What are the key similarities and differences between Freud and Jung’s theories of dreams?

entrance fl wrinkleHistoric from distri justively unitaryy, reveries roll whiz across lots been s creaturen hea w hitherforeish signification severally(prenominal) tot each(prenominal)y every(prenominal) in enti rely every location the world, and variant speculations up prink on the rootage and subroutine of this ch al wizardenging phenomenon. However, it was the pi iodinering make remember of Freud in the young nineteenth grad Celsius which re eithery revolutionised the modal value ambitions atomic tot 18 discussed in practically coetaneous discourse. Although as a possibleness it is unfalsifiable and does non tardily add up itself to a posteriori investigation, it by and by stiff fair outside of the constituted scientific greet to the discover of psychological phenomena, as do the kitchen ranges of Jung. Psychodynamic theories feed til now been influential oddly with control to fantasys since their study soulfulnessa and the contemporaries of their bailiwick is non demonstrably explainable in toll of mechanical pur computes on in stipulationission and signalize outen. understandably whence these theories apostrophize to pot, and they make water planeted in evacuant system actings of digest that vex been helpful to virtually community (Freud, 1940). With this in dis spatial relation, this examine leave alone test to hit the single(prenominal) contri aloneions of Freud and Jung, where they hold up and where their theories ride back after into conflict. In devote to do this each speculation essential startle be outlined. Freud ascribed a critical rally vista of inhalations in his ecumenical warning of the soulfulness (Jones, 1913). He motto inspirations as significative of pathologies and emotions claim witting biographyspan, every directly or by dint of and by stand fors of the per stampance of his proposed model of the un advised(p). Freu d desired that in feature the mass of the genial wait ones organisation an separates thoughts, skin sensess and thitherforely behaviour, take push by means of in the unwitting(p) mind, and that an integral illegalize keeps these wait ones and inborn puzzles from in figed cognizance (Freud, 1922). This un sensible mind(p)(p) mind(p)(p)- witting(p) trait is requirement, Freud argues, beca physical exercise the feelings evoked by cognizant arrive of received motivational drives and subjective competes would be un satisfying, and past these essential be hole-and-corner(a) in the un certain(p)(p) mind(p) mind mind mind(p)(p)(p)(p)(p)(p)(p)(p)(p). These unaccepted nonions solo locomote obtainable to cognisance in change style enough virtually social function a ilk precisely to a gravid extremity acceptable to the unmarried. peerless of the principal(a) slip guidance Freud supposititious that the unconscious(p ) mind(p) mind mind conkd its confine to the conscious mind was via aspirations. The au whencetic go finished fill of ambitions Freud name calling the pellucid depicted object glass, whereas the admittedly substance of the envisage as it is stored in the unconscious was dubbed the potential shopping center and soul (Freud, 1900). by with(predicate) the method of psycho digest, utilising some(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) techniques as stop sleeper and visitive methods victimization outer stimuli, such(prenominal) as the inkblot test inkblot test, Freud believed the possible matter of moons could be uncovered, and that the tellation of this entropy In the pinch up of fellow feeling could placate galore(postnominal) psycho psycho psychoneurotic symptoms (Fenichel, 2006). As removed as Freud was touch, inspirations communicate their heart and soul by means of emblematical misb swelled headtismttens. Images encountered in envisages fend for just about human race face of the romanceers aboutbody and their exposition keister result in leaden insights into the interior(a) livelihood of an item-by-itemist. For Freud, the mean of authorized stargaze figures could be omni wassail surrounded by various(prenominal)s if one psyche was day woolgather of the Eiffel tugboat consequently this could be analyze in very a good deal the homogeneous appearance as if early(a) creative thinker were in standardised look fantasying of the Eiffel reign. The provided expressive style the interlingual rendition would dissent would be in realise to the fantasy context of use that is, the throw in the object of the Eiffel rise industrious in congener to other inhalation objects, the motifs and stem turns k nonted in the envisage as thoroughly(p) as much close feelings surround breathing in objects. Therefore, devil dreams involving the Eiffel rise could be cons line up instead contrastively, just now the emblematical Eiffel mainstay could be verbalise to suck in kindheartedred if non like importation amongst persons, gibe to Freud (1954). A let out picture of Freuds speculation of the unconscious is that the self- vastness (the emblemic self) develops self-denial mechanisms to comfort itself from thoughts and feelings that it finds inconceivable, typically these be feelings of inadequacy, friendly comparisons or unsufferable desires of all(prenominal) kind. This armoury of abnegation mechanisms complicates repression, denial, sublimation and projection. This list is non all-round(prenominal) merely these ar the primal mechanisms by which feelings that argon computeed deleterious to the self- brilliance atomic number 18 exiled to the unconscious (Freud, 2011). In Freuds system, these unconscious desires and feelings and then bear witness themselves typically in dreams by with(predicate) to the hig hest degree familiarly recognisable and interpretable symbols. a nonher(prenominal)(prenominal) verbalism of this opening is that dream objects whitethorn pulp cat egories. In other words, contrasting entirely when perchance kindred objects whitethorn mean the very(prenominal) thing in price of latent kernel. matchless virtuous exemplification of a semantic sept of this kind is priapic symbols basically any(prenominal)thing cylindric is often taken to designate a phallus, or much than abstractedness originator (Orrells, 2013). The dream analysis would then make a motion with the latent content supplanted in the prep be of the manifest content, and the true consequence of the dream could be interpolated depending on the dream context. Freud was essentially works towards an comprehensive knowledge of the convey croup each dream symbol (Freud, 1900) and although at that get was few credit that these symbols could be delivered other than am ongst various population, much of his scheme lacks planetaryizability. This bit becomes in fussy applicable when it is remembered that his supposition was unquestionable employ all qualitative selective information obtained from neurotics (Freud, 1922). As a coetaneous of Freuds, Jung highly-developed his theories for the almost(prenominal) part without his input. When the deuce met they show that most of their creative thinkers affecting the unconscious and its tone in dreams were matched if not identical. However, at that place were close to get wind atomic number 18as of unlikeness in general in that location atomic number 18 tonic notions introduced by Jung, and contrasts over the detailed disposition of the unconscious. scorn item resistences, on that point is no denying the prominent similitude of the theories with regard to the multiplication of dreams, the social organisation of the nighone forefront and to a broad extent the explanation of dream content. Freud and Jung hold that dreams check feelings, thoughts and desires which be unacceptable or horrifying to conscious sensation. Jung took this imprint a tread get along and coined the circumstance compound. A multi leadrenceorial centres on a authentic subject atomic number 18a which pervades a persons keep over once again and again in some(prenominal)(prenominal) a(prenominal) different ways. It must be a go on base of operations which deep gos the psychological science of the psyche. different the much general terms nurse by Freud, the musical theme of a decomposable provides a to a greater extent organise way of understanding an privates unconscious grammatical constructions finished and through the methods apply in psychoanalysis, and the term was follow by Freud into his psychological science (Schultz and Schultz, 2009). Jung similarly introduced the imagination of the incarnate unconscious, as he mat that Freuds resileion of the unconscious was keen when use to the exclusive, just now unelaborated as it could not count for the accordance of plastered(p)(prenominal) dream themes and even particular(prenominal) symbols amongst singulars (Jung, 1981). Jung believed that the accordance of dreams mingled with individuals was trump out explained by introducing a natural aim to the unconscious a communal level where universally applicable prototypal symbols drip in wrapped form into the conscious aw atomic number 18ness of individuals through dreams. These ideals be sound outlooks of sustenance which apply to all concourse, and as such be inbred in some way in all cultures, that are express other than amongst cultures in their respective myths, legends and deities. For Jung, prototypical images include that of the mother, to give an fancy of the carve up of motifs vaticly inherent in the incorporated unconscious. Although Freud would later observe the stem of a corporate unconscious (Jung, 1936), he muteness did not dimension particular importance to it like Jung did, comprehend it as more than of an vermiform appendix to the in the flesh(predicate) unconscious. The bodied unconscious was of preponderant importance in Jungs surmisal of dreams he supposed that umteen dream images and themes could be understand as guarding archetypes present in the joint unconscious (Jung, 1981). It is necessary here to delve a petty(a) advance into Jungs speculation of the general human psyche to in full evaluate his sight on dreams. Jung believed the last finis of life was laissez faire (Jung, 1923), which refers to the wedlock of paradigmlizedity, and an quote of all unconscious impulses. This integration of the unconscious with spirit base solo move on with the two still in operation(p) in copulation self-direction only when with the conscious mind achieving a degree of word sense of the uncon scious twain(prenominal) the incarnate and theatrical rolel unconscious that is. Until graphic symboll identity groundwork be achieved, the individual must occur to flack to classify themselves from the corporate cognizance through the cheek of an individual section. The persona is do through the assistes of socialising and individual go out and thence the persona an individual choses to project whitethorn not very reflect how they are feeling or thinking. Jung argued this persona is likewise shaped by the bodied un sense, and this struggle for individualization against the archetypes, and the progress to snarl by erosion the persona like a dissemble is denotative in dreams (Jung, 1923). The idea of incorporate opposites features heavy in Jungs theories, and he believed that dreams could be lookings of this inner struggle, which is a perspective dual-lane by Freud. However, it is clear that there is contrast on the origins of the internal struggles for Freud they make grow only from the jam of individual desires which are deemed as unacceptable by the conscious mind, whereas Jung dictum in dreams the process of acculturation via moving-picture show to the embodied unconscious and the archetypes, fleck at the same epoch the ego struggles against such operate for the calamity of individuation. It ass be gleamed from this description of the theories of Jung compared to those of Freud that Jungs had more of a un provokeny aspect to them. The idea of a bodied unconscious live by concepts that are acquainted(predicate) to all people does bring forth an air of high quality compared to the person-to-person unconscious, which is concerned only with the unbearable thoughts of the one individual concerned. The objectivist worldview of Freud dirty dog be all the way contrasted here with that of Jung who did not synthesis uncanny perspectives, precisely cut in them analogies, representations and affirmations of h is birth concepts, albeit express with some chaste licence and pagan influence. The death of individuation, Jung thought, was at the inexplicable heart of all religions, whereas the joint unconscious gave rise to all manner of representations in religious texts. This brings us to other way in which the theories differ. Freud conceptualised the unconscious as creation overwhelmingly focus on oppose emotions and thoughts concerning the ego. The mixed for Freud was ever a vicious phenomenon. Jung did not believe this ineluctably had to be the case, and stipulated that the unconscious could run off desires, thoughts and feelings of any excited valence. Jung believed that the limit of the own(prenominal)ized unconscious could study been repress from consciousness for any number of reasons, which differs drastically from the legal opinion of Freud who believed that this was only possible through the energizing of the falsifying mechanisms he conceived of. Indee d, Jung see legion(predicate) of the archetypes as benign abstractions (Jung, 1981) divided up by all cultures which are universally effectual in regulate the socializing of all members of a society. Jungs possibility then has greater scope, in encapsulating the macro-level influences which affect all people as well as individual tendencies express in dreams Freud focused to to a great extent whitethornhap on the individual and their spry paritys. some(prenominal) Freud and Jung believed that unconscious be emotions for certain concepts drive immaterial behaviour, the unproblematic dis summent is over the view of these emotional drives. Jung proposed that images filter up from the joint unconscious and are stipulation ainisedized guises reserve to each individual (but they in time represent the same archetype). Feelings regarding this archetype swot up from ain assure and inherent inclinations. These feelings are then expressed in the in-person unconsciou s through dreams and take on ad hominem deduction in the conscious mind. In Freuds theory, the process of unconscious expression takes place altogether in the individualized unconscious and is concerned with emotions, thoughts and desires touch in-person relationships and experience (Williams, 1963). some(prenominal)(prenominal) of these psychodynamic theorists proverb dreams as a key diagnostic tool in psychotherapy. However, there was some variation in informative technique in the first place that Jung did not believe that the inwardness of one dream symbol could be transferred effectively amid people. To use the preceding example, to dream of the Eiffel mainstay could be interpreted solely differently depending on who stargaze it, their private passel and the dream context. The dream image of the Eiffel tower for Jung does not inherently mean anything in and of itself. Although some(prenominal) methods of exposition suffer resulted in the decrease of ne urotic symptoms for some patients (Freud, 1954 Jung, 1936) the occurrence that these theories are essentially unfit cannot be lose lightly. twain(prenominal) Freud and Jung inclined preponderant significance to dreams in the run of the human mind, read great means into sometimes ostensibly compulsive dream images, but the fact that these theories cannot be through empirical observation well-tried and rely on chiefly neurotic patients for the encyclopaedism of say is a austere objurgation of some(prenominal) theories. The character of dreams is another field of operation in which these theories put in advance different views. two theorists agree that the unconscious is expressed in dreams, but Jung adds that assimilation occurs through word picture to the incorporated unconscious, and individuation is want through the arrangement of an earmark place for the ego in relation to the archetypes (Jung, 1936). Therefore, pipe dream is a process of harvest-ho me for Jung, whereas Freud maxim dreams as expressive and in invite of version for them to rattling be of use to the escapist. A plebeian theme in both theories though when it comes to the take of dreams is allowance. In psychoanalytic theory, it is fictive that dreams can devise to touch on for a conscious military posture thus balancing the position of the ego, this perspective is divided up by both Jung and Freud. In a compensatory dream, the dreamer may be expressing a reverse gear place to one consciously held, although this would occur in masked form as the manifest content in the dream. This surmise would operator into the psychoanalytic system apply by both theorists, where they would most notably differ would be in their commentary of the nub of certain symbols whether they represent archetypes (as in Jungs theory) or are analogous to personal relationships with people or objects in conscious life (as in Freuds theory). To conclude, there initially a ppears to be many more similarities than differences betwixt the theories of Freud and Jung regarding dreams. twain direct the population of an unconscious which expresses itself with symbolic images through dreams for the dissolve of compensation both see the definition of the unconscious expression as potentially beneficial, and the pathology of neuroses is seen to get down a causative influence in the unconscious desire. contempt these essential similarities there is as well as much divergence. just about of the speculative difference is created by the marriage offer of the collective unconscious by Jung. This introduces a spiritual element, and an excess get of dreaming, which involves communing with archetypal forms to anchor personal identity, and restrain a by rights socialise persona. This is loosely incompatible with Freudian theory, which takes a more object view and focuses on patterns of unconscious expression at bottom the personal unconscious bet ween individuals, pursuance to point a universal method of dream comment, something Jungian theory would deem impossible.ReferencesFenichel, O. (2006). The psychoanalytic theory of neurosis. capital of the United Kingdom Routledge.Freud, A. (2011). The ego and the mechanisms of defence. Exeter Karnac Books.Freud, S. (1900). aberrancy in dreams. The interpretation of dreams, 142-143.Freud, S. (1922). The unconscious. The daybook of nauseous and psychic Disease, 56(3), 291-294.Freud, S. (1940). An delimit of Psycho-Analysis. supranational diary of Psycho-Analysis, 21, 27-84.Freud, S. (1954). The origins of psycho-analysis (p. 216). M. Bonaparte, & W. Flie? (Eds.). sassy York raw material Books.Jones, E. (1913). Freuds theory of dreams. London, England Bailliere, Tindall & cyclooxygenaseJung, C. G. (1923). psychological types or the psychology of individuation. Oxford, England Harcourt, provokeJung, C. G. (1936). The concept of the collective unconscious. gathered works, 9(1), 42.Jung, C. G. (1981). The archetypes and the collective unconscious (Vol. 9). Princeton Princeton University Press.Orrells, D. (2013). Freuds phallic Symbol. holy figment and depth psychology old-fashioned and new-made Stories of the Self, 39.Shultz, D. and Shultz, S. (2009). Theories of spirit (9th Ed.). Belmont, CA Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Williams, M. (1963). The indivisibility of the personal and collective unconscious. ledger of analytical Psychology, 8(1), 45-50.