Aksel Haaning, (1959 -), magister artium in Medieval Latin from University of Copenhagen (1992); Ph.d. (2000), now Associate Professor in Intellectual History and Science Studies at the University of Roskilde, Denmark. His research is focused on the Philosophy of Nature, the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period, religious movement in the Middle Ages and the spiritual traditions later on as well. since 2008 he has specialised in Jungian History and Jungian Studies, and the discovery of the unconscious 1800-1950; he is currently working on a major book on how and why Jung decided for the study of alchemy and he hermetic philosophy.
9:15 – 10:30 Aksel Haaning: C.G. Jung’s quest for “Aurora consurgens” and the unnoted manuscript at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. The diagnosis of the modern mind in the 1930s and the discovery of alchemy. Moderator: John Beebe (CGJISF)
Abstract: In the 1930’ies Jung was eagerly studying the alchemical philosophy in order to heal the modern psyche from alienation and from forgetting the past. He discovered, and decided to publish, the unknown manuscript entitled Aurora consurgens. My lecture will make a presentation of a new manuscript of the text from The Royal Library in Copenhagen, and try to answer, why this text takes such a pivotal place in Jung’s later work. The main focus of my lecture however, will be at Jung’s diagnosis of the modern psyche in Europe between the World Wars, and try to explain, why the studies of alchemy in Jung’s view could be so important for a more healing future development – a central point in Jung’s later studies. This, I think, is about origins, innovations and controversies.
Aksel Haaning has published several books in Danish, including Naturens lys. Vestens naturfilosofi i højmiddelalder og renæssance ca. 1250-1650, 1998; 2001; [The Light of Nature. The Philosophy of Nature from the high Middle Age to the Renaissance], Middelalderens naturfilosofi. Naturens genkomst i filosofi, digtning og videnskab ca. 1100-1250, Danish 2009 [The Philosophy of Nature in the Middle Ages. The Return of Nature in Philosophy, Poetry and Science 1100-1250] and the popular Den kristne mystik – fra middelalderens verden, Danish 2011) [Christian Mysticism in the Middle Age], which includes chapters on spirituality and history of religion.
Gustav Bovensiepen, MD, Cologne, Germany. Jungian analyst for adults, children and adolescents, trained at the Jung-Institute in Berlin. Co-editor of Analytische Psychologie and on the editorial boards of some German and international psychoanalytic journals. Author of numerous clinical papers and award-winner of two analytic awards and active in the training of analysts and child analysts. In the last years my main clinical interest is focused on problems of symbolization and on different mental states of the analyst in the analytic situation. This interest meets very well with my since 15 years lasting active passion for Argentinean tango. I am still not sure about what is more difficult: to become a good enough analyst or a good enough tango dancer.
11:00 – 12:00 Gustav Bovensiepen (DGAP): Der analytische Prozess als Spiel wechselnder Perspektiven im Analytiker. The analytical process as a playing of changing perspectives in the analyst Moderator: Verena Kast (SGAP, AGAP)
Abstract: Probably beyond transference and counter-transference I assume there is also a rich “non-analytic” mental activity in the analyst’s mind. We seldom speak or publish about this mental activity. I propose to handle all those “thoughts” (e.g. phantasies, imaginations, images, etc.) in a more playful way or attitude; to play with our thoughts we gain more different perspectives to look on the analytic material and on the intersubjective field and we become a psychic lively object for the patients’ mind, which is so necessary to grow emotionally. In a modern analytic psychotherapy with patients of a broad spectrum of Self related problems we must develop a high flexibility of mental perspectives or vertices. From infant observation and developmental research we know how important e.g. the perspective is, from where the baby is looking at the mothers face and vice versa. Perspectives of the analytic process could be the spatial perspective, the rhythm of close and far, the dynamic of presence and absence and the “look ” or perspective on images. The imaginal and pictorial thinking is important for the Jungian approach but it has its pitfalls and sometimes inhibits analytic thinking. To enlarge our traditional Jungian symbolic handling of images, pictures and icons I will refer also to modern theories of iconology. My main hypothesis is that if we develop a more flexible and playful analytic attitude in our thinking in the analytic situation we enlarge the possibilities to create mental links: in the analysand, in the analyst and within the analytic couple and this – hopefully – will further the emergence of meaning. For illustration some clinical vignettes will be presented.
9:00 – 10:30 PANEL: Jean Kirsch (CGJISF) Panel Leader / Moderator; Stan Marlan (PSJA, IRSJA); Mark Saban (IGAP); Susan Rowland (IAJS and Pacifica Graduate Institute); David Tacey (IAJS): How and Why We Still Read Jung: a panel of personal and professional reflections. See the lovely presentation of the panel.
NB! We are very sorry to announce that Susan Rowland will not attend the Congress because of health problems. Jean Kirsch will read a short statement of Susan Rowland’s presentation, and the other presentations and the discussion will then be expanded. In spite of this sad withdrawal we are sure the plenary panel will be a well-attended and engaging morning session.
Pia Skogemann. Member of the board in DSAP. Member of the Training Committee at the C.G. Jung Institute, Copenhagen (Dir. of Training from 1997 – 2006). Member of IAAP Executive Committee from 2001 – 2007.
11:00 – 12:00 Pia Skogemann (DSAP): The Double Conjunction Tales. A structuring model for fairy tales. Moderator: Christopher Hauke (SAP)
Abstract: This lecture offers a contemporary model for structuring and interpreting fairy tales. Instead of using the drama-based structure, which Marie-Louise von Franz introduced, the fairy tale is viewed as a narrative whole comprised of 2×4 typical links in a definite sequence. Of these the fourth and the eighth, that is the first and the second conjunction (the final wedding), are the most important. The model is modern in the sense that it allows for different ways to be feminine or masculine. If one of the lovers, male or female, is the more active, the other one is typically more passive. A female protagonist is seen as representing an archetypal feminine ego, while the male protagonist is seen as a masculine ego. The structuring serves as a guiding tool for interpretation. It is based on the notion that individuation presupposes psychological relationship. Therefore the model is focusing on the gradual maturation not only of the protagonist but of the relationship between the heroine and the hero (or vice versa) as the narrative enfolds. The model was first published in a Danish work on Fairy Tales in 1998 (En karl var min mor, en fisk var min far. L & R Fakta, Copenhagen). Since then the model has proved its value in terms of its usability. Pia Skogemann has published more than ten books on Jungian subjects in Danish, but only one, Where The Shadows Lie, Chiron, USA, 2009, has so far been published in English.
9:00 – 10:15 Eduardo Carvallo (SVAJ) and Eva Pattis Zoja (OGAP, CIPA): Sandwork: An experience working with Colombian vulnerable population. Una experiencia trabajando con una población colombiana vulnerable. Co-moderators: Heyong Shen (IM-China) and Patrizia G. Michan (IRSJA) ABSTRACT: Abstract-EXPRESSIVE SANDWORK
10:45 – 12:00 Vito Marino de Marinis (CIPA) and Gianni Nagliero (AIPA): Dalla scissione alla collaborazione: il processo di riparazione del conflitto fra associazioni. From Splits to Collaboration: The Process of Resolving Conflicts between Societies. Moderator: Stefano Carta (AIPA)
Yehuda Abramovitch, M.D. Psychiatrist at Beer-Yaakov Mental Health Center and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University. Senior analyst, Israel Institute of Jungian Psychology.
9:00 – 10:00 Yehuda Abramovitch (IIJP): Jung’s Understanding of Schizophrenia – Is it Still Relevant in the “Era of The Brain”? Moderator: Alvaro Ancona de Faria (SBrPA)
Abstract: Among the forefathers of psychoanalysis Jung was probably the most involved with and committed to grasping the meaning of psychotic thinking, and he left behind precious insights to treatment. Today we have at our disposal works written between 1919 and 1958, covering most of Jung’s productive years, showing how important and dear this field was to him. The current “state of the art” in modern psychiatry attributes the psychotic process to alteration in the brain’s anatomy, biochemistry and electrophysiology, thus exempting the subject, i.e. the afflicted person, from responsibility for his sanity and for his attachment to reality. In this light it is more refreshing than ever to return to Jung’s teachings. Jung understood Schizophrenia as an “Abaissement du Niveau Mental”, a similar phenomenon to the one encountered in dreams, and caused by a peculiar “Faiblesse de la Volonté”. He contested that complexes in Schizophrenia, in contrast with neurotic disorders, are disconnected and can either never reintegrate to the psychic totality or they can join together in remission “like a mirror broke into splinters”. Accordingly, a person who does not fight for the supremacy of his ego-consciousness and for the subjugation of unconscious forces, a person who lets himself be swayed by the intrusion of alien contents arising from the unconscious (or even is fascinated by regression) exposes himself to the danger of Schizophrenia. The relevance of these notions and their necessity in understanding the psychotic process in light of modern scientific findings will be discussed.
10:30 – 12:00 PANEL: Beverley Zabriskie (JPA), Suzanne Gieser, Roderick Main, and Harald Atmanspacher: From Copenhagen to the Consulting Room: Complementarity, Synchronicity, and Neural Coupling Moderator: George Hogenson (CSJA).
“Pauli has prompted me to write…my thoughts on the concept of synchronicity. Since physicists are the only people nowadays who would be able to deal with such a concept successfully, it is from a physicist that I hope to meet with critical understanding although, as you will see, the empirical basis seems to lie wholly in the realm of psychic phenomena.” C. G. Jung, Letters, vol.1, p. 530)
“I have no doubt that the placing side by side of the points of view of a physicist and a psychologist will also prove to be a form of reflection.” W. Pauli, Letter 76, of 5 August, 1957.
Beverley Zabriskie is a founding faculty member and former President of the Jungian Psychoanalytic Association (JPA) in New York City. She is a member of the board of the Philemon Foundation. Her public ations include “A Meeting of Rare Minds,” the preface to Atom and Archetype: The Pauli-Jung Correspondence, (Princeton University Press, 2001) and “When Psyche meets Soma: the question of incarnation” in About A Body (Routledge, 2006). Her articles in the Journal of Analytical Psychology include “Synchronicity and the I Ching: Jung, Pauli, and the Chinese Woman” (50, 2005) and “Imagination as Laboratory” (49, 2004). Her 2007 Fay Lectures addressed “Transformation Through Emotion: From Myth to Neuroscience”.
Beverley Zabriskie (Jungian Analyst, JPA, New York) “Neural Coupling in the Coniunctio: Who, What, and We.”
Abstract: For Jung, his essay on synchronicity was his equivalent in science to Answer To Job in religion, but “even more shocking.” Already in sympathy with Copenhagen’s Neils Bohr’s complementarities, with synchronicity, Jung made a move away from magical notions of causality toward a mode of psychic engagement with seemingly random phenomena.
While Pauli remarked that Jungian psychology should be transformed into a philosophy, complementarity and synchronicity are active modes in analytic process. They inform our methods of association and amplification, our theories of complexes and psychological types, and our transferential fields. Via the immediate connections of neural coupling and the timelessness of the coniunctio, past, present and future are enfolded in moments of here and now, in the singularity and multiplicities of a self on the who and the what of the mind-body continuum.
Suzanne Gieser (1960), Ph.D in the History of Science and Ideas, licensed relational psychotherapist, senior lecturer and associate professor for ten years at The Institute of Analytical Psychology (IAP) in Stockholm, editor of the Bailey Island and New York Seminars at the Philemon Foundation, member of the board at the Swedish C.G. Jung foundation. Private practice in Stockholm.
Suzanne Gieser, Ph.D.(Psychotherapist and Jungian Scholar, Stockholm) ”From Copenhagen to Zurich: The Complementarity of Bohr, Pauli, and Jung”
Abstract: Using Copenhagen as a starting point in my lecture I my want to highlight the influence of Niels Bohr’s philosophy on the physicist Wolfgang Pauli in the 1920’ies preparing him mentally for a reception of Jung’s ideas. Further, still with the focus on Copenhagen, I want to mention Jung’s seminars on Pauli’s dreams in America 1936-37, when he also stopped by in Copenhagen to attend the 9th conference of the General Medical Society for Psychotherapy, just before going to New York in 1937 to give his final seminars on Pauli’s dreams. This was the only time Jung was in Scandinavia and concerns the reception of Jung’s ideas in Sweden and Scandinavia.
Roderick Main, PhD, is a Professor in the Centre for Psychoanalytic Studies, University of Essex, UK. He has published several books and many papers on Jungian psychology, especially in relation to synchronicity, religion, society, and myth.
Professor Roderick Main (Jung Scholar, Centre for Psychoanalytic Studies, University of Essex). “The cultural significance of synchronicity for Jung and Pauli”
Abstract: In this paper I shall step back from the complex details of C. G. Jung’s concept of synchronicity to look instead at the broader question of the concept’s cultural significance, as this was envisaged both by Jung himself and by Wolfgang Pauli, Jung’s most important discussant in developing the concept. For both thinkers the principle of synchronicity was, above all, an attempt to develop an expanded, more holistic understanding of science. But I shall argue that Jung’s and Pauli’s motives for proposing this development were not just, as might be expected, psychological (including therapeutic) and scientific, but also historical, social, political, philosophical, and religious. I shall focus in particular on their joint publication The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche, though I shall also draw on their correspondence, especially to each other, and on biographical sources.
Harald Atmanspacher is a physicist working at the Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology at Freiburg (Germany) and at Collegium Helveticum at ETH Zurich (Switzerland).
Harald Atmanspacher (Physicist, Collegium Helveticum, ETH Zurich) “Psychophysical Correlations: Synchronicity and Meaning”
Abstract: The philosophical framework that Jung developed together with Wolfgang Pauli (“dual-aspect monism”) implies that psychophysical phenomena are neither reducible to physical processes nor to conscious mental activity. Rather, they belong to a radically novel class of phenomena, deriving from relations between the physical and the mental. In synchronistic events, a particular class of psychophysical phenomena, these relations are explicated as meaning.
Cinzia Bressi , MD, PhD is a professor of psychiatry and psychotherapy at the University of Milan, the chief of Psychotherapy Centre at Milan’s University hospital. She is a member of the British Jungian Analytical Association, British Psychotherapy Foundation of London. She is working analytically with adults and also with adolescents and their families. Currently is interested in reflective functioning and attachment in both analytical practice and theoretical aspects.
9:00 – 10:15 Cinzia Bressi (BAP) (British Jungian Analytical Association, British Psychotherapy Foundation, London) “Heard with the eyes”: Personal equation and fluid self-state communication in the therapeutic relationship
Abstract: Jung described the personal equation in psychotherapeutic practice as a collision between an individual mind and environmental conditions. Contemporary psychoanalytic thought has pointed out the analyst’s interpretation hold some performance or action-like qualities, in that the analyst’s words are a kind of unintentional action. I would like to highlight that enactment belongs to the analyst’s subjective responses that are intrinsically related to his or her personal psychology. The analyst’s reflective function is compromised during mutual enactments. In such situations, I believe that in addition to the analyst’s personal equation, the timing of the reflective mental space, where the analyst can ‘hold’ the content of the projective identification, that is, a dissociated and non-representable part of the patient’s mind, is also of extreme importance. As analysts, if we receive our analysand’s pain and terror, without reacting of without seeking to change them, then these islands of affective reality, these parts of Self that were initially dissociated, can be recognized and guided towards self-reflection through symbolic ability and verbal forms that are expressed within a relational context. The new emerges in projective identification, projective counteridentification and enactments and is being activated in not-too-safe conditions.
The heart of these analytical aspects is Jung’s transcedent function, where “the union of conscious and uncounscious is consummated”. In other words, according to Jean Knox, the transcendent function can be interpreted as a constant, dynamic confrontation and integration process between explicit conscious information and memories with the knowledge that we accumulate uncounsciously in the internal working models of implicit memory, the primary part of which represents the sense of Self and contributes to the patient’s process of individuation.
Nadia Fina (AGAP and IAAP member) works in Milan, Italy as Psychotherapist of adults and adolescents. Supervisors since many years in Health Services. Honorary Scientific Responsible for APG (Association for Group Psychoterapy)
and Nadia Fina (AGAP): Countertransference and Projective Counteridentification
Abstract: Countertransference and projective counteridentification need to be verified according to the form and content of the material the patient produces, and to the interaction of the analytic couple, so that what it is in the patient that causes the therapist’s responses and how such come about can be clearly understood. The analyst need to explore how the patient stimulates his or her countertransference responses and what this means for them both.
Moderator: Catherine Crowther (SAP)
10:45 – 12:00 Judith Woodhead (SAP): Moments of Embodiment. Moderator: Lisbet Myers Zacho (DSAP)