The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious

Jung opens this chapter with a definition of the collective unconscious and explains how it differs from the personal unconscious. The personal unconscious consists of memories that were once part of conscious experience but were eventually repressed or hidden. These repressed experiences are called “complexes.” Therefore, the personal unconscious is an individualized part of the psyche—it is specific to a person’s life history and experiences. In contrast, the collective unconscious is inherited, meaning that it is passed down to each person and is shared by all humans. While the personal unconscious is made up of complexes, the collective unconscious is made up of archetypes, which are pre-existing motifs that transcend culture, space, and time. They are also hidden from conscious perspective.

Jung is critical of his contemporaries’ focus on the personal psyche alone. He suggests that true psychological understanding—and healing—can only occur when individuals begin to explore the deeper recesses of the unconscious. Jung asserts that there is no difference between believing in instincts and the collective unconscious. To believe in one is to accept that there are aspects of the psyche that are beyond the control and influence of the individual and that these aspects drive behavior and choice.

Jung asserts that the collective unconscious can and should be studied empirically by examining recurring symbols and motifs across various cultures and mythologies. He points to the prevalence of the “dual mother” figure in various religions as an example of how archetypes might be studied in a scientific manner. The dual mother appears in both Egyptian and Christian mythology, indicating that there must be a wellspring from which these mirrored ideas are sourced.

In addition to the motif of the dual mother, Jung finds recurrences of “dual birth.” The Christian concept of a second birth through salvation is mirrored in characters living new, better lives after the guidance of fairy godmothers in folklore. He says that the continuous appearance of symbols like these is an example of the universal nature of the collective unconscious.

To uncover these archetypes and the individual’s relationship with them, Jung argues for an empirical process grounded in dream analysis. He says dreams can prove the existence of archetypes. He writes: “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” (49). He also says that the technique of “active imagination”—a process of consciously engaging with images from the unconscious—can be used to explore dreams for archetypal material.

At the beginning of the chapter, Jung addresses biased attitudes about psychology as a metaphysical practice. He observes that people are more willing to discuss salacious topics than God or spiritual concepts. However, he argues that the field of psychology is a legitimate phenomenological practice that can be studied empirically. Furthermore, Jung asserts that participation in the collective unconscious is inevitable. Those who refuse to explore the collective unconscious experience only a limited version of life.

Jung builds on ideas from both Sigmund Freud’s work and William James’s Varieties of Religious Experience, arguing that mental conditions are impacted by the unconscious portion of the psyche. He suggests that therapeutic methods that ignore the collective unconscious do not probe far enough into the psyche for recovery, stating: “Its nature shows itself not merely in the personal sphere, or in the instinctual or social, but in phenomena of world-wide distribution. So if we want to understand the psyche, we have to include the whole world” (56).

To establish analytical psychology as a legitimate field, Jung opens with a detailed analysis of the archetype of the Anima. Archetypes emerge across cultures and mythologies, often in dualistic form. He uses the Chinese philosophy of yin and yang as an example of how masculine and feminine dualities frequently arise in spiritual and philosophical practice. Parental pairs, representing these gendered motifs, are often found in archetypes, correlating with their masculine and feminine forms. Like all archetypes, the Anima falls subject to syzygy, meaning it inhabits corresponding opposites.

Jung describes the Anima as the feminine archetype, particularly within the male psyche. While it symbolizes emotionality and maternal instinct, it can also manifest as moodiness and irritability. Children often view the Anima, especially in its association with the mother, as a type of superhuman, but this view alters and tarnishes over time. Jung suggests that complexes within the personal unconscious are often the result of an individual’s relationship and perception of the Anima.