelty to a sinologist, but what he has to tell us is a novelty to us. The Chinese philosophers were no fools. We think the old people were fools, but they were as intelligent as we are. They were frightfully intelligent people, and psychology can learn no end from old civilizations, particularly from India and China. A former President of the British Anthropological Society asked me: "Can you understand that such a highly intelligent people as the Chinese have no science?" I replied: "They have a science, but you do not understand it. It is not based on the principle of causality. The principle of causality is not the only principle; it is only relative." 
	142 	People may say: What a fool to say causality is only relative! 
But look at modern physics! The East bases its thinking and its evaluation of facts on another principle. "Ve have not even a 
19 The Secret of the Golden Flower. [The Chinese text was translated by Richard Wilhelm. The commentary by Jung is contained in Alchemical Studies (C.W., vol. 13)·] 
68 

LECTURE 11 (DISCUSSION) 
word for that principle. The East naturally has a word for it, but we do not understand it. The Eastern word is Tao. My friend McDougaIl2° has a Chinese student, and he asked him: "What exactly do you mean by Tao?" Typically Western! The Chinese explained what Tao is and he replied: "I do not understand yet." The Chinese went out to the balcony and said: "What do you see?" "I see a street and houses and people walking and tramcars passing." "What more?" "There is a hill." "What more?" "Trees." "What more?" ''The wind is blowing." The Chinese threw up his arms and said: "That is Tao." 
	143 	There you are. Tao can be anything. I use another word to 
designate it, but it is poor enough. I call it synchronicity. The Eastern mind, when it looks at an ensemble of facts, accepts that ensemble as it is, but the Western mind divides it into entities, small ~uantities. You look, for instance, at this present gathering of people, and you say: "Where do they come from? Why should they come together?" The Eastern mind is not at all interested in that. It says: "What does it mean that these people are together?" That is not a problem for the Western mind. You are interested in what you come here for and what you are doing here. Not so the Eastern mind; it is interested in being together. 
	144 	It is like this: you are standing on the sea-shore and the 
waves wash up an old hat, an old box, a shoe, a dead fish, and there they lie on the shore. You say: "Chance, nonsense!" The Chinese mind asks: "What does it mean that these things are together?" The Chinese mind experiments with that being together and coming together at the right moment, and it has an experimental method which is not known in the West, but which plays a large role in the philosophy of the East. It is a method of forecasting possibilities, and it is still used by the Japanese Government about political situations; it was used, for instance, in the Great War. This method was formulated in 1143 B.C.21 
20 [William McDougall (1871-1938), American psychiatrist. Cf. Jung's "On the Psychogenesis of Schizophrenia" (C.W., vol. 3), par. 504, and "The Therapeutic Value of Abreaction" (C.W., vol. 16), par. 255.] 
21 [Cf. The I Ching, or Book of Changes, trans. by Wilhelm/Baynes, 3rd edn., introduction, p. liii.] 
69 

LECTURE III 
The Chairman (Dr. Maurice B. Wright): 
	145 	Ladies and Gentlemen, it is my privilege to be the Chairman 
at Professor lung's lecture at this evening's meeting. It was my privilege twenty-one years ago to meet Professor lung when he came over to London to give a series of addresses,! but there was then a very small group of psychologically minded physicians. I remember very well how after the meetings we used to go to a little restaurant in Soho and talk until we were turned out. Naturally we were trying to pump Professor lung as hard as we could. When I said goodbye to Professor lung he said to me-he did not say it very seriously-"I think you are an extravert who has become an introvert." Frankly, I have been brooding about that ever since! 
	146 	Now, ladies and gentlemen, just a word about last night. I 
think Professor lung gave us a very good illustration of his views and of his work when he talked about the value of the telescope. A man with a telescope naturally can see a good deal more than anybody with unaided sight. That is exactly Professor lung's position. With his particular spectacles, with his very specialized research, he has acquired a knowledge, a vision of the depth of the human psyche, which for many of us is very difficult to grasp. Of course, it will be impossible for him in the space of a few lectures to give us more than a very short outline of the vision he has gained. Therefore, in my opinion anything which might seem blurred or dark is not a question of obscurantism, it is a question of spectacles. My own difficulty is that, with my muscles of accommodation already hardening, it might be impossible for me ever to see that vision clearly, even if for the moment Professor Jung could lend me his spectacles. But however this may be, 
1 [Cf. "On the Importance of the Unconscious in Psychopathology," and "On Psychological Understanding," both delivered in 1914 (C.W., vo!. 3).] 
7° 

LECTURE III 
I know that we are all thrilled with everything he can tell us, and we know how stimulating it is to our own thinking, especially in a domain where speculation is so easy and whereyroof is so difficult. 
Professor lung: 
	147 	Ladies and Gentlemen, I ought to have finished my lecture 
on the association tests yesterday, but I would have had to overstep my time. So you must pardon me for coming back to the same thing once more. It is not that I am particularly in love with the association tests. I use them only when I must, but they are really the foundation of certain conceptions. I told you last time about the characteristic disturbances, and I think it would be a good thing, perhaps, if I were briefly to sum up all there is to say about the results of the experiment, namely about the complexes. 
	148 	A complex is an agglomeration of associations-a sort of pic- 
ture of a more or less complicated psychological nature-sometimes of traumatic character, sometimes simply of a painful and highly toned character. Everything that is highly toned is rather difficult to handle. If, for instance, something is very important to me, I begin to hesitate when I attempt to do it, and you have probably observed that when you ask me difficult questions I cannot answer them immediately because the subject is important and I have a long reaction time. I begin to stammer, and my memory does not supply the necessary material. Such disturbances are complex disturbances-even if what I say does not come from a personal complex of mine. It is simply an important affair, and whatever has an intense feeling-tone is difficult to handle because such contents are somehow associated with physiological reactions, with the processes of the heart, the tonus of the blood vessels, the condition of the intestines, the breath· ing, and the innervation of the skin. Whenever there is a high tonus it is just as if that particular complex had a body of its own, as if it were localized in my body to a certain extent, and that makes it unwieldy, because something that irritates my body cannot be easily pushed away because it has its roots in my body and begins to pull at my nerves. Something that has little tonus and little emotional value can be easily brushed aside because it has no roots. It is not adherent or adhesive. 
71 

149 
150 
151 

1. THE TAVISTOCK LECTURES 
Ladies and Gentlemen, that leads me to something very important-the fact that a complex with its given tension or energy has the tendency to form a little personality of itself. It has a sort of body, a certain amount of its own physiology. It can upset the stomach. It upsets the breathing, it disturbs the heart -in short, it behaves like a partial personality. For instance, when you want to say or do something and unfortunately a complex interferes with this intention, then you say or do something different from what you intended. You are simply interrupted, and your best intention gets upset by the complex, exactly as if you had been interfered with by a human being or by circumstances from outside. Under those conditions we really are forced to speak of the tendencies of complexes to act as if they were characterized by a certain amount of will-power. When you speak of will-power you naturally ask about the ego. Where then is the ego that belongs to the will-power of the complexes? We know our own ego-complex, which is supposed to be in full possession of the body. It is not, but let us assume that it is a centre in full possession of the body, that there is a focus which we call the ego, and that the ego has a will and can do something with its components. The ego also is an agglomeration of highly toned contents, so that in principle there is no difference between the ego-complex and any other complex. 
Because complexes have a certain will-power, a sort of ego, we find that in a schizophrenic condition they emancipate themselves from conscious control to such an extent that they become visible and audible. They appear as visions, they speak in voices which are like the voices of definite people. This personification of complexes is not in itself necessarily a pathological condition. In dreams, for instance, our complexes often appear in a personified form. And one can train oneself to such an extent that they become visible or audible also in a waking condition. It is part of a certain yoga training to split up consciousness into its components, each of which appears as a specific personality. In the psychology of our unconscious there are typical figures that have a definite life of their own.2 
All this is explained by the fact that the so-called unity of consciousness is an illusion. It is really a wish-dream. We like to 2 For example, the figures of anima and animus. [See Two Essays on Analytical Psychology (C.W., vol. 7), pars. 296ff.] 
72 

152 
153 
154 

LECTURE III 
think that we are one; but we are not, most decidedly not. We are not really masters in our house. We like to believe in our will-power and in our energy and in what we can do; but when it comes to a real show-down we find that we can do it only to a certain extent, because we are hampered by those little devils the complexes. Complexes are autonomous groups of associations that have a tendency to move by themselves, to live their own life apart from our intentions. I hold that our personal unconscious, as well as the collective unconscious, consists of an indefinite, because unknown, number of complexes or fragmentary personalities. 
This idea explains a lot. It explains, for instance, the simple fact that a poet has the capacity to dramatize and personify his mental contents. When he creates a character on the stage, or in his poem or drama or novel, he thinks it is merely a product ofhis imagination; but that character in a certain secret way has made itself. Any novelist or writer will deny that these characters have a psychological meaning, but as a matter of fact you know as well as I do that they have one. Therefore you can read a writer's mind when you study the characters he creates. 
The complexes, then, are partial or fragmentary personalities. When we speak of the ego-complex, we naturally assume that it has a consciousness, because the relationship of the various contents to the centre, in other words to the ego, is called consciousness. But we also have a grouping of contents about a centre, a sort of nucleus, in other complexes. So we may ask the question: Do complexes have a consciousness of their own? If you study spiritualism, you must admit that the so-called spirits manifested in automatic writing or through the voice of a medium do indeed have a sort of consciousness of their own. Therefore unprejudiced people are inclined to believe that the spirits are the ghosts of a deceased aunt or grandfather or something of the kind, just on account of the more or less distinct personality which can be traced in these manifestations. Of course, when we are dealing with a case of insanity we are less inclined to assume that we have to do with ghosts. We call it pathological then. 
So much about the complexes. I insist on that particular point of consciousness within complexes only because complexes play a large role in dream-analysis. You remember my diagram 
73 

I. THE TA VISTOCK LECTURES 
LECTURE III 

as thirty per cent of all associations are identical words. This is a striking case of participation, of mental contagion. If you think about this case you can draw certain conclusions. The mother was forty-five years old, married to an alcoholic. Her life 
(Figure 4) showing the different spheres of the mind and the dark centre of the unconscious in the middle. The closer you approach that centre, the more you experience what Janet calls an abaissement du niveau mental: your conscious autonomy begins to disappear, and you get more and more under the fascination of unconscious contents. Conscious autonomy loses its tension and its energy, and that energy reappears in the increased activity of unconscious contents. You can observe this process in an extreme form when you carefully study a case of insanity. The fascination of unconscious contents gradually grows stronger and conscious control vanishes in proportion until finally the patient sinks into the unconscious altogether and becomes completely victimized by it. He is the victim of a new autonomous activity that does not start from his ego but starts from the dark sphere. 
	155 	In order to deal with the association test thoroughly, I must 
mention an entirely different experiment. You will forgive me if for the sake of economizing time I do not go into the details of the researches, but these diagrams (Figs. 8, 9, 10, 11) illustrate the results of very voluminous researches into families.3 They represent the quality of associations. For instance, the little summit in Figure 8 designated as number XI is a special class or category of association. The principle of classification is logical and linguistic. I am not going into this, and you will simply have to accept the fact that I have made fifteen categories into which I divide associations. We made tests with a great number of families, all for certain reasons uneducated people, and we found that the type of association and reaction is peculiarly parallel among certain members of the family; for instance, father and mother, or two brothers, or mother and child are almost identical in their type of reaction. 
	156 	I shall explain this by Figure 8. The dotted line ( ..... ) rep- 
resents the mother, the broken line (- - - - -) her sixteen-year-old daughter, and the unbroken line (--) the father. This was a very unfortunate marriage. The father was an alcoholic and the mother was a very peculiar type. You see that the sixteenyear-old daughter follows her mother's type closely. As much 
D.	
! 
...... 
	L 		:,,,,,,~:::":::":::":::;:. 	. 
	l __ :~::.::~:::~:::~: 	~ 
	Father 	Mother 	Daughter 	n __ 
FiG. 8. Association Test of a Family 
3 "The Familial Constellations" (C.W., vo!. 2) and "The Significance of the Father in the Destiny of the Individual" (C.W., vo!. 4) , pars. 698-702. 
74 
was therefore a failure. Now the daughter has exactly the same reactions as the mother. If such a girl comes out into the world as though she were forty-five years old and married to an alcoholic, think what a mess she will get into! This participation explains why the daughter of an alcoholic who has had a hell of a 
75