 introduction of the theory of psychoanalysis. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. The theory of psychoanalysis by Carl Gustav Jung. Introduction. In these lectures I've attempted to reconcile my practical experiences in psychoanalysis with the existing theory or rather with the approaches to such a theory. Here is my attitude towards those principles which my honored teacher, Sigmund Freud, has evolved from the experience of many decades. Since I've long been closely connected with psychoanalysis, it will perhaps be asked with astonishment how it is that I am now, for the first time, defining my theoretical position. When, some ten years ago, it came home to me what a vast distance Freud had already traveled beyond the bounds of contemporary knowledge of psycho pathological phenomena, especially the psychology of the complex mental processes. I no longer felt myself in a position to exercise any real criticism. I did not possess the sorry, Mandarin courage of those people who, upon a basis of ignorance and incapacity, consider themselves justified in critical rejections. I thought one must first work modestly for years in such a field before one might dare to criticize. The evil results of premature and superficial criticism have certainly not been lacking. A preponderating number of critics have attacked with as much anger as ignorance. Psychoanalysis has flourished undisturbed and has not troubled itself one jot or tittle about the unscientific chatter but has buzzed around it. As everyone knows, this tree has waxed mightily and not in one world only but alike in Europe and in America. Official criticism participates in the pitiable fate of Proctofan Tasmist and his lamentation in the Walpurgis night. You still are here. Nate is a thing unheard. Vanishing once, we've said the enlightening word. Such criticism has omitted to take to heart the truth that all that exists has sufficient right to its existence, no less is it with psychoanalysis. We will not fall into the error of our opponents nor ignore their existence nor deny their right to exist. But then this enjoins upon ourselves the duty of applying a proper criticism grounded upon a practical knowledge of the facts. To me it seems that psychoanalysis stands in need of this weighing up from the inside. It has been wrongly assumed that my attitude denotes a split in the psychoanalytic movement. Such a sism can only exist where faith is concerned. But psychoanalysis deals with knowledge and it's ever changing formulations. I've taken William James' pragmatic rule as a plumb line. You must bring out of each word its practical cash value, set it at work within the stream of your experience. It appears less a solution than as a program for more work and more particularly as an indication of the ways in which existing realities may be changed. Thus become instruments, not answers to enigmas in which we can rest, we don't lie back upon them, we move forward and on occasion make nature over again by their aid. And so my criticism has not proceeded from academic arguments, but from experiences which have forced themselves on me during 10 years earnest work in this sphere. I know that my experience in no wise approaches Freud's quite extraordinary experience and insight, but nonetheless it seems to me that certain of my formulations do present the observed facts more adequately than is the case in Freud's method of statement. At any rate I have found in my teaching that the conceptions put forward in these lectures have afforded peculiar aid in my endeavors to help my pupils do an understanding of psychoanalysis. With such experience I am naturally inclined to ascent to the view of Mr. Dooley, that witty humorist of the New York Times when he says defining pragmatism, truth is truth when it works. I am indeed very far from regarding a modest and moderate criticism as a falling away or a scism on the contrary through it I hope to help on the flowering and fructification of the psychoanalytic movement and to open a path towards the scientific treasures of psychoanalysis for those who have hitherto been unable to possess themselves of psychoanalytic methods whether through lack of practical experience or through distaste of the theoretical hypothesis. For the opportunity to deliver these lectures I have to thank my friend Dr. Smith, Eli Jeleth of New York who kindly invited me to take part in the extension course at Fordham University. These lectures were given in September 1912 in New York. I must here also express my best thanks to Dr. Gregory of Bellevue Hospital for his ready support of my clinical demonstrations. For the troublesome work of translation I am greatly indebted to my assistant Ms. M. Molzer and to Mrs. Edith Eater and Dr. Eater of London. Only after the preparation of these lectures did Adler's book, Uber den Nell Rosen, character, become known to me in the summer of 1912. I recognize that he and I have reached similar conclusions on various points, but here is not the place to go into a more intimate discussion of the matter. That must take place elsewhere. End of Introduction. Chapter 1 of the Theory of Psychoanalysis by Carl Gustav Jung. This LibriVox recording is in the public domain. Chapter 1. Consideration of Early Hypotheses. It is not an easy task to speak about psychoanalysis in these days. I'm not thinking when I say this of the fact that psychoanalysis in general, it is my earnest conviction, is among the most difficult scientific problems of the day. But even when we put this cardinal fact aside, we find many serious difficulties which interfere with the clear interpretation of the matter. I'm not capable of giving you a complete doctrine elaborated both from the theoretical and the empirical standpoint. Psychoanalysis has not yet reached such a point of development, although a great amount of labor has been expended upon it. Neither can I give you a description of its growth, abo wo, for you already have in your country with its great regard for all the progress of civilization. A considerable literature on the subject. This literature has already spread a general knowledge of psychoanalysis among those who have a scientific interest in it. You've had the opportunity of listening to Freud, the real explorer and founder of this method who has spoken in your own country about this theory. As for myself, I've already had the honor of speaking about this work in America. I've discussed the experimental foundation of the theory of complexes and the application of psychoanalysis to pedagogy. It can be easily understood that under these circumstances I fear to repeat what has already been said or published in many scientific journals in this country, a further difficulty lies in the fact that in very many quarters there are already prevailing quite extraordinary conceptions of our theory, conceptions which are often absolutely wrong and unfortunately wrong just in that which touches the very essence of psychoanalysis. At times it seems nearly impossible to grasp even the meaning of these errors and I'm constantly astonished to find anyone with a scientific education ever arriving at ideas so divorced from all foundations in fact. Obviously it would be of no importance to cite examples of these curiosities and it would be more valuable to discuss here those questions and problems of psychoanalysis which really might provoke misunderstanding. A change in the theory of psychoanalysis, although it has very often been repeated, it seems to be still an unknown fact to many people that in these last years the theory of psychoanalysis has changed considerably. Those, for instance, who have only read the first book Studies in Hysteria by Brewer and Freud still believe that psychoanalysis essentially consists in the doctrine that hysteria, as well as other neuroses, has its roots in the so-called trauma or shocks of earliest childhood. They continue to condemn this theory and have no idea that it is 15 years since this conception was abandoned and replaced by a totally different one. This change is of such great importance in the whole development of psychoanalysis as well for its technique as for its theory, but I must give it in some detail. That I may not wear you with the complete recitation of cases already well known. I will only just refer to those in Brewer and Freud's book which I shall assume are known to you for the book has been translated into English. You will there have read that case of Brewer's to which Freud referred in his lectures at Clark University. You will have found that the hysterical symptom has not some unknown organic source but is based on certain highly emotional psychic events, so-called injuries of the heart, trauma or shocks. I think that nowadays every careful observer of hysteria will acknowledge from his own experience that at the root of this disease such painful events are to be found. This truth was already known to the physicians of former days. For traumatic theory, so far as I know it was really Charcot who probably under the influence of Page's theory of nervous shock made this observation of theoretical value. Charcot knew by means of hypnotism at that time not understood that hysterical symptoms could be called forth by suggestion as well as made to disappear through suggestion. Charcot believed that he saw something like this in those cases of hysteria caused by accident cases which became more and more frequent. The shock can be compared with hypnosis in Charcot's sense. The emotion provoked by the shock causes a momentary complete paralysis of willpower during which the remembrance of the trauma can be fixed as an auto suggestion. This conception gives us the original theory of psychoanalysis. Ethiological investigation had to prove whether this mechanism or a similar one was also to be found in those cases of hysteria which could not be called traumatic. This lack of knowledge of the etiology of hysteria was supplied by the discovery of Brewer and Freud. They proved that even in those ordinary cases of hysteria which cannot be said to be caused by shock, the same trauma element was to be found and seemed to have an etiological value. It is natural that Freud, a pupil of Charcot, was inclined to suppose that this discovery in itself confirmed the ideas of Charcot. Accordingly, the theory elaborated out of the experience of that period mainly by Freud received the imprint of a traumatic etiology. The name of trauma theory is therefore justified. Nevertheless, this theory had also a new aspect. I'm not here speaking of the truly admirable profoundness and precision of Freud's analysis of symptoms, but of the relinquishing of the conception of auto suggestion, which was the dynamic force in the original theory and its substitution by a detailed exposure of the psychological and psychophysical effects caused by the shock. The shock, the trauma, provokes a certain excitation which under normal circumstances finds a natural outlet, a partial retention takes place, the so-called blocking of the effect, effect time, this amount of excitation which can be compared with an amount of potential energy is transmitted by the mechanism of conversion into physical symptoms. The cathartic method, according to this conception, therapy had to find the means by which those retained emotions could be brought to a mode of expression, thereby setting free from the symptoms that amount of repressed and converted feeling. Hence this was called the cleansing or cathartic method. Its aim was to discharge the blocked emotions. From this it follows that analysis was then more or less closely concerned with the symptoms, that is to say the symptoms were analyzed. The work of analysis began with the symptoms, a method abandoned today. The cathartic method and the theory on which it is based are, as you know, accepted by other colleagues so far as they are interested at all in psychoanalysis and you will find some appreciation and quotation of the theory as well as of the method in several textbooks. The traumatic theory criticized. Although, as a matter of fact, the discovery of Brewer and Freud is certainly true as can easily be proved by every case of hysteria, several objections can be raised to the theory. It must be acknowledged that their method shows with wonderful clearness the connection between the actual symptoms and the shock, as well as the psychological consequences which necessarily follow from the traumatic event. But nevertheless, a doubt arises as to the etiological significance of the so-called trauma or shock. It is extremely difficult for any critical observer of hysteria to admit that a neurosis with all its complications can be based on events in the past as it were on one emotional experience long past. It is more or less fashionable at present to consider all abnormal psychic conditions and so far as they are of exogenic growth as the consequences of hereditary degeneration and not as essentially influenced by the psychology of the patient and the environment. This conception is too narrow and not justified by the facts. To use an analogy we know perfectly well how to find the right middle course in dealing with the etiology of tuberculosis. There are of course cases of tuberculosis where in earliest childhood the germ of the disease falls upon a soil predisposed by heredity so that even in the most favorable conditions the patient cannot escape his fate. Nonetheless, there are also cases where under favorable conditions illness can be prevented despite a predisposition to the disease. Nor must we forget that there are still other cases without hereditary disposition or individual inclination and in spite of this fatal infection occurs. All this holds equally true of the neuroses where matters are not essentially different in their method of procedure than they are in general pathology. Neither a theory in which the predisposition is all important nor one in which the influence of the environment is all important will ever suffice. It is true the shock theory can be said to give predominance to the predisposition even insisting that some past trauma is the condition Sene-Quinone of the neuroses. Yet Freud's ingenious empiricism presented even in their studies and hysteria some views insufficiently exploited at the time which contained the elements of a theory that perhaps more accentuates the value of environment than inherited or traumatic predisposition. The conception of repression, Freud synthesized these observations in a form that was to extend far beyond the limits of the shock theory. This conception is the hypothesis of repression. As you know by the word repression is understood the psychic mechanism of the re-transportation of a conscious thought into the unconscious sphere. We call this fear the unconscious and define it as the psyche of which we are not conscious. The conception of repression was derived from the numerous observations made upon neurotic patients who seem to have the capacity of forgetting important events or thoughts and this to such an extent that one might easily believe nothing had ever happened. These observations can be constantly made by anyone who comes into close psychological relations with his patients As a result of the Brewer and Freud studies it was found that a very special method was needed to call again into consciousness those dramatic events long since forgotten. I wish to call attention to this fact since it is decidedly astonishing for a priori we are not inclined to believe that valuable things can ever be forgotten. For this reason several critics object that the reminiscences which have been called into consciousness by certain hypnotic processes only suggested ones and do not correspond with reality. Even granting this it would certainly not be justifiable to regard this in itself as a condemnation of repression since there are and have been not a few cases where the fact of repressed reminiscences can be proved by objective demonstration. Even if we exclude this kind of proof it is possible to test the phenomena by experiment. The association tests provide us with the necessary experiences. Here we find the extraordinary fact that associations pertaining to complexes saturated with the emotion emerge with much greater difficulty into consciousness and are much more easily forgotten. As my experiments on this subject were never re-examined the conclusions were never adopted until just lately when Wilhelm Peters, a disciple of Kreplen, proved in general my previous observation namely that painful events are very rarely correctly reproduced. As you see the conception rests upon a firm empirical basis there is still another side of the question worth looking at you might ask if the repression has its root in a conscious determination of the individual or do the reminiscences disappear rather passively without conscious knowledge on the part of the patient. In Freud's works you will find a series of excellent proofs of the existence of a conscious tendency to repress what is painful. Every psychoanalyst will know more than a dozen cases showing clearly in their history one particular moment at least in the course of time. Every psychoanalyst will know more than a dozen cases showing clearly in their history one particular moment at least in which the patient knows more or less clearly that he will not allow himself to think of the repressed reminiscences. A patient once gave this significant answer, je l'ai mis de côté, I have put it aside. But on the other hand we must not forget that there are a number of cases where it is impossible for us to show even with the most careful examination the slightest trace of conscious repression. In these cases it seems as if the mechanism of repression were much more in the nature of a passive disappearance. Or even as if the impressions were dragged beneath the surface by some force operating from below. From the first class of cases we get the impression of complete mental development accompanied by a kind of cowardice in regard to their own feelings. But among the second class of cases you may find patients showing a more serious retardation of development. The mechanism of repression seems here to be much more an automatic one. This difference is closely connected with the question I mentioned before that is the question of the relative importance of predisposition and environment. The first class of cases appears to be mainly influenced by environment and education. In the other predisposition seems to play the chief part. It is pretty clear where treatment will have more effect. As I've already said the conception of repression contains an element which is in intrinsic contradiction with the shock theory. We find for instance in the case of Ms. Lucy R. Described by Freud that the essential etiological moment is not to be found in the traumatic scenes but in the insufficient readiness of the patient to set store upon the convictions passing through her mind. But if we think of the later views we find in the selected papers on hysteria where Freud forced through further experience supposes certain traumatic sexual events in early childhood to be the source of the neurosis then we get the impression of an incongruity between the conception of repression and that of shock. The conception of repression contains the elements of an etiological theory of environment while the conception of shock is a theory of predisposition. But at first the theory of neurosis developed along the lines of the trauma conception. Pursuing Freud's later investigations we see him coming to the conclusion that no such positive value can be ascribed to the traumatic events of later life as their effects could only be conceivable if the particular predisposition of the patient were taken into account. Evidently the enigma was to be resolved just at this point. As the analytical work progressed the roots of hysterical symptoms were found in childhood. They reached back from the present far into the past. The further end of the chain threatened to get lost in the midst of early childhood but it was just there that reminiscences appeared of certain scenes where sexual activities had been manifested in an active or passive way and these were unmistakably connected with the events which provoked the neurosis. For further details of these events you must consult the works of Freud as well as the numerous analyses which have already been published. The theory of sexual trauma in childhood hence arose the theory of sexual trauma in childhood which provoked bitter opposition not from theoretical objections against the shock theory in general but against the element of sexuality in particular. In the first place the idea that children might be sexual and that sexual thoughts might play any part with them aroused great antagonism. In the second place the possibility that hysteria had a sexual basis was most unwelcome for the sterile position that hysteria was either a reflex neurosis of a uterus or arose from lack of sexual satisfaction had just been given up. Naturally therefore the real value of Freud's observations was disputed. If critics had limited themselves to that question and had not adorned their opposition with moral indignation a calm discussion would have been possible. In Germany for instance this method of attack made it impossible to get any credit for Freud's theory. As soon as the question of sexuality was touched general resistance as well as haughty contempt were awakened but in truth there was but one question and issue were Freud's observations true or not. That alone could be of importance to a really scientific mind. It is possible that these observations do not seem very probable at first sight but it is unjustifiable to condemn them a priori as false. Wherever really sincere and thorough investigations have been carried out it has been possible to corroborate his observations. The fact of a psychological chain of consequences has been absolutely confirmed although Freud's original conception that real traumatic scenes were always to be found has not been. Theory of sexual trauma abandoned Freud himself abandoned his first presentation of the shock theory after further and more thorough investigation. He could no longer retain his original view as to the reality of the sexual shock. Excessive sexuality, sexual abuse of children or very early sexual activity in childhood were later on seemed to be of secondary importance. You will perhaps be inclined to share the suspicion of the critics that the results derived from analytic researches were based on suggestion. There might be some justification for this view if these assertions had been published broadcast by some charlatan or ill qualified person but anyone who has carefully read Freud's works and has himself similarly sought to penetrate into the psychology of his patients will know that it is unjust to attribute to an intellect like Freud's the crude mistakes of a journeyman. Such suggestions only read down to the discredit of those who make them. Ever since then patients have been examined by every possible means from which suggestion could be absolutely excluded and still the associations described by Freud have been proved to be true in principle. We are thus obliged in the first place to regard many of these shocks of early childhood as phantoms while other trauma have objective reality. With this knowledge at first somewhat confusing the etiological importance of the sexual trauma in childhood declines as it seems now quite irrelevant whether the trauma really took place or not. Experience teaches us that fantasy can be so to speak of the same traumatic value as real shock. In the face of such facts every physician who treats hysteria will recall cases where the neurosis has indeed been provoked by violent traumatic impressions. This observation is only in apparent contradiction with our knowledge already referred to of the unreality of traumatic events in childhood. We know perfectly well that many persons suffer shocks in childhood or in adult life who nevertheless get no neurosis. Therefore the trauma has Cetera's parables no absolute etiological importance but owes its efficacy to the nature of the soil upon which it falls. The predisposition for the trauma. No neurosis will grow on an unprepared soil where no germ of neurosis is already existing. The trauma will pass by without leaving any permanent and effective mark. From this simple consideration it is pretty clear that to make it really effective the patient must meet the shock with a certain internal predisposition. This internal predisposition is not to be understood as meaning that totally obscure hereditary predisposition of which we know so little but as a psychological development which reaches its apogee and its manifestation at the moment and even through the trauma. I will show you first of all by a concrete case the nature of the trauma and its psychological predisposition. A young lady suffered from severe hysteria after a sudden fright. She had been attending a social gathering that evening and was on her way home at midnight accompanied by several acquaintances when a carriage came behind her at full speed. Everyone else drew aside but she paralyzed by fright remained in the middle of the street and ran just in front of the horses. The coachman cracked his whip, cursed and swore without any result. She ran down the whole length of the street which led to a bridge. There her strength failed her and to escape the horses feet she thought in her extreme despair of jumping into the water but was prevented in time by passersby. This very same lady happened to be present a little later on that bloody day the 22nd of January in St. Petersburg when a street was cleared by soldiers' volleys. Right and left of her she saw people dying or falling down badly wounded remaining perfectly calm and clear minded she caught sight of a gate that gave her escape into another street. These terrible moments did not agitate her either at the time or later on. Once it must follow that the intensity of the trauma is of small pathogenic importance. The special conditions form the essential factors. Here then we have the key by which we are able to unlock at least one of the anti-rooms to the understanding of predisposition. We must next ask what were the special circumstances in this carriage scene. The terror and apprehension began as soon as the lady heard the horses footsteps. It seemed to her for a moment as if these betokened some terrible fate portending her death or something dreadful. Then she lost consciousness. The real causation is somehow connected with the horses. The predisposition of the patient who acts thus wildly at such a common place occurrence could perhaps be found in the fact that horses had a special significance for her. It might suffice for instance if she had been once concerned in some dangerous accident with horses. This assumption does hold good here when she was seven years old. She was once out on a carriage drive with the coachman. The horses shied and approached the steep river bank at full speed. The coachman jumped off his seat and shouted to her to do the same which she was barely able to do as she was frightened to death. Still she sprang down at the right moment whilst the horses and carriage were dashed down below. It is unnecessary to prove that such an event must leave a lasting impression behind but still it does not offer any explanation for the exaggerated reaction to an inadequate stimulus. Up till now we only know that this later symptom had its prologue in childhood but the pathological side remains obscure. To solve this enigma we require other experiences. The amnesia which I will set forth fully later on shows clearly the disproportion between the so-called shock and the part played by fantasy. In this case fantasy must predominate to an extraordinary extent to provoke such an effect. The shock in itself was too insignificant. We are at first inclined to explain this incident by the shock that took place in childhood but it seems to me with little success. It is difficult to understand why the effect of this infantile trauma had remained latent so long and why it only now came to the surface. The patient must surely have had opportunities enough during her lifetime of getting out of the way of a carriage going full speed. The reminiscence of the danger to her life seems to be quite insufficiently effective. The real danger in which she was at that one moment in St. Petersburg did not produce the slightest trace of neurosis despite her being predisposed by an impressive event in her childhood. The whole of this traumatic event still lacks explanation from the point of view of the shock theory we are hopelessly in the dark. You must excuse me if I return so persistently to the shock theory. I consider this necessary as nowadays many people, even those who regard us seriously, still keep to this standpoint. Thus the opponents to psychoanalysis and those who never read psychoanalytic articles or do so quite superficially get the impression that in psychoanalysis the old shock theory is still in force. The question arises, what are we to understand by this predisposition through which an insignificant event produces such a pathological effect? This is the question of chief significance and we shall find that the same question plays an important role in the theory of neurosis, for we have to understand why apparently irrelevant events of the past are still producing such effects that they are able to interfere in an impish and capricious way with the normal reactions of actual life. The sexual element in the trauma. The early school of psychoanalysis and its later disciples did all they could to find the origin of later effects in the special kind of early traumatic events. Freud's research penetrated most deeply. He was the first and it was he alone who discovered that a certain sexual element was connected with the shock. It is just this sexual element which, speaking generally, we may consider as unconscious, and it is to this that the traumatic effect is generally due. The unconsciousness of sexuality and childhood seems to throw a light upon the problem of the persistent constellation of the primary traumatic event. The true emotional meaning of the accident was all along hidden from the patient so that in consciousness this emotion was never brought into play. The emotion never wore itself out. It was never used up. We might perhaps explain the effect in the following way. This persistent constellation was a kind of suggestion, a chance, for it is unconscious and the action occurs only at the stipulated moment. It is hardly necessary to give detailed examples to prove that the true nature of sexual manifestations during infancy is not understood. Physicians know, for instance, how often a manifest masturbation persisting up to adult life, especially in women, is not understood as such. It is therefore easy to realize that to a child the true nature of certain actions would be far less conscious. And that is the reason why the real meaning of these events even in adult life is still hidden from our consciousness. In some cases even the traumatic events are themselves forgotten either because their sexual meaning is quite unknown to the patient or because their sexual character is unacceptable being too painful. It is what we call repressed. As we have already mentioned Freud's observation that the admixture of a sexual element with a shock is essential for any pathological effect leads on to the theory of the infantile sexual trauma. This hypothesis may be thus expressed. The pathogenic event is a sexual one. This conception forces way with difficulty. The general opinion that children have no sexuality in early life made such an etiology inadmissible and adverse prevented its acceptance. Infantile sexual fantasy. The change in the shock theory already referred to, namely that in general the shock is not even real but is essentially a fantasy did not make things better. On the contrary, still worse since we are forced to the conclusion that we find in the infantile fantasy at least one positive sexual manifestation. It is no longer some brutal accidental impression from the outside but a positive sexual manifestation created by the child itself. And this very often with unmistakable clearness even real traumatic events of an outspoken sexual type do not always happen to a child quite without its cooperation but are not infrequently apparently prepared and brought about by the child itself. Abraham stated this proving his statement with evidence of the greatest interest and this in connection with many other experiences of the same kind makes it very probable that even really sexual scenes are frequently called forth and supported by the peculiar psychological state of the child's mind. Perfectly independently from psychoanalytic investigation medical criminology has discovered striking parallels to this psychoanalytic statement. End of chapter one. Chapter two of the theory of psychoanalysis by Carl Gustav Jung. This LibriVox recording is in the public domain. Chapter two, the infantile sexuality. The precocious manifestations of sexual fantasy as cause of the shock now seem to be the source of neurosis. This logically attributed to children of far more developed sexuality than have been hitherto admitted. Many cases of precocious sexuality have been recorded in literature long before the time of psychoanalysis. For instance, a girl of two years old with normal menstruation or cases of boys of three and four and five years of age having normal erections and so far ready for cohabitation. These were however curiosities. Great astonishment was caused when Freud began to attribute to the child not only ordinary sexuality but even polymorphic perverse sexuality. All this based upon the most exhaustive investigation. People inclined much too lightly to the superficial view that all this was merely suggested to the patients and was a highly disputable artificial product. Hence Freud's three contributions to the sexual theory not only provoked opposition but even violent indignation. It is surely unnecessary to insist upon the fact that science is not furthered by indignation and that arguments of moral resentment may perhaps please the moralist that is his business but not a scientific man for whom truth must be the guide and not moral indignation. If matters are really as Freud describes them all indignation is absurd. If they are not so again indignation will avail nothing. The conclusion as to what is the truth can only be arrived at on the field of observation and research and nowhere else. The opponents of psychoanalysis with certain honorable exceptions display rather ludicrously somewhat pitifully inadequate realization of the situation. Although the psychoanalytic school could unfortunately learn nothing from their critics as the criticism took no notice of its investigations and although it could not get any useful hints because the psychoanalytic method of investigation was and still is unknown to these critics it remains a serious duty for our school to explain thoroughly the contrast between the existing conceptions. It is not our endeavor to put forward a paradoxical theory contradicting all existing theories but rather to introduce a certain category of new observations into science. Therefore we regard it as a duty to do whatever we can to promote agreement. It is true we must renounce all hope of obtaining the approval of those who blindly oppose us but we do hope to come to an understanding with scientific men. This will be my endeavor now in attempting to sketch the further intellectual development of the psychoanalytic conception so far as the so-called sexual theory of the neuroses is concerned. Objections to the sexual hypothesis. As I said the finding of precocious sexual fantasies which seemed the source of the neuroses forced Freud to the view of a highly developed sexuality in infancy. As you know the reality of this observation is understood by many who maintain that crude error that narrow-minded delusion misled Freud and his whole school alike in Europe and in America so that the Freudians saw things that never existed. They regarded them as people in the grip of an intellectual epidemic. I have to admit that I possess no way of defending myself against criticism of this kind. The only thing I can do is to refer to my own work asking thoughtful persons if they discover there any clear indications of madness. Moreover I must maintain that science has no right to start with the idea that certain facts do not exist. At the most one can say this seems very improbable. We want still more proofs and more research. This is also our reply to the objection. It is impossible to discover anything trustworthy by the psychoanalytic method as this method is practically absurd. No one believed in Galileo's telescope and Columbus discovered America on a false hypothesis. The psychoanalytic method may be full of errors but this should not prevent its use. Many chronological and medical observations have been made with inadequate instruments. We must regard the objections to the method as pretext until our opponents come to grip with the facts. It is there a decision must be reached not by wordy warfare. Our opponents also call hysteria a psychogenic disease. We believe that we have discovered the etiological determinants of this disease and we present without fear the results of our investigation to open criticism. Whoever cannot accept our results should publish his own analyses of cases so far as I know that has never been done at least not in European literature. Under the circumstances critics have no right to deny our conclusions a priori. Our opponents have likewise cases of hysteria and those cases are surely as psychogenic as our own. There is nothing to prevent their pointing out the psychological determinants. The method is not the real question. Our opponents content themselves with disputing and reviling our researches but they do not point out any better way. Many other critics are more careful and more just and do admit that we have made many valuable observations and that the associations of ideas given by the psychoanalytic method will very probably stand but they maintain that our point of view is wrong. The alleged sexual fantasies of childhood with which we are here chiefly concerned must not be taken, they say, as real sexual functions being obviously something quite different since that the approach of puberty, the characteristic peculiarities of sexuality are acquired. This objection being calmly and reasonably made deserves to be taken seriously. Such objections must also have occurred to everyone who has taken up analytic work and there is reason enough for deep reflection. The conception of sexuality. The first difficulty arises with the conception of sexuality. If we take sexuality as meaning the fully developed function we must confine this phenomenon to maturity and then of course we have no right to speak of sexuality in childhood. If we so limit our conception then we are confronted again with new and much greater difficulties. The question arises how then must we denominate all those correlated biological phenomena pertaining to the sexual functions sense to strict theory as for instance pregnancy, childbirth, natural selection, protection of the offspring, etc. It seems to me that all this belongs to the conception of sexuality as well although a very distinguished colleague did once say childbirth is not a sexual act. But if these things do pertain to this concept of sexuality then there must also belong innumerable psychological phenomena for we know that an incredible number of the pure psychological functions are connected with this sphere. I shall only mention the extraordinary importance of fantasy in the preparation for the sexual function. Thus we arrive rather at a biological conception of sexuality which includes both a series of psychological phenomena as well as a series of physiological functions. If we might be allowed to make use of an old but practical classification we might identify sexuality with the so-called instinct of the preservation of the species as opposed in some way to the instinct of self-preservation. Looking at sexuality from this point of view we shall not be astonished to find that the root of the instinct of race-preservation so extraordinarily important in nature goes much deeper than the limited conception of sexuality would ever allow. Only the more or less grown-up cat actually catches mice but the kitten plays at least as if it were catching mice. The young dog's playful indications of attempts at cohabitation begin long before puberty. We have a right to suppose that mankind is no exception to this rule although we do not notice similar things on the surface and are well brought up children. Investigation of the children of the lower classes proves that they are no exceptions to the biological rule. It is of course infinitely more probable that this most important instinct that of the preservation of the race is already nascent in the earliest childhood than that it falls at one swoop from heaven full-fledged at the age of puberty. The sexual organs also develop long before the slightest sign of their future function can be noticed where the psychoanalytic school speaks of sexuality. This wider conception of its function must be linked to it and we do not mean simply that physical sensation and function generally designated by the term sexual. It might be said that in order to avoid any misunderstanding on this point the term sexuality should not be given to these preparatory phenomena in childhood. This demand is surely not justified since the anatomical nomenclature is taken from the fully developed system and special names are not generally given to more or less rudimentary formations. After all the objections to the terminology do not spring so much from objective arguments as from those tendencies which lie at the base of moral indignation. But then no objection can be made to the sex terminology of Freud as he rightly gives to the whole sexual development the general name of sexuality. But certain conclusions have been drawn which so far as I can see cannot be maintained. The sexuality of the suckling. When we examine how far back in childhood the first traces of sexuality reach we have to admit implicitly that sexuality already exists ob-o-wo but only becomes manifest a long time after intrauterine life. Freud is inclined to see in the function of taking the mother's breast already a kind of sexuality. Freud was bitterly reproached for this view but it must be admitted that it is very ingenious if we follow his hypothesis that the instinct of the preservation of the race has existed separately from the instinct of self-preservation ob-o-wo and has undergone a separate development. This way of thinking is not however a biological one it is not possible to separate the two ways of manifestation of the hypothetical vital process and to credit each with a different order of development. If we limit ourselves to judging by what we can actually observe we must reckon with the fact that everywhere in nature we see that the vital processes in an individual consists for a considerable space of time in the functions of nutrition and growth only. We see this very clearly in many animals for instance in butterflies which as caterpillars pass an asexual existence of nutrition and growth. To this stage of life we may allot both the intrauterine life and the extrauterine time of suckling in man. This time is marked by the absence of all sexual function hence to speak of manifest sexuality and the suckling would be a contra-dictio in ad-yecto. The most we can do is to ask if among the life functions of the suckling there are any that have not the character of nutrition or growth and hence could be termed sexual. Freud points out the unmistakable emotion and satisfaction of the child while suckling and compares this process with that of the sexual act. This similarity leads him to assume sexual quality in the act of suckling. This conclusion is only admissible if it can be proved that the tension of the need and its gratification by a release is a sexual process that the act of suckling has this emotional mechanism proves however just the contrary. Therefore we can only say this emotional mechanism is found both in nutrition and in the sexual function. If Freud by analogy deduces the sexual quality of sucking from this emotional mechanism then his biological empiricism would also justify the terminology qualifying the sexual act as a function of nutrition. This is unjustifiably exceeding the bounds in either case. It is evident that the act of sucking cannot be qualified as sexual. We are aware however of functions in the suckling stage which have apparently nothing to do with the function of nutrition such as sucking the finger and its many variations. This is perhaps the place to discuss whether these things belong to the sexual sphere. These acts do not subserve nutrition but produce pleasure. Of that there is no doubt but nevertheless it is disputable whether this pleasure which comes by sucking should be called by analogy a sexual satisfaction. It might be called equally pleasure by nutrition. This latter qualification is even the further justification that the form and kind of pleasure belong entirely to the function of nutrition. The hand which is used for sucking finds in this way preparation for future use in feeding one's self. Under these circumstances nobody will be inclined by a petitia principii to characterize the first manifestation of human life as sexual. The statement which we make that the active sucking is attended by a feeling of satisfaction leaves us in doubt whether the sucking does contain anything else but the character of nutrition. We notice that the so-called bad habits shown by a child as it grows up are closely linked with early infantile sucking such for instance as putting the finger in the mouth biting the nails, picking the nose, ears, etc. We see too how closely these habits are connected with later masturbation. By analogy the conclusion of these infantile habits are the first step to onanism or to actions similar to onanism are therefore of a well-marked sexual character cannot be denied. It is perfectly justified. I have seen many cases in which a correlation existed between these child these habits and later masturbation. If this masturbation takes place in later childhood before puberty it is nothing but an infantile bad habit from the fact of the correlation between masturbation and the other childish bad habits we conclude that these habits have a sexual character insofar as they are used to obtain physical satisfaction from the child's own body. This new standpoint is comprehensible and perhaps necessary. It is only a few steps viewed to regarding the infant's act of sucking as of a sexual character. As you know Freud took the few steps but you have just heard me reject them. We have come to a difficulty which is very hard to solve. It would be relatively easy if we could accept two instincts side by side each and entity in itself. Then the act of sucking the breast would be both an action of nutrition and a sexual act. It seems to be Freud's conception. We find in adults the two instincts separated yet existing side by side or rather we find that there are two manifestations in hunger and in the sexual instinct. But at the sucking age we find only the function of nutrition rewarded by both pleasure and satisfaction. Its sexual character can only be argued by Appetitio Principi for the fact showed that the act of sucking is the first to give pleasure not the sexual function. Obtaining pleasure is by no means identical with sexuality. We deceive ourselves if we think that in the suckling both instincts exist side by side for then we project into the psyche of the child the facts taken from the psychology of adults. The existence of the two instincts side by side does not occur in suckling for one of these instincts has no existence as yet where if existing is quite rudimentary. If we are to regard the striving for pleasure as something sexual we might as well say paradoxically that hunger is a sexual striving for this instinct seeks pleasure by satisfaction. If this were true we should have to give our opponents permission to apply the terminology of hunger to sexuality it would facilitate matters where it possible to maintain that both instincts existed side by side but it contradicts the observed facts and would lead to untenable consequences. Before I try to resolve this opposition I must first say something more about Freud's sexual theory and its transformations. The polymorphic perverse sexuality of infancy we've already reached the conclusion setting out from the idea of the shock being apparently due to sexual fantasies that the child must have in contradiction to the views hitherto prevailing a nearly fully formed sexuality and even a polymorphic perverse sexuality. Its sexuality does not seem concentrated on that genital functions or on the other sex but is occupied with its own body to be autoerotic. If its sexual instinct is directed to another person no distinction or but the very slightest is made as to sex it can therefore be very easily homosexual. In place of non-existing local sexual function there exists a series of so-called bad habits which from this standpoint look like a series of perversities that have the closest analogy with the later perversities. In consequence of this way of regarding the subject's sexuality whose nature is ordinarily regarded as a unit becomes decomposed into a multiplicity of isolated striving forces Freud then arrived at the conception of the so-called erogenous zones by which he understood male skin, anus, etc. It is of course a universal tacit presumption that sexuality has its origin in the sexual organs. The term erogenous zone reminds us of spasmodenic zones and the underlying image is at all events the same just as the spasmodenic zone is the place when the spasm arises so the erogenous zone is the place when it arises an affluent to sexuality. Based upon the model of the genital organs and the origin of sexuality the erogenous zones must be conceived as being so many genitals out of which the streams of sexuality flow together. This is the condition of the polymorphic perverse sexuality of childhood. The expression perverse seems to be justified by the close analogy with the later perversities which present so to speak but a new addition of certain early infantile perverse habits. This is the case with one or other of the different erogenous zones and are the cause of those exchanges in sex which are so characteristic for childhood. According to this view the later normal and monomorphic sexuality is built up out of several components. The first division is into homo and heterosexual components to which is linked an autoerotic component as also there are components of the different erogenous zones. This conception can be compared with the position of physics before Robert Mayer when only isolated forces having elementary qualities were recognized whose interchanges were little understood. The law of the conservation of energy brought order into the interrelationship of the forces at the same time abolishing the conception of those forces as absolute elements but regarding them as interchangeable manifestations of one and the same energy. The sexual components as energy manifestations. Conceptions of great importance do not arise only in one brain but are floating in the air and dip here and there appearing even under other forms and in other regions where it is often very difficult to recognize the common fundamental idea. Thus it happened with the splitting up of sexuality into the polymorphic perverse sexuality of childhood. Experience forces us to accept a constant exchange of isolated components as we notice more and more that for instance perversities exist at the expense of normal sexuality or that the increase of certain kinds of sex manifestations causes corresponding deficiencies of another kind. To make the matter clear let me give you an instance. The young man had a homosexual phase lasting for some years during which time women had no interest for him. This abnormal condition changed gradually toward his 20th year and his erotic interest became more and more normal. He began to take great interest in girls and soon the last traces of his homosexuality were conquered. This condition lasted several years and he had some successful love affairs. Then he wished to get married. He had here to suffer a great disappointment that the girl to whom he proposed refused him. During the ensuing phase he absolutely abandoned the idea of marriage. After that he experienced a dislike of all women and one day he discovered that he was again perfectly homosexual. That is young men had an unusually irritating influence upon him. To regard sexuality as composed of a fixed heterosexual component and a like homosexual element the advice to explain this case for the conception of the existence of fixed components excludes any kind of transformation. To understand the case we have to admit a great mobility of the sexual components which even goes so far that one of the components can practically disappear completely whilst the other comes to the front. If only substitution took place if for instance the homosexual component entered the unconscious leaving the field of consciousness to the heterosexual component modern scientific knowledge would lead us to conclude that equivalent effects arose from the unconscious fear. Those effects would have to be conceived as resistances against the activity of the heterosexual component as a repugnance towards women. Experience tells us nothing about this. There have been some small traces of influences of this kind but of such slight intensity that they cannot be compared with the intensity of the former homosexual component. On the conception that has been outlined it is also incomprehensible how this homosexual component regarded as so firmly fixed can never disappear without leaving active traces. To explain things the process of development is called in forgetting that this is only a word and explains nothing. You see therefore the urgent necessity of an adequate explanation of such a change of scene. For this we must have a dynamic hypothesis. Such commutations are only conceivable as dynamic or energy processes. I cannot conceive how manifestations of functions can disappear if I do not accept a change in the relation of one force to another. Freud's theory did have regard to this necessity in the conception of components. The presumption of isolated functions existing side by side began to be somewhat weakened more in practice than theoretically. It was replaced by an energy conception. The term chosen for this conception is libido. End of Chapter 2 Chapter 3 of the Theory of Psychoanalysis by Carl Gustav Jung. This librivox recording is in the public domain. Chapter 3 The Conception of Libido Freud had already introduced the idea of libido in his three contributions to the sexual theory in the following words. In biology the fact that both mankind and animals have a sexual want is expressed by the conception of the sexual desire. This is done by analogy with the want of nourishment so-called hunger. Popular speech has no corresponding characterization for the word hunger and so science uses the word libido. In Freud's definition the term libido appears as exclusively a sexual desire. Libido as a medical term is certainly used for sexual desire and especially for sexual lust. But the classical definition of this word as found in Cicero, Salus and others was not so exclusive. The word is there used in a more general sense for every passionate desire. I only just mentioned this definition here as further on it plays an important part in our considerations and as it is important to know that the term libido has really a much wider meaning than is associated with it through medical language. The idea of libido while maintaining its sexual meaning in the author's sense as long as possible offers us the dynamic value which we are seeking in order to explain the shifting of the psychological scenery. With this conception it is much simpler to formulate the phenomena in question instead of by the incomprehensible substitution of the homo by the heterosexual component. We may say now that the libido has gradually withdrawn from its homosexual manifestation and is transferred in the same measure into a heterosexual manifestation. Thus the homosexual component practically disappears. It remains only an empty possibility signifying nothing in itself. Its very existence therefore is rightly denied by the laity just as we doubt the possibility selected at random which turned out to be a murderer. By the use of this conception of libido many relations between the isolated sexual functions are now easily explicable. The early idea of the multiplicity of sexual components must be given up. It savers too much of the ancient philosophical notion of the faculties of the mind. Its place is taken by libido which is capable of manifold applications. Earlier components only represent possibilities of activities. With this conception of libido the original idea of a divided sexuality with different roots is replaced by a dynamic unity without which the formerly important components remain but empty possibilities of activities. This development in our conception is of great importance. We have here the same process which Robert Mayer introduced into dynamics just as the conception of the libido theory removed their character as elements from the forces imparting to them the character of a manifestation of energy so the libido theory similarly removes from the sexual components the idea of the mental faculties as elements. Selene Dermergen and describes to them merely phenomenal value. This conception represents the impression of reality far more than the theory of components. The disappointment he met with just at the time he had definitely decided on a heterosexual life drove his libido again from the heterosexual manifestation into a homosexual form thus calling forth his entire homosexuality. The energy theory of libido I must point out here that the analogy with the law of the conservation of energy is very close. In both cases the question arises when an effect of energy disappears where is this energy meanwhile and where will it reemerge? Applying this point of view as a heuristic principle to the psychology of human conduct we shall make some astonishing discoveries. Then we shall see how the most heterogeneous phases of individual psychological development are connected in an energetic relationship. Every time we see a person who is splenetic or has a morbid conviction or some exaggerated mental attitude we know here is too much libido and the excess must have been taken away from somewhere else where there is too little. From this standpoint psychoanalysis is that method which discovers those places or functions where there is too little or too much libido and restores the just proportions. Thus the symptoms of a neurosis must be considered as exaggerated and correspondingly disturbed functional manifestations overflowing with libido. The energy which has been used for this purpose has been taken away from somewhere else and it is the task of the psychoanalyst to restore it once it was taken or to bestow it where it was never before given. Those complexes of symptoms which are mainly characterized by lack of libido for instance the so-called apathetic conditions force us to reverse the question here we have to ask where did the libido go? The patient gives us the impression of having no libido and there are occasionally physicians who believe exactly what the patients tell them. Such physicians have a primitive way of thinking like the savage who believes when he sees an eclipse of the sun that the sun has been swallowed up and put to death but the sun is only hidden and so it is with these patients although the libido is there it is not get-outable and is inaccessible to the patient himself superficially we have here a lack of libido. It is the task of psychoanalysis to work for that hidden place where the libido dwells and where it is as a rule inaccessible to the patient. The hidden place is the non-conscious which may also be called the unconscious without ascribing to it any mysterious significance the conception of unconscious fantasy. Psychoanalytic experience has taught us that there are non-conscious systems which by analogy with conscious fantasies can be described as fantasy systems of the unconscious in cases of neurotic apathy these fantasy systems of the unconscious are the objects of the libido we know well that when we speak of unconscious fantasy systems we only speak figuratively we do not mean more by this than that we accept as an indispensable postulate the conception of psychic entities existing outside consciousness experience teaches us we might say daily that there are unconscious psychic processes which influence the disposition of the libido in a perceptible way those cases known to every psychiatrist in which complicated systems of delusions emerge with relative great suddenness show clearly that there must be unconscious psychic development and preparation for we cannot regard them as having been just suddenly formed when they entered consciousness the sexual terminology I feel myself justified in making this digression concerning the unconscious I've done it to point out that with regard to shifting of the manifestations of the libido we have to deal not only with the conscious but also with another factor the unconscious whether the libido sometimes disappears we have not yet followed up the discussion of the further consequences which result from the adoption of the libido theory Freud has taught us and we see it in the daily practice of psychoanalysis that in earlier childhood instead of the normal later sexuality we find many tendencies which in later life are called perversions we have to admit that Freud has the right to give to these tendencies a sexual terminology through the introduction of the conception of the libido we see that in adults those elementary components which seem to be the origin and the source of normal sexuality lose their importance and are reduced to mere potentialities the effective power their life force is to be found in the libido without libido these components mean nothing we saw that Freud gives to the conception of libido an undoubted sexual definition somewhat in the sense of sexual desire the general view is that libido in this sense only comes into being at the age of puberty how are we then to explain the fact that in Freud's view a child has a polymorphic perverse sexuality and that therefore in children the libido brings into action not only one but several possibilities if the libido in Freud's sense begins its existence at puberty it could not be held accountable for earlier infantile perversions in that case we should have to regard these infantile perversions as faculties of the mind in the sense of the theory of components apart from the hopeless theoretical confusion which would thus arise we must not multiply explanatory principles in accordance with the philosophical axiom prancipia pritur ne casetatum known sunt multiplacanda there is no other way but to agree that before and after puberty it is the same libido hence the perversities of childhood have arisen exactly in the same way as those of adults common sense will object to this as obviously the sexual needs of children cannot possibly be the same as those of adults we might admit with Freud that the libido before and after puberty is the same but is different in its intensity instead of the intense post-puberty sexual desire there would be first a slight sexual desire in childhood with diminishing intensity until as we reach back to the first year it is but a trace we might admit that we are biologically in agreement with this formulation it would then have to be also agreed that everything that falls into the region of this enlarged conception of sexuality is already pre-existing but in miniature for instance all those emotional manifestations of psychosexuality desire for affection, jealousy for others and by no means least the neuroses of childhood it must however be admitted that these emotional manifestations of childhood by no means make the impression of being in miniature their intensity can rival of an effect among adults no must it be forgotten that experience has shown that perverse manifestations of sexuality and childhood are often more glaring and indeed seem to have a greater development than in adult if an adult under similar conditions had this apparently excessive form of sexual sexuality which is practically normal in children we could rightly expect the total absence of normal sexuality and of many other important biological adaptations an adult is rightly called perverse when his libido is not used for normal functions and the same could be said of a child it is polymorphous perverse since it does not know normal sexual functions these considerations suggest the idea that perhaps the amount of libido is always the same and that no increase first occur at puberty this somewhat audacious conception accords with the example of the law of the conservation of energy according to which the quantity of energy remains always the same it is possible that the summit of maturity is reached when the infantile diffuse applications of libido discharge themselves into the one channel of definite sexuality and thus lose themselves therein for the moment we must content ourselves or we must next pay attention to one point of criticism concerning the quality of the infantile libido many critics do not admit that the infantile libido is simply less intense or is essentially of the same kind as the libido of adults the emotions among adults are correlated with the genital functions this is not the case in children or it is only so in miniature or exceptionally and this gives rise to an important distinction which must not be undervalued I believe such an objection is justified there is really a considerable difference between immature and fully developed functions as there is a difference between play and reality between shooting with blank and with loaded cartridges that the childish libido has the harmlessness demanded by common sense cannot be contested but of course none can deny that blank shooting is shooting we must get accustomed to the idea that sexuality really exists even before puberty right back in early childhood and that we have no right to pretend that manifestations of this immature sexuality are not sexual this does not indeed refute the objection which while recognizing the existence of infantile sexuality in the form already described yet denies Freud's claim to regard as sexual early infantile manifestations such as sucking we have mentioned already the motives which induce Freud to enlarge the sexual terminology in such a way we mentioned to have this very active sucking for instance could be conceived from the standpoint of pleasure in the function of nutrition and that on biological grounds there was more justification for this derivation than for Freud's view it might be objective that these and similar activities of the oral zones are found in later life in an undoubted sexual use this only means that these activities can in later life be used for sexual purposes but that does not tell us anything concerning the primitive sexual nature of these forms I must therefore admit that I find no ground for regarding the activities of the suckling which provoke pleasure and satisfaction from the standpoint of sexuality indeed there are many objections against this conception it seems to me insofar as I am capable of judging these difficult problems that from the standpoint of sexuality it is necessary to divide human life into three phases the three phases of life the first phase embraces the first few years of life I call this part of life the pre-sexual stage these years correspond to the caterpillar stage of butterflies and are characterized almost exclusively by the functions of nutrition and growth the second phase embraces the later years of childhood up to puberty and might be called the pre-puberty stage the third phase is that of ripary years proceeding only from puberty onwards and could be called the time of maturity you cannot have failed to notice that we become conscious of the greatest difficulty when we arrive at the question of what age we must put the limit of the pre-sexual stage I'm ready to confess my uncertainty with regard to this problem if I survey the psychoanalytical experiences with children as yet insufficiently numerous at the same time keeping in mind the observations made by Freud it seems to me that the limit of this phase lies between the third and fifth years this of course with due consideration for the greatest individual diversities from various aspects this is an important age the child has emancipated itself already from the helplessness of the baby in a series of important psychological functions have acquired a firm hold from this period on the obscurity of the early infantile amnesia or the discontinuity of the early infantile consciousness begins to clear up through the sporadic continuity of memory it seems as if at this stage a considerable step have been made towards emancipation and the formation of a new and independent personality as far as we know the first signs of interest and activity which may fairly be called sexual fault into this period although these sexual indications have still the infantile characteristics of harmlessness and not yieftay I think I have sufficiently demonstrated why a sexual terminology cannot be given to the pre-sexual stage and so we may now consider the other problems from the standpoint that we have just reached you will remember that we dropped the problem of the libido in childhood because it seemed impossible to arrive at any clearness in that way but now we are obliged to take up the question again if only to see whether the energy conception harmonizes with the principles just advanced we saw following Freud's conception that the altered manifestations of the infantile sexuality if compared with those of maturity are to be explained by the diminution of sexuality in childhood the sexual definition of libido must be abandoned the intensity of the libido is said to be diminished relatively to the early age but we advanced just now several considerations to show why it seems doubtful if we can regard the vital functions of a child sexuality accepted as of less intensity than those of adults we can really say that sexuality accepted the emotional phenomena and if nervous symptoms are present then these likewise are quite as intense as those of adults on the energy conception of the libido all these things are about manifestations of the libido but it becomes rather difficult to conceive that the intensity of the libido can ever constitute the difference between a mature and an immature sexuality the explanation of this difference seems rather to postulate a change in the localization of the libido if the expression be allowed in contra distinction to the medical definition is occupied for more with certain side functions of a mental and physiological nature than with local sexual functions one is he already attempted to remove from the term libido the predicate sexualis and thus to have done with the sexual definition of the term given in Freud's three contributions this necessity becomes imperative when we put it in the form of a question the child in the first years of his life living suffering and enjoying the question is whether he is striving his suffering his enjoyment are about reason of his libido sexualis Freud has pronounced himself in favor of this supposition there is no need to repeat the reasons through which I am compelled to accept the presexual stage the larva stage possesses a libido of nutrition if I may so express it but not yet the libido sexualis it is thus we must put it if we wish to keep the energy libido theory offers us I think there is nothing for it but to abandon the sexual definition of libido or we shall lose what there is valuable in the libido theory that is the energy conception for a long time past the desire to extend the meaning of libido and to remove it from its narrow and sexual limitations has forced itself upon Freud's school one was never weary of insisting that sexuality in the psychological sense was not to be taken to literally but in a broader connotation but exactly how that remained obscure and thus to sincere criticism remained unsatisfied I do not think I am going astray if I see the real value of the libido theory in the energy conception and not in its sexual definition thanks to the former we are in possession of a most valuable heuristic principle we owe to the energy conception the possibility of dynamic ideas and relationships which are of inestimable for us and the chaos of the psychic world the Freudians would be wrong not to listen to the voice of criticism which reproaches our conception of libido with mysticism and inaccessibility we deceived ourselves in believing that we could ever make the libido sexualis the bearer of the energy conception of the psychical life and if many of Freud's school still believe they possess a will to find an almost complete conception of libido that this conception has been put to use far beyond the bounds of its sexual definition the critics are right when they object to our theory of libido as explaining things which cannot belong to its sphere it must be admitted that Freud school makes use of a conception of libido which passes beyond the bounds of its primary definition indeed this must produce the impression that one is working with a mystical principle the problem of libido and dementia precox I have sought to show these infringements in the initial work of Van Lungen und symbol of libido and at the same time the necessity for creating a new conception of libido which shall be in harmony with the energy conception Freud himself was forced to a discussion of his original conception of libido when he tried to apply its energy point of view to a well-known case of dementia precox the so-called Schreber case in this case we had to deal among other things with that well-known problem of libido precox the loss of adaptation to reality the piguia phenomenon consisting in a special tendency of these patients to construct an inner world of fantasy of their own surrendering for this purpose their adaptation to reality as a part of the phenomenon the lack of sociability or emotional rapport will be well known to you all this representing a striking disturbance of the function of reality through considerable psychological study of these patients we discovered that this lack of imagination to reality is compensated by a progressive increase in the creation of fantasies this goes so far that the dream world is for the patient more real than external reality the patient Schreber described by Freud found for this phenomenon an excellent figurative description in his delusion of the end of the world his loss of reality is thus very concretely represented the dynamic conception of this phenomenon is very clear we say that the libido withdrew itself more and more from the external world consequently entered the inner world the world of fantasies and had there to create as a compensation for the lost external world a so-called equivalent of reality this compensation is built up piece by piece and it is most interesting to observe the psychological materials of which this inner world is composed this way of conceiving the transposition and displacement of the libido has been made by the everyday use of the term its original pure sexual meaning being very rarely recalled in general the word libido is used practically in so harmless a sense that Clappareta in a conversation once remarked that we could as well use the word interest the manner in which this expression is generally used has given rise to a way of using the term that made it possible to explain Schreber's end of the world by withdrawal of the libido on this occasion Freud recalled his original sexual definition of the libido and tried to arrive at the change which in the meantime had taken place in his article in Schreber he discusses the question whether what the psychoanalytic school calls libido and conceives of as interest from erotic sources coincides with interest generally speaking you see that putting the problem in this way Freud asked the question which Clappareta practically answered Freud discusses the question here whether the loss of reality noticed in dementia precox to which I drew attention in my book the psychology of dementia precox is due entirely to the withdrawal of erotic interest or if this coincides with the so-called objective interest in general we can hardly agree that the normal function due real is only maintained through erotic interest the fact is that in many cases reality vanishes altogether not a trace of psychological adaptation can be found in these cases reality is repressed and replaced by fantasies created through complexes we are forced to say that not only the erotic interest but interest in general that is the whole adaptation to reality are lost I formally tried in my psychology of dementia precox to get out of this difficulty by using the expression psychic energy because I could not base the theory of dementia precox on the theory of transference of the libido in its sexual definition my experience at that time chiefly psychiatric did not permit me to understand this theory only later did I learn to understand the correctness of the theory as regards the neuroses by increased experience in hysteria and the compulsion neurosis as a matter of fact an abnormal displacement of libido quite definitely sexual does play a great part in the neuroses but although very characteristic repressions of sexual libido do take place in certain neuroses that loss of reality so typical for dementia precox never occurs in dementia precox so extreme is the loss of the function of reality that this loss must also entail a loss of motive power to which any sexual nature must be absolutely denied for it will not seem to anyone that reality is a sexual function if this were so the withdrawal of erotic interest in the neuroses would lead to a loss of reality a loss of reality indeed that could be compared with that in dementia precox but as I've said before this is not the case these facts have made it impossible for me to transfer Freud's libido theory to dementia precox hence my view is that the attempt made by Abraham in his article the psychosexual differences between hysteria and dementia precox is from the standpoint of Freud's conception of libido theoretically untenable Abraham's belief that the paranoidal system or the centimotology of dementia precox arises by the libido withdrawing from the external world cannot be justified if we take libido according to the definition for as Freud has clearly shown a mere introversion or regression of the libido leads always to a neurosis and not to dementia precox it is impossible to transfer the libido theory with its sexual definition directly to dementia precox as this disease shows a loss of reality not to be explained by the deficiency in erotic interest it gives me particular satisfaction that our master also when he placed his hand on the fragile material his psychic psychology felt himself compelled to doubt the applicability of his conception of libido which I prevailed hitherto my position of reserve towards the ubiquity of sexuality which I allowed myself to adopt in the preface to my psychology of dementia precox although with a complete recognition of the psychological mechanism was dictated by the conception of the libido theory at that time its sexual definition did not enable me to explain those disturbances of functions which affect the indefinite sphere of the instinct of hunger just as much as they do those of sexuality for a long time the libido theory seemed to me in an applicable to dementia precox the genetic conception of libido with greater experience in my analytical work I noticed that a slow change of my conception of libido had taken place a genetic conception of libido gradually took the place of the descriptive definition of libido contained in Freud's three contributions thus it became possible for me to replace by the expression psychic energy the term libido the next step was that I asked myself if nowadays the function of reality consists only to a very small extent of sexual libido and to a very large extent of other impulses it is still a very important question considered from this phylogenetic standpoint whether the function of reality is not at least very largely of sexual origin it is impossible to answer this question directly in so far as the function of reality is concerned we shall try to come to some understanding by a side path a superficial glance at the history of evolution suffices to teach us that innumerable complicated functions whose sexual character must be denied are originally nothing but derivations from the instinct of propagation as is well known there has been an important displacement in the fundamentals of propagation during the ascent through the animal scale has been reduced in number and the primitive uncertainty of impregnation has been replaced by quite assured impregnation and a more effective protection of offspring the energy required for the production of eggs and sparma has been transferred into the creation of mechanisms of attraction and mechanisms for the protection of offspring here we find the first instincts of art inanimals used for the instinct of propagation and limited to the rutting season the original sexual character of these biological institutions became lost with their organic fixation and their functional independence nonetheless there can be no doubt as to their sexual origin as for instance there is no doubt about the original relation between sexuality and music but it would be a generalization as feudal as unesthetic to include music under the category of sexuality such a terminology would lead to the consideration of the cathedral of cologne under mineralogy the stones those quite ignorant of the problems of evolution are much astonished to find how few things there are in human life which cannot finally be reduced to the instinct of propagation it embraces nearly everything I think that is dear and precious to us we have hitherto spoken of the libido as of the instinct of reproduction or the instinct of the preservation of the species and limited our conception to that libido which is opposed to hunger just as the instinct of the preservation of the species as opposed to that of preservation of course in nature this artificial distinction does not exist here we find only a continuous instinct of life or will to live which tries to obtain the propagation of a whole race by the preservation of the individual to this extent this conception coincides with that of Schopenhauer's will as objectively we can only conceive a movement as a manifestation of an internal desire as we have already boldly concluded that the libido which originally subserved the creation of eggs and seed is recognized in the function of nest building and can no longer be employed otherwise we are similarly obliged to include in this conception every desire, hunger, or no less we have no warrant for differentiating essentially the desire to build nests from the desire to eat I think you will already understand the position we have reached with these considerations we were about to follow up the energy conception by putting the energy mode of action in place of the purely formal functioning just as reciprocal actions well known natural science have been replaced by the law of the conservation of energy so here too in the sphere of psychology we seek to replace the reciprocal activities of coordinated psychical faculties by energy conceived as one and homogeneous thus we must bow to the criticism which reproaches the psychoanalytic school for working with a mystical conception of libido I have to dispel the solution that the whole psychoanalytic school possesses a clearly conceived and obvious conception of libido I maintain that the conception of libido with which we are working is not only not concrete or known but is an unknown X, a conceptual image a token and no more real than the energy and the conceptual world of the physicist in this wise only can we escape those arbitrary transgressions of the proper boundaries which are always made when we want to reduce coordinated forces to one another certain analogies of the action of heat with the action of light are not to be explained but this tertium comparationis proves that the undulations of heat are the same as the undulations of light the conceptual image of energy is the real point of comparison if we regard libido in this way we endeavor to simulate the progress which has already been made in physics the economy of thought which physics has already obtained we strive after in our libido theory we conceive libido now simply as energy so that we are in the position to figure out the possible processes as forms of energy thus we replace the old reciprocal action by relations of absolute equivalence we shall not be astonished if we are met with the cry of vitalism but we are as far removed from any belief in our specific vital power as from any other metaphysical assertion we term libido that energy which manifests itself by vital processes which is subjectively perceived as aspiration longing we see in the diversity of natural phenomena the desire of libido in the most diverse applications and forms in early childhood we find libido at first wholly in the form of the instinct of nutrition providing for the development of the body as the body develops there open up successively new spheres of influence for the libido the last and from its functional significance most overpowering sphere of influences sexuality which at first seems very closely connected with the evolution of nutrition with that you may compare the well-known influence on propagation of the conditions of nutrition in the lower animals and plants in the sphere of sexuality libido does take that form whose enormous importance justifies us in the choice of the term libido in its strict sexual sense here for the first time libido appears in the form of an undifferentiated sexual primitive power as an energy of growth clearly forcing the individual towards division budding etc the separation of the two forms of libido is found among those animals where the stage of nutrition is separated by the pupa stage from the stage of sexuality out of this sexual primitive power through which one small creature produces millions of eggs and sperm derivatives have been developed by extraordinary restriction of fecundity the functions of which are maintained by a special differentiated libido this differentiated libido is henceforth de sexualized for it is dissociated from its original reproduction producing eggs and sperm nor is there any possibility of restoring it to its original function the whole process of development consists in the increasing absorption of the libido which only created originally products of generation in the secondary functions of attraction and protection of offspring this development presupposes a quite different and much more complicated relationship to reality a true function of reality which is functionally inseparable from the needs of reproduction involves a correspondingly increased adaptation to reality this of course does not imply that the function of reality is exclusively due to differentiation and reproduction I'm aware that a large part of the instinct of nutrition is connected with it thus we arrive at an insight into certain primitive conditions of the function of reality it would be fundamentally wrong to pretend that the compelling source is still a sexual one it was largely a sexual one originally the process of absorption of the primitive libido into secondary functions certainly always took place in the form of so-called affluxes of sexual libido libidinosa sazusa that is to say sexuality was diverted from its original destination a definite quantity was used up in the mechanisms of mutual attraction and of protection of offspring this transference of sexual libido from the sexual sphere to associated functions is still taking place for example modern neo-malthusianism is the artificial continuation of the natural tendency we call this process sublimation when this operation occurs without injury to the adaptation of the individual we call it repression when the attempt fails from the descriptive standpoint psychoanalysis accepts the multiplicity of instincts and among them the instinct of sexuality is a special phenomenon moreover it recognizes certain affluxes of the libido to a sexual instincts from the genetic standpoint it is otherwise it regards the multiplicity of instincts as issuing out of relative unity the primitive libido it recognizes that definite quantities of that primitive libido are split off associated with the recently created functions and finally merged in them from this standpoint we can say without any difficulty that patients with dementia precox withdraw their libido from the external world and in consequence suffer a loss of reality which is compensated by an increase of the fantasy building activities we must now fit the new conception of libido into that theory of sexuality and childhood which is of such great importance in the theory of neurosis generally speaking we first find the libido as the energy of vital activities acting in the zone of the function of nutrition through the rhythmical movements and the active sucking nourishment is taking with all signs of satisfaction as the individual grows and his organs develop the libido creates new ways of desire new activities and satisfactions now the original model rhythmic activity creating pleasure and satisfaction must be transferred to other functions which have their final goal in sexuality this transition is not made suddenly at puberty but it takes place gradually throughout the course of the greater part of childhood the libido can only very slowly with great difficulty detach itself from the characteristics of the function of nutrition in order to pass over into the characteristics of sexual function as far as I can see we have two epics during this transition the epic of sucking and the epic of the displace rhythmic activity considered solely from the point of view of its mode of action sucking clings entirely to the domain of the function of nutrition but it presents also a far wider aspect it is no mere function of nutrition it is a rhythmical activity with its goal in a pleasure and satisfaction of its own distinct from the obtaining of nourishment the hand comes into play as an accessory organ in the epic of the displace rhythmical activity it stands out still more as an accessory organ when the oral zone ceases to give pleasure which must now be obtained in other directions the possibilities are many as a rule the other openings of the body become the first objects of interest of the libido then follow the skin in general in certain places of predilection upon it the actions carried out at these places generally take the form of rubbing, piercing, tugging, etc accompanying by a certain rhythm and serve to produce pleasure after a halt of greater or less duration at these stations the libido proceeds until it arrives at the sexual zone where it may next provoke the first onynistic attempts during its march the libido carries over not a little from the function of nutrition into the sexual zone this readily explains the numerous close associations between the function of nutrition and the sexual function this march of the libido takes place at the time of the pre-sexual stage which is characterized by the fact that the libido gradually relinquishes the special character of the instinct of nutrition and by degrees requires the character of the sexual instinct at this stage we cannot yet speak of a true sexual libido therefore we are obliged to qualify the polymorphous perverse sexuality of early infancy differently the polymorphism of the tendencies of the libido at this time is to be explained as the gradual movement of the libido away from the sphere of the function of nutrition towards the sexual function the infantile perversity thus rightly vanishes the term perverse so strongly contested by our opponents for it provokes a false idea when a chemical body breaks up into its elements these elements are the products of its disintegration but it is not permissible on that account to describe elements as entirely products of disintegration perversities are disorders of fully developed sexuality but are never precursors of sexuality although there is undoubtedly an analogy between the precursors and the products of disintegration the childish rudiments no longer to be conceived as perverse but to be regarded as stages of development change gradually into normal sexuality as the normal sexuality develops the more smoothly the libido withdraws from its provisional positions the more completely and the more quickly does the formation of normal sexuality take place it is proper to the conception of normal sexuality that all those early infantile inclinations which are not yet sexual should be given up the less this is the case the more is sexuality threatened with perverse development the expression perverse is here used in its right place the fundamental condition of a perversity is an infantile imperfectly developed state of sexuality End of Chapter 3