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.
Differences in the outlooks of Freud and Jung extend to various philosophical and ethical concerns. They include several issues important to understanding human nature. The two men's personal lives and backgrounds also differ in ways that parallel their theoretical contrasts. In some areas it may be the case that their lives and backgrounds affected the generation of theoretical constructs. (Such a causal relationship has been hypothesised and documented for personality theories in general (ERIKSON 8; STOLOROW and ATWOOD 51).) In other areas it may be that their theories influenced their personal lives. This can occur in two ways. First, the forces posited in a theory, if they arc true, are just as relevant to, and influential in, shaping the theorist's life as they are for any other individual. Additionally, once certain principles are considered and set forth in a theory, be they true or not, the theorist may purposely or otherwise take on behaviour and beliefs which are consistent with those principles. Besides life affecting theory and vice versa, it may be difficult at times to dichotomise life and theory in so neat a way. For example, the self-analyses of Freud and Jung represent a blending of life and theory. Thus, all that will be attempted in this paper is to show that the two factors are intertwined for both Freud and Jung, and that contrasts between the two men emerge when examining both factors.
Only infrequently is an attempt made here to delve deeply into the inner psyche of the theorists to find a connection between personal life and theory. Others have attempted such an analysis (e.g. STOLOROW and ATWOOD 51). This paper focuses on more overt aspects of life and theory for which just as importantly, and perhaps less questionably, a connection between life and theory exists. An attempt is made to cover the men's lives and theories separately, but as stated above, such a dichotomisation may at times seem arbitrary. An early and brief section of the paper