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.