A little history One of the prominent representatives of the school of S. Freud, who created his own teaching (his own school), the so-called analytical psychology, is Carl Gustav Jung - a Swiss psychiatrist and teacher, doctor Medicine and honorary doctorates from Clark University and the University of Calcutta. However, in order to avoid confusion, it is worth making a little clarification here. The analytical psychology of C. Jung belongs to one of the areas of so-called depth psychology, which combines a number of areas in psychology, focused primarily on the observation of unconscious mental processes of a person. Z. Freud's psychoanalysis is also considered to be one of the areas of depth psychology along with other areas, like: analytical psychology of C. Jung, individual psychology of A. Adler and neo-Freudianism. This is where confusion can arise. After all, on the one hand, the teachings of S. Freud (psychoanalysis) are only one of the areas of depth psychology. On the other hand, K. Jung, A. Adler and other representatives of Freudianism and neo-Freudianism are traditionally attributed to the school of S. Freud. However, everything falls into place if we take into account the fact that these representatives at one time were members of the so-called Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, founded in 1908 by Sigmund Freud. Moreover, this society arose from a small group of people who gathered at S. Freud’s house in 1902 on Wednesdays. Initially headed by S. Freud and called the “Psychological Society on Wednesdays,” it was intended to unite not only doctors and psychologists involved in clinical practice, but also philosophers, writers, lawyers, artists and other figures who are far from psychology, but interested ideological side of psychoanalytic teaching. So by 1906, there were already 17 members of various faiths in the society. However, at the beginning of 1910, a split occurred in the ranks of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society due to disagreements on many issues of the psychoanalytic approach. Many participants left it, including representatives of their own psychological concepts, which they subsequently created. Among them was Carl Gustav Jung, who from 1907 to 1912 was a close associate of Sigmund Freud, but due to disagreements with him, eventually moved away from him. Thus, as you already understood, representatives of their own psychological concepts, who were members of the Vienna psychoanalytic society, is usually attributed to the school of S. Freud, i.e. They seemed to have gone through the school of S. Freud. Although not all of them were his students. And their own concepts on many issues may be very far from the teachings of S. Freud. Concept of Carl Jung Unlike Z. Freud, K. Jung rejected the idea that personality is completely formed by learning and depends only on the influence of the environment. He believed that each individual is born with a ready-made personal sketch, and the environment reveals only some of the inclinations of this sketch, embedded in him from birth. C. Jung called this sketch the collective unconscious, which in his view is only one of forms of the unconscious, inherent in the entire society and which is a product of inherited brain structures. Unlike Z. Freud, K. Jung identified several forms of the unconscious: individual, family, group, national, racial and collective. The difference between the collective unconscious and its other forms, according to K. Jung, is that it is common to different people and does not depend on the individual development of the individual. The collective unconscious is based not on the personal experience of a particular person, but on the experience of a society that has gone through a long evolutionary path of development. It contains all the mental needs of a person, from sexual attraction to the need for respect, friendship, recognition, etc. C. Jung designated them with the term archetypes, believing that it is from them that goals, motives,aspirations, motivations and desires of a person. Archetypes are certain innate mental predispositions recorded in the brain from birth. Unlike instincts, they are based on cultural values ​​reflected in fairy tales, mythologies, legends, religions, etc. Moreover, as C. Jung noted, archetypes are universal units of the collective unconscious, independent of national, religious and geographical characteristics. They are inherent in all people without exception. An archetype is a semblance of the image of a hero, who is characterized by a certain set of values ​​and a tendency to act in a certain way. For example, in Russian folk tales, Vasilisa the Wise represents the image of a certain sage who can always find a way out of any difficult situation. Other nations, of course, have their own heroes who represent this image. For example, the Scarecrow in the fairy tale “The Wizard of the Emerald City.” Since the heroes of fairy tales, myths and legends can have both positive and negative connotations, C. Jung, in describing archetypes, tried to preserve the principle of identifying pairs of opposites. For example, Anima (the female part of a man’s psyche) and Animus (the male part of a woman’s psyche). Or the persona (the social role that a person plays, fulfilling the demands addressed to him by society) and the shadow (the dark side of the personality that a person does not recognize in himself due to incompatibility with his conscious image of himself).K. Jung believed that a person can have any archetypes. Moreover, they can manifest themselves differently at different periods of life and in different life situations. The main thing is to realize them, recognize them in yourself and actualize them, i.e. realize your individual inclinations and unique features. C. Jung called this process individuation, a kind of analogue of self-actualization. However, he did not try to classify the archetypes in any way. And he described them arbitrarily, pointing rather to general principles and features. The classification of archetypes was later taken up by his followers. Moreover, they tried to classify them in different ways. For example, Marie-Louise von Franz (Ph.D., K. Jung’s closest colleague, who worked with him for about 30 years) believed that archetypes are grouped with each other not randomly, but according to a certain order - “game archetypes”, which she associated with the signs of the Zodiac. She defends this idea in the book “Psyche and Matter” (1988). Of course, there were (and still exist to this day) many other followers of C. Jung who are trying in some way to describe and classify archetypes. However, we will not go into detail, since this issue could take an entire book, not an article. Although, as a clear example, I will give a fairly well-known classification by Carol S. Pearson, an American writer and teacher who develops new approaches to therapy, based on the works of C. Jung. In her 1991 book, Awakening the Hero Within, she describes 12 archetypes: Innocent - Developing faith, confidence and optimism. Good Guy - Realizing that bad things happen and developing realism. Warrior - Learning to compete, achieve goals and, if necessary, protecting oneself. Caregiver - Showing care and compassion for others, helping. Seeker - Desire to be different, willingness to try new things. Lover - Loving others, being romantic and intimate, making commitments. Rebel - Letting go and starting over; take action in desperate situations. Creator - Demonstrate imagination, innovation and giftedness. Ruler - Take responsibility, live in accordance with your values. Magician - Create change by changing your way of thinking or behavior. Sage - Think clearly, critically and formulate your own opinions. Jester - Enjoy life and work; enjoy the moment. In addition, there is the so-called Pearson-Marr indicator or Pearson-Marr questionnaire, which allows you to identify a person’s dominant archetype. And it is called that because Carol S. Pearson created it together with herassistant Hugh Marr. There are also metaphorical association cards (MACs) of archetypes and various techniques for working with them. All this is aimed at identifying the unconscious predispositions and aspirations of a person (once suppressed by life circumstances), so that they can be realized in the future. However, we will not dwell on this, but will return to consideration of the concept of Carl Jung. And when we look at it to the end, everything will become clear to you. So, C. Jung designated the collective unconscious (in which the archetypes are hidden) as a deeper layer, compared to the individual Freudian unconscious. According to him, we are born with this collective unconscious. And only then, in the process of gaining experience, in the process of life, other forms of the unconscious are formed, as if layering on this deep structure. But since the layering in the process of education and in the process of life in its various spheres does not occur smoothly (not every individual can satisfy everything his needs, inherent in him from birth), to this extent internal conflicts arise, which K. Jung called complexes. For example, a child has a “warrior” archetype (he constantly wants to compete with someone). Let's say he likes to play football. And he fell in love with him in the yard, playing ball with the local kids. And so he began to take an interest in football: he watches programs about football, reads magazines about famous football players, etc. And in general he dreams of becoming a great football player. Of course, it would be nice to send him to a football sports club. But his parents want to make him an economist (there is more money and the work is not dusty). In general, they consider his idea with football absurd. And with the best intentions, they do everything to ensure that their child becomes an economist. Then his initial desire (to become a football player) may over time turn into a complex that periodically manifests itself in an obsession. Of course, this is an example of an extreme case when parents destroy a child’s dream. In fact, complexes can arise when the child’s desire to satisfy some relatively “soft” need hidden in his unconscious is destroyed. For example, the child’s desire to have a toy is devalued. Precisely devaluation, because if parents are not able to buy their child a toy, say, because of financial problems, then they may not devalue his desire (they say, this is some kind of bullshit, you can do without it!), but take it into account , having found some alternative to it.K. Jung understood the reasons for the emergence of complexes more broadly, unlike S. Freud. For S. Freud, a complex is a brightly colored sexual desire repressed into the unconscious, resulting from a sexual need that the individual, due to certain circumstances, could not satisfy. For K. Jung, a complex is an unresolved life problem, repressed into the unconscious, but arising as a result of a variety of current contradictions. As K. Jung believed, complexes are formed as a result of psychotraumatic situations and, as a rule, as a result of moral conflicts. The immediate environment in which this or that individual is brought up imposes its own morality on him: like this cannot be done, that cannot be done. But the individual wants to satisfy his innate needs. And since he cannot do this, an internal conflict arises, which gradually develops into a complex. Over time, complexes acquire an autonomous character and are not subject to conscious control, manifesting themselves in situations somehow related to the complex, the mechanism of which is triggered automatically. The person seems to be doing something absurd. Something that he himself does not like about himself, but cannot stop this process. And, as a rule, he does not admit to himself what he is doing. Sometimes he tries to explain to himself the reasons for his absurd behavior. But, as a rule, he finds justification for them, misunderstanding the symbolic language of the unconscious. Complexesthey try to penetrate the individual’s consciousness through: dreams, the content of delusions or hallucinations in psychosis, inappropriate behavior, etc., exceeding his conscious expectations. The unconscious, according to C. Jung, seems to be trying to reach the individual. Explain to him what it wants, reminding him of his existence, manifesting himself in obsessions, split personality (in the case of schizophrenia) and other mental disorders. Method of psychotherapy according to K. Jung Based on his ideas, K. Jung proposed his own method of getting rid of complexes, which in his understanding is divided into several stages. At the first stage, an individual who has certain complexes must confess to the psychotherapist, but most importantly, himself in the presence of these complexes. At this stage, he is partially aware of the problem. At the very least, recognizing the presence of a particular complex allows a patient suffering from a mental disorder to set the task of getting rid of it. The patient talks about his life, experiences, dreams, obsessions, etc. a psychotherapist who tries to make this conversation more complete and frank. At the second stage, when the patient has already recognized the problem, its interpretation begins, i.e. searching for the true causes of its occurrence. Of course, with the participation of a psychotherapist. Like Z. Freud, K. Jung attached special importance to dreams, trying to discover in them certain symbols that the collective unconscious speaks. He tried to connect the patient's interpretation of the dream with his own interpretation. Trying to reveal the symbolism of the collective unconscious. True, in addition to dreams as material for analysis, K. Jung also widely used other forms of expression of the unconscious: drawings, dances, sculptures, etc. The result of this stage should be an understanding of the true causes of complexes. A person must face his unconscious. Open up to him and only then will he be able to realize the true reasons for the emergence of his complexes. When the patient has already recognized the existing problem and began to realize the roots of its occurrence, the third stage follows. No less important, from the point of view of K. Jung. The third stage is training. The result of this stage of treatment should be the formation in the patient not only of a new understanding of himself and the world around him (previous stage), but also of new habits, behavioral patterns and responses to situations. At the final, fourth stage of treatment, from the point of view of C. Jung, the patient’s dependence from the psychotherapist should be kept to a minimum. This means that all the efforts of the psychotherapist are transferred (transformed) to the patient himself. On the process of self-learning and self-improvement. That is, the patient, having realized the true reasons for the emergence of his complexes, must not only finally get rid of them, but also learn to prevent the emergence of new complexes by listening to his unconscious. Criticism of the theory of C. Jung The teaching of C. Jung was subsequently subjected to severe criticism, both from his contemporaries and from a number of modern scientists. According to many modern researchers, the analytical psychology of C. Jung with his concept of the collective unconscious is a type of modern occultism and esotericism, which is actively attracted by adherents of the occult and figures of alternative medicine in an effort to scientifically substantiate their views. Moreover, they believe that C. Jung did not decide the original problem (the problem of falsifiability - Popper's scientific criterion) of Freud's theory, but only expanded the list of possible causes of neuroses and psychological problems. Obviously, such criticism is fair from the point of view of an objective scientific approach. In essence, the collective unconscious is interpreted within the framework of a certain purpose or fate of a person striving to fulfill some earthly mission. After all, according to K. Jung, this or that complex arises in an individual due to the fact that in his collective unconscious certain goals, aspirations and desires are laid down from birth. But the individual, due to certain circumstances!