The Jung Topic: Self Identity -- The Ego and Persona

[Lindamomof7]

I ditto Irmajean...

[finding my way]

:confused:whyohwhyohwhy is the discussion of Jungian topics so triggering:confused:

The discussion we are having about Jung is very interesting to me. This thread is for that discussion. I am trying to understand the dynamics of ego, persona, etc to better understand dissociation in particular. Others have their own needs they are seeking to be met here. Mark, I am not censoring you. Allan, am I supposed to feel hurt that you are saying this is boring when I feel it is very interesting? I am confused:confused: Is my interest in Jung unacceptable?????? Do Jungians have to go into the site's shadow??:eek:

[Luna-]

Since most of the "off-topic" discussion is here, shall I open up another thread for the Ego and Persona? Will everyone be happy ...? Or would you like to do it, SpiritEm?

[finding my way]

I'm kind of trying to play with people to raise awareness. The difficulties we are having here seem to be quite on topic... we are negotiating the space between us. What will our personas allow? What are the consequences of not allowing some of this discussion to take place? Greater safety or comfort for some? Greater alienation for others?

[spiritual_emergency]

After briefly reviewing the thread and considering where and how the content has meandered, I thought one possible solution might be to simply shorten the title to: The Jung Topic . It seems to me as if maybe people are finding their comfort zone. Some of us are more familiar with Jung and closer to the material but for those who aren't, they might need to find either a bridge of connection or a means of interpretation through a lens they're familiar with.

Anyway, if we simply shortened the title, that would allow us to continue our explorations (or "riffing" as Mark put it) without feeling that we're getting too far from the original intent. Meantime, we could always start a new thread on the Ego/Persona and maybe one on the Shadow at the same time, since the conscious parts make up a sort of whole. I wouldn't however, attempt to turn this one back in that direction but would instead, simply allow it to stand as a wading-in point.

Allan: My point to everyone, especially SE in another forum, is that this is a lecture, intellectual and incredilby boring. SE is not boring nor are the others but, my point is that the "intellectual nature of this is distancing and defensive and that is why its boring. I fear that this is taken as criticism rather than observation.

I'm going to take it as an observation. Of your individual response. You find the conversation to be boring and distancing, and it's bringing up defenses within you. I don't know what the solution is to that but maybe someone else, who is more familiar with the community structure, has some ideas.

[Mark]

May I suggest that we create a thread for "understandings of self" and move the off-topic stuff to there? We can treat the broad topic of identity there and leave this one for more specific-Jung applications.

[IrmaJean]

Would you like the thread title changed, SE? We can do that for you if you like.

Finding, I think it's great that you have an interest in Jung.

One thing I have truly valued about this board has been the diversity of the community. I think it's a beautiful thing that we can communicate and express ourselves and support one another from all over the world. Hearing others voices, thoughts, feelings, struggles and how they found the path to healing can be a learning experience for all of us, I think.

I don't personally know Jung's work, but I have a huge interest in anything psychology-related and the workings of the mind...so there you go. Back to the discussion then...

Or what Mark said about the thread title...(we cross-posted)

[spiritual_emergency]

Irma Jean Would you like the thread title changed, SE? We can do that for you if you like.

After sleeping on it, I don't see any problem with continuing the way we have been. We started out looking at the concept of the Ego and Persona. The intent was to do so from a Jungian perspective but I see no reason why we can't bring in other perspectives on self-identity. One model I've stumbled across fairly recently has been Jane Loevinger's model, that details nine stages of ego development. It reminds me somewhat of Maslow's hierarchy.

- The first stage has to do with the differentiation of self from world and formation of ego in the first place.

- The second stage has to do with egocentric ego formation.

- The third with manipulative ego formation.

- The fourth with societal and conformist ego formation.

- The fifth stage with a self -aware or reflective ego formation.

- The sixth stage is qualitatively different and involves issues such as relationships with others and issues of intimacy and ego involved in relationships.

- The seventh and eighth stages have to do with interpersonal ego and

- the last [stage] with an integrative ego.

Source: Loevinger's Model of Ego Development

Then, there are models such as Dabrowski, Graves and Wilber's that we could consider.

The ego itself can be so complex, we could spend a great deal of time just exploring that one very small area of the psyche but sooner or later, I suspect that myself, Luna or fmw won't be able to contain ourselves and we'll be compelled to start talking about the Shadow. We can create a new thread then.

Naturally, those who do not find any of the above to be of interest to them are not obligated to take part. Alternatively, they can pursue their own areas of interest.

Does that work for everyone?

[finding my way]

Those stages of ego development are interesting. I would think sometimes they don't necessarily go in that order? Like maybe an introvert would develop an interpersonal ego earlier?

I've been thinking more in terms of the ways the ego gets into conflict... with others, with self... after a certain point that conflict can get quite dangerous. Most children resolve conflict without rational thought and mature perspectives of course, and the methods of coping we created back then we still carry with us. Perhaps studying the egos of children would be the most helpful! When the danger point comes, some give up, some put up a fight, some cry, and then from there, there is the interaction inside... how you feel about yourself from all of that. Maybe you've survived the outer conflict, but what do you do with how you feel on the inside about it all?

What we keep leading up to here with the Jung topic is that humans have the option of "stuffing" the events or aspects of ourselves that we can't handle... I think Robert Bly called it the long black bag we drag behind us. Pushing it from the front of consciousness doesn't get rid of it though, any more than you can get rid of your shadow. It will act out, and sometimes with power. The ego is then put in another state of conflict. The beauty of the Jungian method in my life has been that with a shifted perspective, a more mature ego, the contents of that bag contains treasures.

At the end of the day, I do not have to use Jungian labels if there are now better ones. I do want to know that we have communicated, though, and that what has been incredibly meaningful for me and others hasn't been lost.

[Lindamomof7]

..........

[spiritual_emergency]

fmw: Those stages of ego development are interesting. I would think sometimes they don't necessarily go in that order? Like maybe an introvert would develop an interpersonal ego earlier?

I don't know fmw. We all have to crawl before we can walk although some babies skip the crawling stage and some babies don't crawl but instead, roll, or drag, or scootch. Likewise, once they're up on their feet some meander, some skip, some go straight to running. A model is little more than a fixed set of interpretation but we probably shouldn't think of it as being fixed in concrete, rather, it's more like a backbone with some degree of flexibility but not so much that it completely falls apart.

What we keep leading up to here with the Jung topic is that humans have the option of "stuffing" the events or aspects of ourselves that we can't handle... I think Robert Bly called it the long black bag we drag behind us. Pushing it from the front of consciousness doesn't get rid of it though, any more than you can get rid of your shadow. It will act out, and sometimes with power. The ego is then put in another state of conflict. The beauty of the Jungian method in my life has been that with a shifted perspective, a more mature ego, the contents of that bag contains treasures.

Yeah. I'm itching towards that discussion too.

At the end of the day, I do not have to use Jungian labels if there are now better ones. I do want to know that we have communicated, though, and that what has been incredibly meaningful for me and others hasn't been lost.

We all have our personal preferences. My greater desire is to look at the entirety of the psyche, of which the ego is only one part and it's really only the surface layer. To me, the interesting stuff lies deeper. If we think of the psyche as a world however, most people have only been to the country of the Ego/Persona. It's all they know. They don't realize there are vast, territories beyond its borders. Methods of exploring beyond those borders of that which we call "me" include psychotherapy, spiritual or contemplative traditions and oddly enough, some forms of severe trauma and crisis.

Insofar as conflict goes... as long as we are bound by a physical plane of existence, it's going to happen. If we could all slip our bodies, lose our egos, and become pinpoints of consciousness... we might find that we play (and even dance) quite well together. There's a lot of ground between here and there however.

~ Namaste

[malign]

And the ground has its beauties, too ...

:-)

[Luna-]

I wasn't quite done here yet. I'd like to return to two things that finding raised early on and I don't feel we got to discussing: dissociation and its relationship to the Ego and Persona, as well as the relationship between Ego and Persona. I've tried to piece together the bits of conversation relevant to this, so we can hopefully explore this further(?)

When we are first born, we don't know we have a body -- we lack that kind of awareness. As our body develops and as we interact with the world and the people in it, we also develop an ego which is to say: We develop a system of beliefs about ourselves, others, the larger world, and our place in it. Those beliefs, amassed, create the psychological structure of the ego.

If this ego becomes deflated, we call it depression.

If this ego becomes inflated, we call it mania.

If this ego becomes displaced, we call it dissociation. (my emphasis)

If this ego fragments, we call it psychosis.

So is there anything more we want to explore here about Persona? Is the drive to fit in socially and with the world (the role of Persona) that leads us to dissociate?

… I am trying to understand the dynamics of ego, persona, etc to better understand dissociation in particular ...

and then

… a healthy Persona, like a healthy ego, is a valuable thing. The part I am mulling over is not so much the interface with the outer world, that seems obvious to me, but the interface you have with yourself. People all over this site say horrible things to themselves, as if that doesn't "count"--- like trashing yourself is calorie-free or something. I am thinking it counts very much, at least as much as what people say to you. So, is there a "persona" with what you are saying to you about you? Or is that called something else maybe?

Anyone? (I'm confident SpiritEm will bite. )

[finding my way]

thanks Luna, I'm glad you are still interested!

In thinking this over, we really can't get to the heart of this without talking about the Self. Jungians use capital S Self to denote one thing, and lower case s self to denote another. I always found this terminology device awkward, but you can't really get Jungian stuff if you don't get that there is much more to us than we think, and the "more" has a purposiveness about it, and we will have better health if self and Self are in good communication. Small s self is more what we know of consciousness: ego & persona, all that self talk that goes on in our heads. Capital S Self is the unconscious, housing a good deal more than we will ever comprehend: projection & transference material at the shallower levels (though still quite deep by "self" standards), dream material, and much much more that bubbles up in deeply symbolic expressions like alchemical texts, mythologies, fairy tales, art, poetry, religious writing, and also "delusions" of the "insane."

Of course all of this is controversial. People have to think for themselves and decide if they can make healthy use of these ideas or not.

So... tagging onto SE's earlier post,

if the ego is caught up in self talk (without Self) and it is mostly negative, this can lead to depression or neurosis- type issues

if the ego is caught up in self talk (without Self) and it is GRAND, this can lead to mania

if the ego has encountered Self and is scared ****less by it and the self talk is mostly negative, this can lead to dissociation

if the ego has encountered Self and is taken over by it and doesn't hear self talk but only Self talk, this can lead to psychosis

The above are scenarios of mental illness, not of mental health. And of course the vast field of psychology cannot be reduced so simply, really. And I could have some things wrong here. The value of even attempting to talk about it is that .... we're talking about it!!! These things are so complex. It is worth the effort, I think, to revisit depth psychology to reclaim what is useful about it, though we may need to update some of the terms.

[spiritual_emergency]

Oh! I didn't realize this was here. I was, (with apologies or perhaps acknowledgement to finding my way), rushing ahead to other places.

finding my way: Jungians use capital S Self to denote one thing, and lower case s self to denote another. I always found this terminology device awkward, but you can't really get Jungian stuff if you don't get that there is much more to us than we think

Yes, it's a bit like my earlier lamentation that Freudian based psychology (or any psychology) which acknowledges only the ego cannot contain, comprehend or understand psychosis because psychosis brings in elements that are beyond the ego. The ego is still very much involved of course because it serves as a mediator to the materialistic plane. You cannot function well in this world without a functioning ego. The difference might lie in where it's rooted. Is it rooted in surface values (Persona) or is it rooted in values of depth (Self)?

Luna: I'd like to return to two things that finding raised early on and I don't feel we got to discussing: dissociation and its relationship to the Ego and Persona, as well as the relationship between Ego and Persona. I've tried to piece together the bits of conversation relevant to this, so we can hopefully explore this further(?)

I need to think about this some more, in part because there is dissociation wherein the ego-identity separates from the physical body (non-voluntary) and then, there is voluntary displacement such as that seen in say, trance or shamanic states. The difference between the two terms are probably as profound as the differences between rape and love-making.

[Luna-]

Can I just check if we are talking about the same kind of dissociation? I got the impression, finding, that you meant dissociation in the sense of parts of the ego splitting off from each other viz, Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) or Multiple Personality? In which case, different parts of the ego are known to each self/personality, but not to other selves who have their own parts of the ego. I wondered what dissociates from what in this instance, in Jungian terms? Or was this not what you meant?

[spiritual_emergency]

A few days ago, Neji had asked a question in relation to MPD/DID that was in a Jungian line: I'm curious, if someone is DID, are their other personalities then shadows?. I don't know if we want to drag that response in here.

Meantime, I had assumed fmw was referring to milder forms of dissociation, such as driving home from work without any real awareness of the traffic or route or perhaps, "splitting off" from a traumatic event. I'll wait for her to confirm my assumption.

[finding my way]

Oooo, thank you thank you for talking about this stuff, because I have been really needing to figure some things out! In my previous post I was talking about the type of dissociation that IFS calls exiling parts of the personality, the dynamic that can happen in trauma. The exiled parts are still us though, and push back at unwanted times and threaten to destabilize ego functioning with voices and flashbacks and acting out behavior. This would be the involuntary dissociation, and some of our members are suffering terribly from it:(. There is also the split off parts in the core of a "complex" and when you peel back the layers you can make sense of how this rejected part of you has been messing you up, and reintegrating that part on new terms can release all kinds of energy and renewal. The voluntary dissociation is another topic, and I was trained in it by a therapist and a shaman, and it has been a powerful healing force in my life.

I'm in a hurry to get ready for work, but thanks for your discussion Luna and Spiritual, I really appreciate it.

[Luna-]

OK, here is SpiritEm's response that she suggested we drag in:

Neji wrote: I'm curious, if someone is DID, are their other personalities then shadows?

SpiritEm's response: I try to stick to that which I feel I know and in spite of having an abundance of "characters" that showed up in my experience, I would continue to maintain that this was evidence of psychic functions, particularly: Shadow, Animus and Self. Meantime, this excerpt struck me as a good explanation that differentiates between the functions of one psyche and what occurs when one person develops multiple forms of psyche.

QUOTE:

Is Schizophrenia 'Split Personality'?

Yes . . . and No! Imagine, if you will, that a 3-levelled house represents the structure of the psyche.

- The top floor, consisting of various linked rooms, represents consciousness, in all its bustling, interacting complexity.

- Immediately below is the cellar, which represents the personal unconscious, or dark 'shadow' side of the personality.

- The lowest level, the basement, is the oldest part of the house and contains dim, godlike and archaic figures, personifications of what Jung called 'archetypes', universally occurring, powerful energies and forms of behaviour and thought, which make up what Jung called the 'collective unconscious', and which often take on mythological, religious, semi-human, divine, animal or natural forms.

What we call 'split personality' involves the conscious personality forming split off, distinctly separate personalities, so it's as if the upper floor rooms become completely isolated from each other, their doors all locked.

With a schizophrenic split, or fragmentation, however, it's as if the house's floorboards (foundations of the conscious personality) are split, or shattered as invading archetypal figures from the basement rush up to inhabit, or displace the upstairs (conscious) inhabitants.

As Jung notes, whereas the healthy person's ego (conscious self) is the subject of his/her experiences, the schizophrenic person's ego is (therefore) only one of several subjects. The nature of the schizophrenic 'split' (which I've called 'split subjectivity') in other words, arises from the splitting of the archetypes of the collective unconscious into a multitude of figures that invade, or usurp the weaker and far more fragile conscious personality.

Source: What is Schizophrenia

So, if I've understood correctly...

- With Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia we are dealing with one psyche in one body that may be vulnerable to possession states by another part of the same psyche. (In addition to Shadow possession we can also see Anima/Animus possession and possession by the Self.) How the individual responds may depend very much on the state of their Ego in relation to that other part.

- With DID we are dealing with multiple psyches within one body. I'm not certain but it seems reasonable to presume that each of those psyches might also be prone to inflation, deflation, possession states, etc.

Please don't take those words as written in stone. They are my best understanding at this time but as I learn more, I understand more and my thoughts may change as a result.