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.
It so happens that we have recently received several papers that discuss the relationship of analytical psychologists to each other, to other analytical systems and even to other disciplines. This has, of course, been a feature of Jung's own interests, methods and development. It does indeed seem that there is just now a ground-swell of concern and search for the roots, the bridges and the actual metapsychology of analytical psychology.
I have, therefore, chosen to publish some of these papers together in this issue of The Journal of Analytical Psychology. I hope readers will not be too disappointed that this particular issue does not contain any actual clinical material or discussion. Instead, I hope that every reader will feel free to enter the arena and do battle with any one or several of the authors published; and that they will send us their comments -be they short or not so short, be they in the form of a letter or memorandum - as a way of expressing their disputes, disagreements, agreements or their own further supporting or contradictory experiences, thoughts, reflections or reactions that the papers in this issue may evoke.
The next, the April issue, in contrast to the present one, will carry some predominantly clinical papers, and in particular papers concerned with child analysis.