7g COLLECTIVE REVIEWS
this forms the kernel of the unconscious. There has to be added
to this that which has been put aside as useless durinR the deve- lopment of childhood, and this need not be different in its nature from what is inherited A shaip and final separation of the content of the two systems is only as a rule established at the period of puberty" (9). When Jung deduces from the phenomenon of trans- ference the hypotliesis that definite attributes which are ascribed to the doctor by patients arc projections of the content of the super-personal or collective unconscious, denoting particular "pri- mitive" pictures as dominants of this unconscious, and also separ- ates from the rest the devil-dominants, "demons of sorcery", werwolf, etc. as contents of the collective unconscious, he shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the character of the uncon- scious. In this way it is explicable why psycho-analysis seems to him to be a struggle with the figures of the unconscious as col- lective-unconscious determinants, hi many ways Silberer's anagogic theories, to which Voigtlandcr (31) refers, seem to be precursors of Jung's train of thought. Voigtl.lnder distinguishes a real, a con- structed and an ideally regulating unconscious without proving the justification — not to mention the necessity — for such a disdnc- tion. However, its purpose is quite clear when the auUvoress re- cognises for ploughing that its "real" motive is interest in food, that its purposiveness is an ideal regulating force, but can find nothing which — in spite of all known facts of folk-lore, religion and folk psychology - would admit of a sexual analogy.
Bleuler (4) defends the existence of the unconscious against Kretschmer (25, 26), and emphatically states that behind it is no empty name, but an indispensable concept, "which is derived with somewhat the same probability as Nei>tune was from the distur- bances of the path of Uranus". The scientific conflict between Bleuler and Kretschmer serves as an indicaton that the concept of the unconscious in the sense of Freud has now been made the subject of special discussions outside psycho-analysis. We ^re obliged to refrain from referring to numerous publications by neurologists and psychiatrists in which Uiis discussion appears in a few places, and will only remark that it becomes more and more prominent in the spheres of non-analytic psychology and philosophy. Lowenfeld's (27) intelligent and calm estimation of the r61e of the unconscious in mental life forms a bridge between these investigations. Although he is by no means an adherent of
