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.
When Jung devised his theory of psychological types in , the distinction between neurotic reaction and personality disorder was not established. Only with the later recognition of long-standing patterns of adaptation, apart from immediately disabling symptoms, was the notion of personality disorders as a separate diagnostic category formulated. Nevertheless, Jung's typology in many ways is one of the early attempts to distinguish symptomatology from deep-seated structures which profoundly impact a person's long-term functioning (JUNG 4).
With the introduction of a new diagnostic manual by the American Psychiatric Association in , definitive steps were taken to treat personality structure as separate from distinct symptoms (AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION 1). For the first time, personality disorders were placed on a separate axis, Axis II, thereby permitting clinicians to distinguish between the two types of functioning. However, inside as well as outside the Jungian community, there have been no attempts to assess Jung's typology in the light of the new manual.
At first glance, the two systems may appear to have little in common. Jung's typology does not seem concerned with the mala-daptive behaviour, but rather gives credence to the possibility that there are many styles of functioning, all of which are adaptive. Personality disorders, as defined in DSM-III on the other hand, seem exclusively focused on overtly disturbed behaviour.
Under closer scrutiny, however, we find that Jung made numerous types. It is in the later development of his ideas that these references disappeared, so that all three of the currently most used type surveys omit them (WHEELWRIGHT, WHEELWRIGHT & BUEHLER 12; MYERS 7; SINGER, LOOMIS 9).