Head Types unconscious "from the book of Ken Uilbera" Atman Project ".
The authors of many scientific papers on the "unconscious" just at the outset admit that it exists - as a process, either as content - and then go to the description of its layers, levels, bases, form or content. I am convinced that this approach should be complemented with developmental psychology and evolutionary considerations on the one hand, and dynamic factors, on the other.
Let me cite a few examples of the problem. Tranzaktny analysis suggests an unconscious (or pre-conscious) scenario programming containing verbal prescriptions type "feel guilty" or "accumulate disturbing". Target Analyst - detect these provisions make it clear and understood, thereby freeing the client from the custody of their coercive power. For simplicity, let us call it "verbally-scenario unconscious".
Now, let us note one simple thing: a pre-verbal child can not verbally-scenario unconscious. Rather, the language must first arise in the course of development, then it loaded scenario requirements which must be down below the normal threshold of consciousness - only at this stage and not earlier, you can talk about the unconscious scenario. For the same reason a child to pre-phallic stage may not be phallic fixation and pre-egoichesky the baby does not have the structure of the unconscious-"Ego", etc.
Clearly, there is in the "unconscious" depends largely on development issues - all the unconscious in all its forms, not just initially given. Yet many modern authors seem to suggest that there are some "transpersonalnoe unconscious", attendant at the outset, but the displaced. But let me, if it looks like a verbal form, structure, character, mental ability, abstract thinking and to the highest structure in general, it has not yet been pushed out because of the logic of development it was not yet even have a chance.
Set on a point of view regarding the development and dynamics as opposed to static and given, I have outlined five basic types of unconscious processes. This is precisely the types of unconscious processes rather than levels of the unconscious (although we will refer to and about them.) I'm not going to exhaust its review of the topic or to give the final definition, but merely want to point out those issues which, in my opinion, should be addressed transpersonalnaya psychology.
The main, or background unconscious.
In the word "background" * (or base), I put, in essence, a neutral sense, it should not be confused with the "basis Genesis", or "foundation of". Although in a sense, this notion is a "comprehensive", fundamentally, it refers to the process of development. Embryo "possesses" background unconscious, in fact, it's deep structure, there is potentially ready to arise at some point the future through the memory. All the deep structures, the collective of humanity - by each level of consciousness - from the body, mind, soul and spirit to the rough, subtle and causal - are loaded in the background unconscious. They unconsciously, but are not pushed out because it is not yet part of the consciousness (in this life, we can talk about the replacement of these higher states in the psychology of involution or predrozhdeniya, which see the last chapter). The development or evolution consists of a series of hierarchical transformations, or deployments of deep structures of the unconscious background, starting with the lowest (pleroma and body) and finishing with the highest (God and Emptiness). When - and if - there was all contained in the background unconscious, then the only consciousness: all consciously as to all. As Aristotle said, when all potentially updated, the result will be God.
Note that the background unconscious for the most part (but, in my opinion, unlikely, you can say that completely) devoid of surface structures, since they basically learn at the deployment of (memory), the underlying structures. It looks like - but it seems - the idea of Jung's archetypes as the "forms, without content". Jung himself wrote that the archetype (deep structure) "is determined by its contents [surface structure] just in case, when it becomes aware of, and therefore filled with the material of conscious experience". Everyone "inherits" the same basic underlying structure, but each individual learn the surface structure, which can be very similar or quite distinct from the structures of other people (of course, within the limits imposed by the underlying structures).
And finally, pay attention to the fact that the closer the underlying structures created in the minds of the more powerful will it affect already accrued consciousness. This fact is most important.
Now all of the following four types of unconsciousness can be determined on the background of unconsciousness. This will give us the notion of unconscious processes, which will reflect both the structural and dynamics, as well as multi-layer and development.
Archaic unconscious.
Pioneer efforts in Freud's psychoanalysis led him to the postulation of two fundamentally different mental systems: the system unconscious, as he called it, and consciousness. Unconscious, Freud believed, causing displacement: some signals that the system of consciousness rapidly resisted were forcibly removed from consciousness. "Unconscious" and "displaced" was for him essentially the same thing.
However, Freud began to speak not so much about the system of consciousness and the unconscious system, but on the "Ego", and Eid, and the two formulations are not quite well-matched with each other. That is to say "Ego", it was not the same as the system of consciousness, and Eid - not the same as the system unconscious. At the outset of the "Ego" (Super-"Ego", protect nature and structure) were unconscious, a part of Eid - also unconscious, but not marginalized. According to the words of Freud, "we recognize that the unconscious does not coincide with the displaced, is still true that all the displaced is unconscious, but not all unconscious driven".
Not everything that is unconscious, driven out, because, as Freud knew, something that it was so from the beginning - not some personal experiences, which then displaced, but something that would begin as early as the unconscious. Freud was once thought that the symbols of dreams and fantasies can be to track the personal experiences of real life, but then he began to realize that many of these characters, it seems, can not create a personal experience. "How is it then that the need for these fantasies, and material for them?" - We have heard his question. "There can be no doubt about instinctive sources, but how then to explain why the same fantasies are always formed with the same content? I have this response, which might seem too offensive. I am convinced that the primary imagination ... a phylogenetic inheritance. These individuals ... below ... to the experience of the past eras ". In this phylogeny, or "archaic heritage", he, in addition to instincts, included "abbreviated version of evolution of the entire human race for long periods and lasted from prehistoric times". While Freud was deeply at odds with Jung in the views on the nature of the archaic inheritance, he still claimed that the "fully agree with Jung in recognizing the existence of this phylogenetic heritage".
For Jung "phylogeny legacy" was, of course, from the instincts and related forms or mental images that, over time, he called the "archetypes". In the Young instinct and archetype are closely related - almost united. As explained by Frey-Ron, "link between instinct and archetypal represent [Yungu] so closely that he made a conclusion on the inseparability of ... In the original image [archetype], he saw the instinct of self-portrait - in other words, the perception of the instinct itself ". As for the archaic images of themselves, the point of view, Young is as follows:
Man inherits these images from his last descent, which includes all of both human and pre-human or animal ancestors. These racial images are not inherited in the sense that people consciously remember or those passing through images, which were among his ancestors. They are a predisposition or potential world to experience and react to it in the same way as did his ancestors [ie, underlying structures are archaic.]
This archaic unconscious: it is simply the most primitive and least-developed structure of the background of unconsciousness - pleroma, uroboros and tifon. They initially unconsciously, but are not pushed out, and some of them tend to remain unconscious and never, not deployed in the knowledge, except as rudimentary root structures with very low content of surface or without it. Samorefleksiruyuschee awareness is not available for these structures, because they always retain the heavy tone of the unconscious, with a displacement or without it (and this is an important point). "The prevailing feature of Eid - writes Freud - and that is to be unconscious", and this is the nature of the Id, and not something created by displacement.
By the way, I do not share the enthusiasm about Jung's archaic images, and do not equate archetypes - the structure of the higher subtle and causal fields of the lower - to archaize manner, are their instinct (like Jung himself said) or tifonicheskimi analogues. Agreeing with him almost all on themselves archaic images, I do not consider them equal to the archetype. Archetypes - patterns of this model, rather than the old images.
Whatever the case, and following Freud and Yungu, we can say that in a general sense, somatic side is archaic unconscious Id (instinctive, limbicheskoe, tifonicheskoe, pranic), a mental side - phylogeny inherited fantasies. In general, the archaic unconscious is not a product of personal experience, it was originally unconsciously, but not driven, it provides the earliest and most primitive structures, unfolding of the unconscious background, and even after the deployment of gravitating towards neosoznannosti. They are pre-verbal and most of its pre-humanity.
Freud himself came to understand the importance of differentiating the personal unconscious (which we'll discuss in the next section) from the Archaic. Analyzing the symptoms, dreams and imagination of the client, it is important to distinguish between those that are the products of a valid past experience or personal fantasies, from those who never personally in this life do not worry, and entered the consciousness through impersonal archaic inheritance. In my opinion, the first is better to deal analytically, with the second - mythological.
Plunging unconscious.
After a deep-seated structure of the background became unconscious, and has acquired a certain surface structures, for several reasons, it may return to the unconscious, that is to dive back, the entire amount of such structures we call the sinking (or submerged **) unconsciousness. Immersion unconscious - that once, in that individual's life, was conscious, but are now hidden from awareness.
Immersion unconscious, in principle, can include any structure created - the collective, personal, archaic, thin, and so on. It can also contain elements of a collective that emerged clearly, and then sweep or personal items that have evolved in the course of life, and then sweep or a mixture of both. Jung has written about it, so we do not need to repeat it. It should be noted, however, that even Freud realized the difference between archaize unconscious Eid and Eid submerged unconscious, although sometimes not clearly distinguish them. "In the course of the slow development of some of the content ID into ... in the "Ego", others have remained unchanged in the Eid, as it is difficult achievable kernel. However, as the young and the poor "Ego" back to unconsciousness some of them have absorbed the material, discard it, and likewise received with some fresh impressions which it can absorb themselves in, and because they are being rejected could leave a trace only in Eid. Given the origin of this part of Eid, we are talking about it as the displaced material [in contrast to the first part, which is simply unconscious from the very beginning, that is archaic unconscious] ". This distinction, or rather, one of the differences between the original and take archaize unconscious or submerged unconscious. But, as Freud said, "has no special meaning, that we are not always able to draw a clear dividing line between these two types of content Id. They coincide approximately with the distinction between what is innate and initially attended [archaic unconscious], and that acquired during the development of "Ego" [loaded unconscious] ". Pay attention to the fact that Freud came to these conclusions based on evolyutsionistskogo thinking, "Considering the origin ...".
Immersion unconscious becomes unconscious for a variety of reasons, located in a "continuum of neglect, which extends from simply forgetting to sample and then to forced / dynamic forgetting (the latter is the real displacement). Jung writes about the so personally submerged unconscious:
Personal unconscious ... includes all those psychic contents which have been forgotten in the course of individual lives. Their traces are still stored in the unconscious, even when all conscious memory of those lost. In addition, it contains all the subconscious impressions and perceptions, which was too little energy to reach consciousness. These should be added to a combination of unconscious ideas, too weak and too vague to cross the threshold of awareness. And finally, the personal unconscious contains all the psychic contents that are incompatible with the deliberate setting.
Simply forgetting and lack of a threshold response form subconscious submerged unconscious. A dynamic, forceful forgetting there is a displacement in its pure form - is the grand opening of Freud. Marginalized submerged unconscious is that part of the unconscious background, which, Having emerged and picked up the surface structure, was then forcibly displaced, returned to the unconscious because of incompatibility with the conscious entities (more on this in the next section).
Personal aspect displaced deep unconscious - this is what is called a shadow. Return to the unconscious, it may be affected archaic unconscious (according to the laws of primary process, and by virtue of the principle of pleasure, which dominate tifonicheskih areas), although, of course, is quite concerning. For example, I agree with Jung that the Shadow can be verbal, and highly structured (similar in structure and content of "Ego" / person). In fact, there appears to be a structural continuum from highly structured verbal components of the unconscious to the initial chaos of unstructured materia prima, pleromnoy basis archaic unconscious (which drew the attention and Mate Blanco, and it is one of those conclusions, with which I fully agree). There is no need to prove that one of the main causes of displacement of Shadows is that it becomes the bearer of archaic unconscious: it loaded those instinctive impulses, which seem incompatible with the "Ego".
Embedded unconscious.
Now we come to the point of unconsciousness, which posed a puzzle for more than just Freud, but it nevertheless became one of his greatest discoveries. Freud abandoned the model of consciousness-unconsciousness for model "Ego"-Eid, because "we recognize that the unconscious does not coincide with the displaced, is still true that all the displaced is unconscious, but not everything that is unconscious, driven". Apart from the archaic unconscious, which is what it is, but not displaced, Freud discovered that the "and in the" Ego "many unconscious". At the same time, it is in the "Ego", he placed the beginning of the displacement: "We can say that the resistance of the patient arises from its" ego "...".
The point is that the displacement goes back to some of the "Ego"; one of its aspects replaces Shadow-Id. But then, Freud found that this part of herself was unconscious, but not replaced. He added just two to two and got that no displacement of the "Ego" is displacing. He called it "Super" ego "": it is unconscious, not displaced, but also replaces itself. "We can say that the displacement is the responsibility of Super-" Ego ", but either by the Super-" Ego ", obedient, or his orders" Ego ", often both, of the" Ego ", and super" ego "remained unconscious ". But it is not marginalized.
Before we try to understand this is not displaced, but replacing the structure, I must briefly restored to the memory of my general theory of displacement, based on the work of Piaget, Freud, Sullivan, Young and Levindzher. In fact, we have the following: the process of broadcasting by its nature leads to the shielding of all acts of perception and feelings, which do not meet the basic limiting principles of the broadcast. This is normal and necessary and this forms the basis of "normal and necessary mechanisms for the protection" - preventing suppressing or overloading the system self its environment, internal or external. This is normal "poor", and it is - despite the abundance of theories claiming that the "filter" distorts reality - is absolutely necessary for normal balance.
If the process of translation at any level in the encountering any delays, it broadcasts its individual self and the world wrong (distorts or destroys, substitutes or compresses the dimensions of the deep structure, which with the same success could be right to exist as a surface structure). This happens in different ways and for a variety of reasons, and is expressed in the "energy thresholds", or "information distortions". It was then that the individual is now selectively nevnimatelen or forcibly restrained in his knowledge. It is not just broadcast your self and the world (through the "normal inattentiveness"), and the "edit" any threatening aspects of their self and the world (through selective inattention). The result of this wrong will be simultaneously broadcast a symptom and a symbol, and the task of the therapist (as we have seen) can be regarded as assistance to individuals in the re-broadcast ( "interpretation") of symbolic signs in their original form by offering him "value" for the characters of symptoms ( "your anxiety - it is really a sense disguised fury"). Exclusion - this is simply the wrong form of transmission, but one that is not just a mistake, but intentional (even if unconscious), editing, dynamic displacement from their legitimate interests. Man does not simply forget, he does not want to remember.
At each level, the development of self-identified with the newly emerging structures of this level. When pleromy arises from the body, self is equated with him, then - with the introduction verbal intellect, and so on. Then, on the very nature of exclusive identities, no one pays and can not give it a record without the destruction of this identification. In other words, any exclusive identification unconsciously - by definition and in fact. At a time when the child realizes that he has the body, it ceases to be only one body: he was aware of it, it transtsendiruet and looks at him through his mind, and therefore no longer be just a body. Also, when the adult understands that he has a mind, he ceases to be only the mind and begins to perceive him in terms of the precise areas that are outside the mind. Prior to this self was more or less exclusively identified with the data structures and therefore could not be aware of it, she could not see these structures because it was their own.
In other words, at each level of development can not be fully seen seeing. No observed structure can not watch themselves watching. The structures of this level are used as instruments of perception and the broadcast world - but you can not absorb and transmit the structures themselves, at least not completely. This can happen only with a higher level. The point is that each process sees the broadcast, but he is invisible; broadcasts, but he did not broadcast, and he is able to crowd out, but he is not being replaced.
Freydovskoe Super-"Ego", together with the protective mechanisms and the structure of nature are aspects of "Ego", with which the self unconsciously identified with so strongly that they can not objectively be perceived as everything else in the "Ego". They are broadcast, but do not be broadcast, displace, but are not marginalized. This is a very good agreement with Freud's ideas about the Super-"Ego", because he represented that: 1) Super-"Ego" creates identification ( "identification replaces object-preferences") and 2) one of the goals of therapy is to make the Super-"Ego" conscious to see it as an object, and thus stop its use as something through which you see, and (incorrectly) transliruesh world. This is just a single point in the overall process of evolution, which we described earlier, when the identification with the newly created entity - that is necessary and desirable - and then the individual shall be exempt from this structure, razotozhdestvlyayas it to later integrate it into the unity of a higher order. I should mention in passing that, according to Freud, Super-"Ego" is often harsh and "masochistic" because of the pollution archaize unconscious.
In any case, Super-"Ego" - this is just one example of what we call unconscious introduced: due to its implementation as a self, the latter is unable to see him fully or clearly. It unconsciously, but not driven, it is an aspect of the unconscious background, which, once Having emerged, there is a system of self and therefore remains unconscious, with power to send other items to displaced unconscious. And again, it was not pushed out, but replaces itself. This can happen at any level of consciousness, although, of course, specific details vary greatly, because the tools are becoming the structure of the resistance level and each level has a very special structure (for example, when the bodily "Ego" was introduced unconscious, it is used as a Forms are not incorrect translation displacement and introektsiyu and projection, which are part of the primary process of the power of the tifonicheskih-body areas). However, the most violent, pathological and characteristic form of the process, in general, takes on the "Ego"-mental level and the lower thin areas. Levels below those lacking strength to support the brutal displacement (archaic Eid initially not displaced and did not displace), and higher become transcendental, and integrated that displacement, as we usually represent it, wasting away. Higher areas have their own forms of resistance, but it is the subject of a separate study.
Popup unconscious ***
Let's now look at someone who has done an evolutionary steps from pleromy to bodily self, and then to "Ego"-mind. In the background, still unconscious deep structure of the thin and the causal spheres. They have not yet ascended to consciousness, and usually can not be there until the lower structure. Since the structure is higher in a lower, they should deploy them. In any case, it would be ridiculous to talk about implementing transpersonalnogo before formed personal. Transpersonalnye (subtle and causal), the field has not yet been pushed out, no escape from the consciousness, not filtered - they have not yet had the opportunity to arise, emerge in consciousness. We are not talking about the two-child, that he consciously resists the study of geometry, - his mind has not yet been developed and is not turned to a degree that would allow him to begin studies in mathematics. And as you can not blame the child in the ousting of mathematics, we can not blame him and ousting transpersonalnogo.
At any point of the cycle of development, these have not yet emerged from the background deep structures of the unconscious are called pop-up. For the individual level "Ego" centaur or lower and the upper thin, as well as the lowest and highest causal structure will pop unconscious. They unconsciously, but are not pushed out (in this life, I once again rule involutional and prenatal **** psychology, referred to in the last chapter of this book).
Note the subtle / causal popup unconscious shared some characteristics of archaic unconscious, namely: both have (or have) not been aware of this individual's life, and therefore shall not be displaced, but is unconscious from the outset. The difference between them (aside from the fact that a low and primitive, and the other high and transcendent) is that the archaic unconscious - this is the past of mankind, and a pop-up - his future. However, unconscious-determined future only to the underlying structures, the surface is still not fixed. Unconscious, the past, on the other hand, contains not only deep, but also surface structures (such as Shadow), as those and others have emerged and been identified knowledge.
Now suppose that the development does not stop at egoichesko-kentavricheskoy the field - and historically it happens stop - and that the thin sphere itself begins to emerge from the unconscious background. In fact, there is no way to specify the exact dates for these areas and the higher stages, as a collective humanity evolved only to the stage "Ego", so long as there is certainty only in respect of levels leading up to this point. Generally speaking, a thin area may begin to appear when adolescence ends, but hardly before. For various reasons, it will be accompanied by the emergence of resistance and even, in some sense, displacement. Because of the "Ego" enough to drive not only lower but also higher areas - he can rail against sverhsoznaniya as well as from the subconscious.
That part of the unconscious background, which causes the emergence of resistance or displacement, we call pop-displaced unconscious. This is the background of the unconscious, which - except for a possible stop in development - remains unconscious, gone beyond the point which could become conscious. Therefore, we have the right to seek reasons for the Non, and we find out the whole set of these protections against Transcendence. Among them, the rationalization ( "Transcendence is not possible or patologichna"), exclusion or avoidance of relationships ( "My conscience must remain within the boundaries of the skin"), the horror of his death ( "I'm afraid to die for my" Ego ", which then left me alone?" ) desakralizatsiya (Maslou the term to refer to rejection than seen in any transcendental value), substitution (intuitively figure out the ultimate structure is replaced with a lower claim on the fact that the lowest and is the highest), attention (to the lowest forms of knowledge or experience). Some of them, or all at once to become part of the broadcast "Ego", so that it has quietly continued to broadcast, but have actually been to begin the transformation.
Since orthodox psychoanalysis and psychology has a truly did not understand the nature of the pop-up unconscious in its higher forms, then each time the surface begins to understand the subtle or causal region - as the peak experience, or as a subtle light and bliss - they hasten to explain that breakthrough of an archaic material or long-displaced pulses. Not knowing anything about the pop-up unconscious, they are trying to analyze what is happening in terms of deep unconsciousness. They believe, for example, that a thin region - it does not occur more structure, and de-differentiated low, not timeless, fall down, and before-time, returning up. And so they samadhi trace back to the infantile unity with breast feeding, nadlichnostnoe bring unity to dolichnostnomu mergers in plerome, reduce God to the nipple, seized the baby teeth, and congratulate each other to explain mystery. All of this scheme starts dilapidate already under its own gravity, because it is too ridiculous abundance of things which psychoanalysis has to assign the first four months of life the infant, to explain everything that occurs subsequently
Anyway, now, with the understanding of these six types of unconsciousness (background, archaic, immersion, installation, pop up and pop-up-displaced) as well as the process of translation / transformation, and stages of development represented in the first part of the book, we can turn to a brief introduction to meditation in relation to the unconscious.
* We translate the author's term "ground unconscious" unconsciousness as a background, using the notion of "background" in the sense that it has: 1) in the Gestalt-psychology (the figure-background), and 2) in view of the background as something constantly present, regardless of everything else (eg, background radio, background noise, etc.). This translation seems to us the most adequate thought the author. - Notes. Ed.
** The author uses the term "plunging" to emphasize the dynamic nature of this type of unconscious - its contents will never remain constant, because any time an individual life of a material being replaced, or simply forgotten as unnecessary, and any other material on a reason emerges from unconsciousness to consciousness. - Notes. Ed.
*** The author uses the term "emergent", which can be translated as "pop up", as "occurs". Given the above in note 44 of the unconscious background, the term "popup unconsciousness" seemed to us more appropriate if it is interpreted in terms of Gestalt theory, that is how some new piece, pop-up from the background, on closer examination. Here we have a clear parallel with the notion of cybernetics that the white noise (background), potentially contain the all possible information - arising, it is simply "emerging" from the background. This is an interesting parallel observed by Art. Lem, in his book "The amount of technology". - Notes. Ed.
**** Prenatal - referring to life before birth, in particular, to the intrauterine development. The author uses the term more broadly, linking it to the state of the soul between successive incarnation, as understood in the traditions of Hinduism and "Tibetan Book of the Dead". - Notes. Ed.
HYPNOSIS
Posts
