You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The contention of Jung and his followers that they have arrived at their new views through the use of the same method as that employed by Freud has misled many into speaking of Jung's school of Psycho-Analysis. The most recent work of Jung (14) brings with it a justification of the suspicion to which Jones had given expression in the Jahrbuch that "the practice of the strict rules of psycho-analytic technique has been as half-hearted as has been the acceptance of psycho-analytic theory and that in the future the abandonment of the former will follow the renunciation of the latter". This is now admitted by Jung, who uses an example of a dream analysis to explain his use of a new method. Unfortunately his "interpretation" has very little resemblance to what we are accustomed to regard as such, so that the great difference between his technique and that of Freud is not sufficiently apparent. As Maeder (17) has in the meantime also adopted a new "psychology", it would seem that we are justified in raising an energetic protest against the use of the expression: — Jung's school of Psycho-Analysis.
For Freud and his pupils there has — with one exception — been no occasion to depart from the fundamental rule of Psycho-Analytic procedure and from the technique resulting therefrom, since this procedure continues to prove the only fruitful method of penetrating into the depths of the Unconscious. Horney (18) has devoted a very useful review to this subject, in the course of which she also discusses the usual forms of Resistance and Transference. It is of course only to be expected that Freud's Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis (11) should in more than one connection emphasize the great significance of this fundamental rule. Thus we find that