The Neurological Dichotomy of the Iceberg

Sigmund Freud is widely regarded as the founder of psychoanalysis and Psychology as a modern scientific field. In Zurich, he attracted a cult following of new psychotherapists, Neurologists and doctors interested in this new field, creating the first Psychoanalytic professional associations in history. Freud's theories were not strictly scientific, but deeply philosophic in nature, walking the line between philosophy and observation. The content of his theories were not entirely new, as he borrowed from a range of Philosophers, and early neurologists such as the physician Jean Charcot and the psychologist Wilhelm Wundt. Although the scientific validity of Freud's theories has been widely questioned and at points outright disproved, many of his ideas have been incorporated into mainstream psychology and have influenced the way mental illness is understood and treated. His concept of the unconscious, borrowed from Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, has been widely adopted and expanded upon by subsequent generations of psychologists.

Freud's psychoanalytic perspectives are rooted in basic dichotomies that he carries throughout his philosophic project. He believed that early childhood experiences are particularly influential in shaping the unconscious mind and psychological problems can be traced back to unconscious conflicts arising from these early experiences, something he was largely right on. Freud believed these unconscious conflicts were at the root of many psychological problems in adults, including anxiety and depression. He argued that these conflicts could only be resolved through the process of psychoanalysis, which involves bringing unconscious thoughts and feelings into consciousness through "portals" into the nature of the subconscious, such as dream interpretations, subconscious motor movements and the famous "Fehlleistung"- the Freudian Slip. Between this dichotomy of the "day" and "night" of consciousness, visualized repeatedly as an Iceberg, Freud built an entire philosophic system which endures broadly today.

Ecce Homo

Freud was born in Freiberg, Moravia (now part of the Czech Republic) to Jewish parents, and moved with his family to Vienna while young, where he spent most of his professional life up until his move to the UK. Freud’s personal life was marked by both tragedy and triumph. He married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children and his relationship with his daughter Anna Freud was particularly close, and she went on to become a respected psychoanalyst in her own right. Freud’s later life was tragic, however, including the deaths of four of his sisters and the Nazi persecution of Jews in Austria, which forced him to flee to London in 1938. Freud died in London the following year at the age of 83.
 His interest in the workings of the human mind and psyche began during his medical studies at the University of Vienna, where he was exposed to the emerging fields of neurology and psychiatry. After becoming a doctor in 1881, Freud spent several years studying and working in a number of clinical settings, including in Paris with Jean-Martin Charcot, a leading neurologist at the time who became a major influence on him. Charcot’s work with hypnosis inspired Freud to explore the role of unconscious processes in the development of psychological symptoms.
The proto-Psychologist was particularly interested in the phenomenon of “hysteria” in his early work, a term used to describe a range of physical and psychological symptoms, often experienced by women, which did not have a clear physical cause. He later developed a new technique, known as “free association,” in which patients were encouraged to speak freely about their thoughts, feelings, and memories without censorship or interruption. Through this technique, which sometimes included hypnosis, Freud believed that patients could access unconscious thoughts and memories that were contributing to their symptoms. This technique is still widely used today.
Freud’s theories about the human psyche were not completely new, however he gave them a scientific foundation. His famous trichotomy is still used broadly today; the id, the ego, and the superego. The id represents our most basic and primal desires and are biologically determined, while the superego represents our sense of morality and social norms. The ego served as the mediator between the id and superego, working to balance these competing forces. Freud was not merely a scientist, but a social commentator and philosopher. Some of his theories are still controversial, some completely debunked and some universally accepted. His emphasis on sexual impulses and his belief that these impulses were a driving force in human behavior were particularly controversial in his day and currently. He also faced criticism for his lack of scientific evidence to support his theories, as well as for his tendency to rely on anecdotal evidence from his own clinical practice. His entire theory of dreams is based on anecdotal evidence from his therapy sessions.
Regardless, Freud’s influence on psychology and psychotherapy has been difficult to quantify. Freud’s ideas about the role of the unconscious in mental illness, the importance of childhood experiences in shaping adult behavior, and the dynamics of human relationships have all had a lasting impact on psychology, as well as on broader cultural and intellectual movements. It is difficult to create a simplistic Pathology of any great thinker with a massive, dynamic body of work. As Freud notes, we naturally must categorize and simplify reality in order to participate in a shared cultural reality, but we must resist doing this as much as possible. Freud's philosophy was dynamic and changed throughout his life. Despite being a far-left Atheist, he levied scathing criticisms against the popular Marxism of his own circles. He was a "stoic to the end" with his own worldview that is difficult to put in box.

Freud and Jung: A Binary System

One of the most meaningful controversies in Freud's career was his philosophical conflict with Carl Jung, who was once a close colleague and collaborator. The two fell out over their differing interpretations of the unconscious mind and the role of symbolism in human psychology. Jung's Telos was much broader than Freud’s was; while Freud believes that healing the neurosis that plagues the individual would fix them and enable a healthy, happy life, Jung's goal was to assist the individual to achieve the fullest reification of the Self from the dialectical process of individualization and fixing the bifurcation of the conscious and unconscious. Freud believed that life without pain and suffering was both possible and desirable- but Jung doubted both of these claims (probably, again, because he read Nietzsche). Schopenhauer proposed an entelechy for all life: the Will-to-Live, a very Darwinian, and Nietzsche abstracted it further to Phenomenological definition in the Will-to-Power. Freud has something closer to Schopenhauer's Entelechy.
When we speak of the interaction of Freudianism and Jungianism, this is not merely intellectual interactionism, but personal. Freud and Jung were close friends who developed the field of Psychology together and later schismed in their visions of the essence and development of it. 'Man and his symbols' is filled with descriptions of this personal and intellectual relationship, and Jung details exactly where he started to deviate from his teacher. Jung casually mentions a hilarious story about this relationship: while at a museum exhibition in Bremen in 1909 on their way to Africa, Jung was excited to see the mummies. Freud told him his excitement about the mummies was a suppressed desire that Jung had for Freud to die early. And frequently, Freud's works are hilariously pedantic in their analysis of unconscious symbolism.

Freud and Jung both saw war as the result of repression and transference. In a critical letter to Einstein titled "Why War?" (1933), Freud explores the psychological reasons behind the occurrence of wars, utilizing his belief that a “death drive” is inherent in human nature and the repression of it is the underlying causes of war. Earlier, he makes similar arguments in "Thoughts for the Times on War and Death" (1915) where he reflects on the psychological impact of World War I. He argues that humans have a natural tendency to avoid death, but war creates an environment in which death becomes an inevitable reality, leading to a psychological trauma. Jung likewise say the unresolved trauma of WWI as leading inevitably to WWII.

In his 1933 On a Worldview, Freud argues for a return to a truly materialistic worldview in order to fix the problems with the world, countering Jung’s belief that science itself can never be truly presuppositionless. He muses on the psychological ramifications of man’s dominion over nature, a topic Heidegger was writing large works about at the same time: “Yes, perhaps with the present economic crisis following the world war we are also only paying the price for the last great victory over nature, the conquest of air space.”

Freud and Jung's use of Schopenhauer's "Collective Unconscious"
(das kollektive Unbewusste)

Schopenhauer lives in Nietzsche's shadow, but several of his concepts have been given universal status by the Psychotherapists of Zurich. The "Collective Unconscious" (kollektive Unbewusste) was coined by Schopenhauer, not Freud or Jung. Schopenhauer borrowed this framing of unconscious reality as-is. believed that these collective unconscious elements are the source of many of our patterns of behavior. This is obviously the source of Nietzsche's Apollonian-Dionysian dichotomy, and the foundation of Freud and Jung's psycho-therapeutic theories. Freud was even more deeply influenced by Schopenhauer than Jung and borrowed entire swaths of his pessimistic philosophy. In his 1899 work "The Interpretation of Dreams" Freud wrote: "Schopenhauer's doctrine of the will, which I have adopted as my own, has led me to the discovery of the unconscious in psychology." Every day, the modern uses concepts and phrases which come from Schopenhauer.
One of the key concepts that Freud borrowed from Schopenhauer is the idea that the unconscious mind is the primary driver of human behavior. Schopenhauer believed that the will, or the unconscious drive to survive and reproduce, is the source of all human actions. Freud, in turn, developed the concept of the "id," which he believed to be the unconscious source of all human desires and drives. The interaction of the dichotomy between the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious is a core antinomy of all modern Psychology, thanks to the Zurich circle's reading of Schopenhauer. In Freud, Jung and Schopenhauer (as well as Nietzsche's Apollonian-Dionysian archetypes), the collective unconscious is composed of the inherited symbolic and archetypal patterns that are shared by all humanity throughout all time, past, present and future simultaneously in dynamic interaction. Jung, in his conversations with Einstein, added a temporal element to the definition and expanded the field through the fractal symbolism of the Archetypes, which are "living" universal patterns or themes that are present in the mythology, religion, and stories of all cultures. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Kant and Hegel were already thinking Archetypically (Nietzsche from his very first book), but Jung built out Archetypical thinking more explicitly and gave it a scientific standing- his analysis is still the foundation of all Psychotherapy. Perhaps Schopenhauer is also partly where he gets his Platonism from; Jung certainly didn't pick it up from Nietzsche.
The broader idea of the unconscious was not only Schopenhauer's idea: he simply intellectualized this ancient idea in clear philosophical language. Even in Schopenhauer's self-declared enemy Hegel, we see the concept of the Unconscious and Archetypes:

"Der Mensch ist diese Nacht, dies leere Nichts, das alles in ihrer Einfachheit enthält- ein Reichtum unendlich vieler Vorstellungen, Bilder, deren keines ihm gerade einfällt - , oder die nicht als gegenwärtige sind. Dies die Nacht, das Innere der Natur, das hier existiert Reines selbst,- in phantasmagorischen  Vorstellungen ist es rings um Nacht, hier schießt dann ein blutig Kopf, dort eine andere weiße Gestalt plötzlich hervor, und verschwinden ebenso. Diese Nacht erblickt man, wenn man dem Menschen ins Auge blickt in eine Nacht hinein, die furchbar wird, es hängt die Nacht der Welt hier einem entgegen. In dieser Nacht ist das Seiende zurückgegangen Aber die Bewegung dieser Macht ist ebenso gesetzt."
//
"Man is this night, this empty nothing, which contains everything in its simplicity - a wealth of infinite ideas, images, none of which occurs to him at the moment - or which are not present. This night, the interior of nature, which exists here as Pure Self,- in phantasmagorical imaginings it is night all around, here then a bloody head, there another white figure suddenly shoots forth, and disappears likewise. One sees this night when one looks man in the eye into a night that becomes terrible, the night of the world meets you here.  In this night the existing has receded But the movement of this power is likewise set."

Jung attributes his basic understanding of balance in the Psyche all the way back to Heraclitus, and in German Idealism the power of unconscious symbols is mentioned extensively. Kant wrote about "the immeasurable field... of obscure ideas" and Hegel of "Man is this night, this empty Nothing, which contains everything in its simplicity: wealth and an infinite number of representations, images...". Like these philosophers, Jung notes, "the Unconscious operates in and out of waking existence". And in contradiction to Freud, he notes that while he uses simplistic imagery of consciousness being the 'day' and the unconscious being the 'night' or shadow; the unconscious is not 'dark' in terms of morality- rather simply hidden. The unconscious is as neutral as conscious processes.
Jung was an Existentialist, like Dostoevsky, and Freud was quite anti-Existentialist in his anti-Socratic materialist bent, something he could have picked up from Nietzsche, who was perhaps the most vocal and powerful anti-metaphysical anti-existentialist. Existentialism is an inherently Socratic undertaking, and Socrates Nietzsche hated nearly as much as Christ. Jung's entelechy is anti-materialism and deeply Socratic, recognizing the Telos of mankind as something like a restoration of the transcendent. He has a Teleological understanding of Rationality which he picks up from the tradition of German Idealism, a Mithraic understanding of Time which he expounds upon in Aion most expansively. We see this metaphysical and metaphysical differences in perspectives in the interpretation of symbols; Jung, being deeply Socratic, viewed the snake as a Nous-Logos symbol, bringing damnation and self-perception simultaneously. While Freud viewed it as nothing more than a representation of the Libido.

Schopenhauerian Pessimism & Religion as a Neurosis - Dostoevskian "Demonic" Possession in Jungian Archetypal Thinking

Freud's criticism of religion originates primarily from Feuerbach, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer. He essentially argued that belief in the supernatural was a mental disease. Jung, whom Freud had great respect for in his early years and intended to be his successor, broke with him on these views.
Much of Jung's understanding of religion is a response to Freud's Schopenhauerian Pessimism and understanding of Religion as Presuppositional, Rational belief, the Protestant definition. Freud's criticism of religion is lifted primarily from Feuerbach, Nietzsche and perhaps more than any other- Schopenhauer. He essentially argued that belief in the supernatural was a mental disease. He makes a variety of arguments within three different areas, much like Nietzsche- Anthropologically, Ontogenetically and Phylogenetically. Freud's understanding of the genealogy of morality is nearly word-for-word Nietzsche's historical-Darwinian and later Phenomenological arguments. His last work before he died was an analysis of Moses, so despite his dismissal of religion, he became increasingly fixated on the Psychological nature of it. Jung, whom Freud had great respect for in his early years and intended to be his successor, broke with him on these views, and we can see his responses in Answer to Job as specifically anti-Freudian.
Jung was one of the great anti-ideologues of his century, in the same vein as Solzhenitsyn, Orwell and Dostoevsky. As Dostoevsky utilized the metaphor of the Gerasene Demoniac in his 1871 Psychological novel Бесы, Demons, to illustrate the "possessive" of socio-political ideologies, so Jung and Nietzsche described the presence of the Archetypes as a form of third-party control over the waking consciousness. The Anima/ Animus and the Dionysian/ Apollarian are some of the para-temporal meta-personalities which drive unconscious realities, and drive religious expression. In other words, religion exists not in axiomatic, presuppositional forms, but symbolic psychological patterns that are impervious to surface-level beliefs. Both Dostoevsky, separately, came to the psychological fact that we do not hold ideas, we are held by ideas. Ideas possess; they are not possessed. We are their hosts, not their masters. From Jung's Anti-Freudian Psychological perspective, it is precisely Agnosticism which is the Neurosis, an act of self-deception:

Agnosticism maintains that it does not possess any knowledge of God of anything metaphysical, overlooking the fact that one never possesses a metaphysical belief, but is always possessed by it.

The Modernist Illusion of the "Presuppositionless Science"

With his criticism of Marxism, Freud sees that it is still religious in nature despite its violent claims to be purely materialistic, atheistic and pro-science, it is anything but. Jung makes this exact same accusation against Freud's repetition of Feuerbach’s Materialism- Freud's entire worldview rests upon deeply held religious axioms. The act of science itself is a belief, a set of a priori assumptions that reality can manifest itself to consciousness in a rational fashion. He argues most clearly against Platonic Ontology in his 1927 Die Zukunft einer Illusion, where he states that science can be ideology or metaphysics-free, i.e. Presuppositionless. Freud accused Marxism of being "darkly Hegelian", but Freud's views on history as having an intrinsic Telos, which he adopted from the metaphysician Darwin, is also deeply Hegelian. His entire Phylogenesis analysis is deeply Teleological. Nietzsche makes this observation about the Metaphysical roots of Darwinian Science, which Freud wrongly believes to be "presuppositionless science":

[Hegel] dared to teach that the species concepts develop apart from one another: with which sentence the minds in Europe were performed to the last great scientific movement, to Darwinism - for without Hegel, no Darwin….Hegel, in particular, was its retarder par excellence… in his grandiose attempt he made to persuade us to the divinity of existence.

Freud wrote a short Pathographic essay in 1928 titled “Dostojewski und die Vatertötung” or “Dostoevsky and the killing of the father”. This is his analysis of The Brothers Karamazov and Dostoevsky as “the poet, the neurotic, the ethicist and the sinner”. He praised Karamazov as one of the greatest novels ever written but then filters it through his lens of sexual moral relativism. Because Dostoevsky eventually rejected radical socialism of the 1917 revolution as the new religion, Freud the Feuerbach-inspired Atheist argued “Dostoevsky failed to become a teacher and liberator of the people, he joined their jailers; the cultural future of the people will have little to thank him for.” In addition, he argues that his theism and love for humanity (and general rejection of the Nihilism Freud embraced) came from a lack of “autoerotic gratification” and psychological disorders that history would prove him wrong on. Freud was the perfect image of Modernism depravity Dostoevsky knew would come upon the west. At the time Freud was making these predictions, the genocides he predicted at the end of Crime & Punishment were taking place in his beloved country, unbeknownst to Freud.
History would prove Freud’s words “people will have little to thank him for” empty- Dostoevsky became the greatest writer of all time, surpassing even Tolstoy. As Camus pointed out, “The real 19th century prophet was Dostoevsky, not Karl Marx." Marx was an acolyte of Feuerbach’s materialism and Schopenhauer’s Nihilism just like Freud. In his existentialist novel Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky pens a line perfectly fitting for Freud:

"You boast about your consciousness, but you merely vacillate, because even though your mind is working, your heart has been blackened by depravity."

Dostoevsky’s understanding of the inevitability of religion (a priori assumptions proceeding perception) is similar to Jung’s, but radically different from Freud’s. We can see this understanding of religion lead to different postures to the Nazis and why Freud defended the Atheistic Utopian movements, while Dostoevsky and Jung warned of great horrors. Freud was critical of the Nazi from a Psychological perspective, pointing out the collectivist mindset was a misplacement of repressed desires. In the tradition of Feuerbach, Freud declared himself an enemy of religion "in every form and dilution". In his youth he was deeply influenced by Feuerbach, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, and he later admits that his views on religion largely came from them, and rejected the Judaism of his youth entirely. He actively attacked Judaism and demanded it adopt pure Materialism: “"Presuppositionless science cannot remain alien to the spirit of the new Judaism".

It was not until the rise of Anti-Semitism that dusted off his Jewish identity and started referring to himself as a Jew. Religiously, he was a Cartesian and a Materialist and did not follow Schopenhauer's Platonism or Nietzsche's Phenomenological-Teleological perspectives, but developed a worldview much closer to Feuerbach's One-World Aristotelian materialism, making him easily accessible to the Marxist tradition. His criticisms of Christianity are identical to Feuerbach's, assuming Christianity is Ontologically Dualistic (only Rationalistic Protestantism is) and reacting against it with an opposite but equal de-mysticism Materialism. At points, his pursuits into the perception of reality drew him close to Platonism, but he remained ideologically Cartesian and classically atheistic.

When the Austrian Socialists took power in 1934, Freud remained calm, believing that Austrian Catholicism would prevent the ideology from spreading like it did in Protestant Germany. He was correct on this for a while; the Austrian Socialist fascists did not gain deep power in Austria due to Catholicism, but in 1938 that no longer mattered as German troops invaded and systematically began eliminating religious institutions. He actively wrote against the Nazis- and kicked out Nazi sympathizers from his Psychoanalytic Association- since the very beginning, and was able to escape to England with the help of the US and UK, where he eventually died. Four of his sisters eventually fell victim to the holocaust. Freud warned about carelessly attacking Catholicism, worrying about new social justice ideologies which would replace it:

We live here in a Catholic country under the protection of this church, uncertain how long it will last. As long as it lasts, however, we naturally have misgivings about doing anything that must arouse the hostility of the Church. It is not cowardice, but caution; the new enemy, whom we want to be careful not to serve, is more dangerous than the old one, with whom we have already learned to get along.

Jung issued a much deeper condemnation of Nazism, and became a spy for the Allied forces. Jung was a hyper-Socratic in all of his therapeutic aims, and sees the spiritual development of the Psyche as the critical factor in the prosperity of future society. War itself, Jung believed, was caused by the sum of individuals not taking seriously the process of shadow-integration and in the aftermath of WWI he predicted an even greater calamity would befall Western civilization, and warned with impressive detail about the impending conflict. He was concerned, to the point of fanaticism, with the origins of transpersonal consciousness and the damage that Modernism's "Polished Cartesian Rationality" does to the nuos. In step with Freud, the budding Nazi movement Jung called a psychological illness, an illness he actively worked against by sending psych profiles of Hitler to the Allied intelligence: "The Jewish problem is a complex... and no responsible doctor could bring himself to practice medical cover-up methods on it." But he also went further than Freud and called it a religion, an inevitable secularized faith which replaced Protestantism:

We don't know whether Hitler isn't just establishing a 'new Islam'. He is already there, and he resembles Mohammed.

The German emotional world is Islamic. They are all drunk from a raging god. That could be our future story.

In Modern Man, Jung lays out the philosophic and scientific foundation of his 'Analytic Psychology' (Komplexe Pyschologie), which remains the basis of modern psychology writ large. The Myers-Briggs framework, the concepts of neurosis and complexes, extraversion and introversion, the Unconscious, and a range of other broadly utilized ideas in everyday life all originate here in Jung's analytic psychology. He diatribes about Mysticism, Religion, Characterology, Consciousness, Individualization, and identity but I think the most interesting part of this book is the careful delineation of his thinking in contrast to that of his frenemy, Freud. This is a brilliant analysis of Freudian thinking from someone who intimately knew Freud as a person and intellectual and can speak to the motives that drove Freud's ideology. Jung clearly articulates Freud's fallacies while defending his brilliant contributions to Psychology from his detractors. Dividing the good from the malicious in Freudian thought is still critically relevant for today's world, because Freudian philosophy is the water we swim in.
After his worst fears were realized, Jung worked as a Swiss spy for the American government- sending psychoanalysis of Hitler directly to US Military intelligence. Jung was incredibly practical in his Psychology- he was always thinking about what this ivory-tower philosophizing and psychological discoveries meant for the direction of society. He criticized the Adlerian and Freudian schools for not recognizing that they are essentially clergy- the very act of trying to heal neurosis has a religious element because you are making assumptions about the Telos of human life- about meaning, purpose, and destiny.  He wanted the field of Psychology to admit that it cannot exist in pure Empiricism- the very act of analysis is always preceded by philosophical tenets. He writes:

Just as the discovery of the unconscious shadow-side once forced the school of Freud to deal even with questions of religion, so the latest advance of analytical psychology makes unavoidable the ethical attitude of the doctor... this cannot be grasped by the standpoint of natural science... but the sine qua non [the essential nature] of consciousness itself." He did not merely criticize the trends of his day, but actively sought to be part of the solution.

Jung recognized that there are no 'spiritual but not religious', 'post-religious' or 'non-religious' categories of humans as Europeans in the 20th century claimed, Psychologically speaking. There is only good religion and bad religion; there is no irreligion. He writes:

What psychologists call psychic identity, or "mystical participation," has been stripped from our world. But it is exactly this halo of unconscious associations that gives a colorful and fantastic aspect to the world…yet the emotions that affect us are just the same. In fact, the terrors that stem from our elaborate civilization may be far more threatening than those that "primitive" people attribute to demons.... [our object of veneration] has changed its name and nature for the worse... [the modern man's] gods and demons have not disappeared at all: they merely have new names.

And here we come full circle to Hegel: the mind is Geist; and for the universe to manifest itself rationally and for the consciousness to feel at home in its material trappings, it must know itself as super-rational, for only 'Geist can know Geist'.

Materialistic Metaphysical Dualism

Freud’s religious belief in “presuppositionless science” is rooted in his broader adoption of Cartesian Epistemology. Jung accused Freud's Materialistic approach as being "Psychology without the Psyche... A purely casuistic approach is too narrow to do justice to the true significance." Eugen Bleuler (who first documented and coined the terms “Autistic” and “Schizophrenic”, a teacher of both Jung and Rorschach) made the same accusation of a personality cult against Freud, and resigned from the International Psychoanalytic Association in protest writing that "this 'all or nothing' is in my opinion necessary for religious communities and useful for political parties...but for science, I consider it harmful". Jung makes the same accusation- Freud was behaving like a religious leader, not a scientist.
To Jung and the Existentialists, one of the fundamental errors Freud made is the assumption that human consciousness is neutral in its nascent state: that moral and ethical living is the default setting of human consciousness. Freud assumed that if you treated all the suppressed desires and trauma from childhood, you would arrive at a healthy individual who has no potential for malice or chaos. This is a Cartesian understanding of rationality; that the human condition is rational in nature and pain and suffering is removed through replacing superstition with reason. Impulsively I point here toward Dostoevsky and Nietzsche who dismantled this idea with powerful and artful brilliance, but I value Jung on his repudiation via clinical psychology of this Freudian fallacy. Jung intimately understood how Freud’s ideas evolved. Not only is this assumption broadly condemned by the Phenomenologists and Existentialists but even technically speaking this is faulty according to modern neuroscience. Jung writes: "There is no standpoint above or outside of psychology that would enable us to form an ultimate judgment of what the psyche is." We now know neurophysiologically that the psyche has an inherited archetypal structure/ dynamic nuclei; it does not operate off pure reason or logic, nor can it and nature gives us no inherent Teleology as to why it should.

Thou Art Conscious of only a Single Urge: Jung's Response to Freud

Freudian orthodoxy insisted that personal development was nearly exclusively dependent on sexuality and libido- while Jung believed the unconscious was a vastly intricate and dynamic reservoir which is shaped by countless factors, chief among which are symbolic storytelling, i.e. mythical archetypes. To this day, you see the Freudian view and the Jungian view existing side-by-side in Western society. In mainstream culture, Sexuality has become Deified as the prime mover of individualization; modern society has made it an Ontologic descriptor of Being which is worshiped as a syncretic deity who manifests itself under several faces and several names- one of them being 'Diversity'. And there are strains of society that reject this self-worship because it cannot coexist with Geist- super-rational beliefs. Jung was actually banned from the Vienna psychoanalytic circle for this refusal to worship at Freud's church of Sexual identity and Freud ended his friendship over this disagreement- that's how dogmatically this Freudian belief was held by the clinical and scientific communities of his day. Anyone who disagreed with Freud was putting his or her career in jeopardy.
 In Modern Man, Jung urges his readers to "Renounce the essentially negative" Freudian approach to the Id, which viewed the subconscious images as repressed signs from generational trauma, but not as symbols. Jung goes for Freud's jugular here. Jung locates Freud's views of sexuality as manifestations of the pre-existing moral relativism of the Victorian age until the present, not strictly as a result of psychological science; "Freud is one of the Exponents of a present-day psychic predisposition that has a special history of its own". He accuses Freud of an underdeveloped spirituality and a lack of Existential processing, which expresses itself as an obsession with sex. Like a true German, he quotes Faust; "thou art conscious only of the single urge". This is a sick burn for Germans- they usually read Goethe's Faust in school- but other cultures might not get the reference. Goethe, a Panpsychist himself, had incredible gravity and both Freud and Jung quote his work to give artistic substance to their ideas. Literature is so critical to unlocking the meta-narratives that flow through and under these presuppositional debates, so understanding their usage of Goethe is a key to their perspectives.
Contrary to Freud, Jung understood sexuality itself as a mana-symbol representing unrealized spiritual desires. While Freud adopted the European Materialist idea of sex being a sub-rational animalistic act- Jung defends the historical view that it is precisely the opposite; it is a supra-rational mystical act which constitutes a complete suspension of the rational. And as such, it belongs to the field of Religion and Sociology, not to the field of personal identity. Jung writes about the deification and odd contradictory mythicizing of Sexuality in the West through Freud: "Freud's concept of sexuality is thoroughly elastic and so vague that it can be made to include almost anything. The word itself is familiar, but what it denotes amounts to an indeterminable or variable x that stands as the physiological activity of the glands at one extreme and the highest reaches of the spirit at the other."  As sacred things are to be revered and kept in a specific context, Jung here postulates what amounts to a concept akin to 'sin' within clinical psychology. He issues this dictum against Freudian moral relativism which mimics Dostoevsky’s warning:

It is not the children of the flesh, but the Children of God who know freedom.

Freud is Faust, and his Mephistopheles is the ideological pathogen of individualistic western rationalism. Still, Jung praises Freud for his groundbreaking work and defends the discovery of the "monster within" from those who criticize Freud because they refuse to conceive evil as intrinsic to all people. The opposite fallacy was committed by Freud- who denied the goodness of humanity:

It is painful to interpret radiant things from the shadow-side, and thus in a measure reduce them to their origins in dreary firth. But it seems to me to be an imperfection in things of beauty, and a weakness in man, if an explanation from the shadow-side has a destructive effect. Or mistake would lie in supposing that what is radiant no longer exists because it has been explained from the shadow-side. This is a regrettable error into which Freud himself has fallen...I must have a dark side if I am to be whole, and inasmuch as I become conscious of my shadow I also remember that I am a human being like any other. How can I be substantial if I fail to cast a shadow? Yet the shadow belongs to the light, as the evil belongs to the good, and vice versa.

Rather, this Good-Evil duality, Jung argues, should force introspection into my own capacity to be evil, while more deeply valuing and fostering the good. He warns against displacing the 'location' of evil into any fabricated "other" category:

We still attribute to 'the other fellow' all the evil and inferior qualities that we do not like to recognize in ourselves. That is why we have to criticize and attack him... Whereas I formerly believed it to be my bounded duty to call other persons to order, I now admit that I need calling to order myself

It is true that Jung took evil seriously, to the point of becoming a Dualistic Manichaen, but he also took Goodness seriously. Unlike Freud who viewed Goodness as a biological function for survival, Jung understood goodness as a substance- something real and worth venerating.

This fallacy also explains Freud and Jung's radically different approaches to the concept of Evil. Freud was dismissive of the existence of evil as merely a neurosis caused by misalignment of desires with the subconscious, while Jung took evil so seriously he was accused of Manichaeism. Perhaps this is the influence of Nietzsche, who saw Evil as a living being. He does weave in Nietzschean ideas a few times- he talks about the "will to power" of the communist bloc. This Nietzschean concept of "wille zur macht" is a whole area of philosophy by itself but he keeps it simple here. Some of his phrasings will be odd to an anglophone who isn't well-read on German Idealism- he makes all sorts of subtle references through the text.
Freud had a vaguely racist conceptualization of rational human progress attached to his ‘subconscious’ paradigm. Freud argued that the African cultures that operate symbolically are “less evolved"- while Jung turned this on the head and argued the sickness is in the modern European, rationalized, secularized, 'progressive' society which has denied 'mystical participation' consciously, and in doing so filled society with neurosis and inadvertently created "new demons" by denying the old. Jung came to understand the integration of these two parts of the mind as critical to the very existence of the individual; to the very possibility of living a meaningful, 'fully awake' life. Freud snubbed the "primitive" societies, which mystically participate in the material universe while Jung marveled at their philosophic health. Jung viewed the so-called "primitives" as his superior.
The Freudian subconscious was a vestigial remnant of repressed instincts and desires, which needed to be addressed in clinical psychology- but had little relevance beyond this. It was merely the "trash can" of the mind. Jung kept the concept of the unconscious having a profound impact on the conscious but rejected the narrow, negative connotations. Jung's concept of the "Unconscious" is a broader, expansive, powerful, and indispensable repository of ancestral, cultural, and individual symbols and meta-cognitive narratives which subliminally shape personal identity. The unconscious is a natural part of the human mind- it is neither good nor bad, but simply is. "We" are as much our unconsciousness as our consciousness.

Broad Overview of the Freudian Corpus

In Totem and Taboo, Freud explores the origins of society, religion, and morality through the lens of psychoanalytic theory- particularly symbolism. He posits that early human societies were ruled by patriarchal authorities that prohibited incest, leading to the development of Totemism as a symbolic way of dealing with the psychological conflict surrounding the prohibition. He also discusses the concept of taboo and how it relates to the formation of social norms and moral codes, mimicking Nietzsche’s the Genealogy of Morals. While Nietzsche calls modern morality, particularly Christian morality, “slave morality” and the “morality of the weak”, i.e. a restriction of violent “greatness”, Freud sees morality as restriction of the libido. In The Theme of the Three Caskets (or Coffin Selection), A Mythological Parallel to a Visual Obsession and  A devils neurosis in the seventeenth century, Freud examines cultural motifs and stories including Arabian Nights, using his Repression theories to explain all storytelling.

Beyond the Pleasure Principle is one of Freud’s most mature works, published at the height of his analytic capabilities. This work represents a major departure from Freud's earlier theories of human motivation, and it has had a significant impact on subsequent psychoanalytic and psychological theory. In in, he proposes a new theoretical framework for understanding human drives and behavior, including the intro the concept of the "death drive" (which Jung correlates to the Greek deity of death Thanatos), which he suggests operates in opposition to the "life drive" (again, mythologically correlated to the god Eros). Freud argues that the death drive is a force that compels living organisms towards an inorganic state, and that it can manifest in a variety of behaviors and drives, including self-destructive tendencies and aggression towards others. This antinomy is typical for Continental idealism. Nietzsche makes a similar argument with his Apollarian-Dyonysian concept. Freud also discusses the concept of the “repetition compulsion”, which he believes is connected to the death drive, suggesting that individuals may be compelled to repeat traumatic experiences in an attempt to master or gain control over them. This can lead to behaviors such as reenactment of traumatic events, as well as other forms of compulsive repetition, such as obsessive-compulsive behaviors. Through this lens, dreams can be understood as wish fulfillment that allows individuals to safely express and work through their unconscious desires and conflicts.

"The Finite and the Infinite Analysis" (1937) is a theoretical epistemological essay in which Freud attempts to reconcile his psychoanalytic theory with the limitations of rational understanding. He explores the limits of psychoanalysis, arguing that it is a limited method of curing psychological problems and that there are certain cases where infinite analysis is necessary. Psychoanalysis is a finite tool that can only provide limited insights into the infinite complexities of the human psyche. This essay is very Schopenhauerian, and nearly platonic in nature.

Sigmund Freud's works "On Psychoanalysis" (1910), "The Resistance to Psychoanalysis" (1925), and "The Question of Lay Analysis" (1926) all deal with different aspects of his theory and practice of psychoanalysis, hence they are included here in one volume. His 1910 "On Psychoanalysis" is a seminal work in which Freud outlines his braod theory of the unconscious mind and the psychoanalytic method. He emphasizes the importance of the unconscious and how it can be accessed through psychotherapeudic conceptis  free association, dream analysis, and transference. Freud also discusses the concept of the Oedipus complex, which he believes is a universal developmental stage in which children experience sexual desire for their opposite-sex parent and hostility toward their same-sex parent.

The first editions of Zur Psychopathologie des Alltagslebens (On the psychopathology of everyday life) were printed with a subtitle that does not show up in later versions: About Forgetting, Promising, Mistaking, Superstition and Error”. Here he argues that a range of mechanisms we experience every day, including parapraxes (word substitution), forgetfulness and other mistakes are manifestations of unconscious intentions. This concept is found broadly through his works, but a robust theory is broken out here. Here he also elucidates his famous Freudian "Versprecher" or slip. The subconscious makes up the bulk on the “iceberg” of consciousness, so it’s dark influence impacts even the smallest aspects of everyday life.

In "The Joke and its Relation to the Unconscious" Freud continues this theme of everyday life being impacted by the subconscious. He argues that the nature of humor provides a socially acceptable way of expressing forbidden or taboo thoughts and desires, allowing individuals to release unconscious material in a disguised form.

The Resistance to Psychoanalysis explores the reasons why some individuals are resistant to psychoanalysis and why they may consciously or unconsciously sabotage their own treatment. Freud suggests that resistance arises from various factors, including the patient's fear of change and their attachment to their symptoms. He also argues that resistance is a normal part of the therapeutic process and can be used to help patients gain insight into their unconscious conflicts.  Freud primarily used "free association" and dream analysis as therapeutic techniques, modern psychotherapy often incorporates a range of evidence-based interventions, including cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based interventions, and psychodynamic therapy. These approaches aim to help clients identify and work through unconscious conflicts and emotional difficulties, while also incorporating more active and structured interventions than this early psychoanalysis Freud uses. Still, his basic concepts are still broadly used in modern Psychology. New variations of these Freudian concepts included "implicit cognition" which refers to the ways in which unconscious mental processes can influence behavior and experience without conscious awareness. Similar to Freud's ideas about the psychopathology of everyday life, the concept of implicit cognition highlights the importance of understanding the role of the unconscious/ subconscious in shaping our behavior and perception and understanding what lays below this “iceberg” called Consciousness.

"Civilization and Its Discontents" is the historic translation of “Das Unbehagen in der Kultur”, but literally it translates “the discontent and culture”. True to its name, it presents Freud's analysis of the origins of human aggression and unhappiness in modern society. He argues that the development of civilization has forced humans to suppress their natural instincts and desires, leading to feelings of discontent and anxiety. The work also examines the role of religion and culture in shaping human behavior and provides a critical assessment of the relationship between the individual and society.

 "Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego" examines the psychology of groups and crowds. In this work, Freud argues that individuals within a group lose their sense of individuality and become susceptible to the influence of others. He also explores the ways in which group psychology can be used to understand collective behavior and how it can be applied in the context of psychoanalysis.

In "The Question of Lay Analysis" (1926), Freud discusses the controversial topic of whether non-medical professionals ("lay people") should be allowed to practice psychoanalysis. Regardless, Freudian concepts such as repression and unconscious motivation has become ubiquitous in modern society, and everyone performs some level of Psychoanalysis on those around us. Freud argues that the key factor is not one's professional qualifications, but rather their ability to understand and apply the principles of psychoanalysis. Freud also suggests that lay analysis may be more effective than traditional medical analysis in certain cases. A personality cult formed around Freud later in his life, and he often condemned even highly qualified Psychotherapists, like Jung, merely for disagreeing with him