In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

85 CHAPTER FIVE THE TRANSCENDENT FUNCTION AND THE THEORIES OF OTHERS Though Jung may have been the first to explore this kind of mediatory and transitional activity in such detail, others enunciate ideas and structures that reflect aspects of the transcendent function, particularly when viewed in its more expansive form. This should not be surprising. Much of psychology struggles with fundamental opposites such as self/other, me/not-me, known/ unknown, inner/outer, conscious/unconscious. Despite differences in orientation , many schools endeavor to bring these dualities into conversation. Depth psychology specifically is fundamentally grounded in finding mediatory vehicles to expose contents of the unconscious so that consciousness can transition . No effective theory of psychology can exist without a concept that carries some of the properties of the transcendent function. The following sections explore ideas and structures that in some way reflect aspects of the transcendent function. This chapter is not intended to imply that the transcendent function is the same as or even directly analogous to the theories and structures discussed here. Indeed, Jung is unique and extraordinary in his formulation of these matters. His thinking regarding the dynamic opposition of the psyche, the role of fantasy and symbol in mediating such antitheses, the emergence of something larger than the ego that is purposeful, even numinous and holy, and the potentiating of a transformation are all seminal and singular. Indeed, some might say that without the characteristics just enunciated, the transcendent function is not present. That is a fair statement. However, parts of those ideas and the basic notion of a psychological function mediating between consciousness and the unconscious or between different parts of consciousness can be found in the writings of others. An analysis of the similarities and differences between other ideas and the transcendent function can serve as the vessel through which the differences can be held to allow deeper material 86 The Transcendent Function to emerge. Such a comparison can help us understand the transcendent function , place it within the context of other theories, and ultimately comprehend in a more profound way its importance to the psychological endeavor. WINNICOTT: TRANSITIONAL OBJECTS AS MEDIATING ELEMENTS A close analogy to Jung’s transcendent function is found in the ideas of D. W. Winnicott. Grounded in the idea that the dependence relationship between child and mother is crucial, Winnicott posited that if the mother’s care is not “good enough,” the child may not fulfill its inborn drive to develop in a particular way. He laid out three phases of developmental dependence: absolute dependence in which the infant cannot differentiate itself from the environment and is unable to distinguish between “me” and “not me” (Summers , 1994, p. 139); relative dependence (commencing at about six months) in which the infant becomes aware of objects, recognizes an “out there,” realizes there is a “me” separate from “not me,” and feels anxious about both the separation from mother and its own survival; and toward independence in which the infant actually begins to separate. Winnicott theorized that critical to the child’s adapting to the realization /fear of separation in the relative dependence stage are what he called “transitional objects” and “transitional phenomena” (see, e.g., Winnicott, 1953, 1971). He posited that objects such as blankets and stuffed animals, which symbolically contain part of the child and part of mother, are used by the child as a bridge out of absolute dependence into relative dependence. The transitioning experience occurs as a result of the “me-yet-not-me” character of the transitional object (Eigen, 1991, p. 67); the child lets go of dependence on mother by bonding with an object that represents both mother and itself: Transitional objects. . . . are not mother or self, although feelings of mother and self are invested in them. They are “something else”— something other than mother and me, although filled with the latter two. They are something less than mother and me, and something more. (p. 68) Winnicott also asserted that certain phenomena and activities—cooing, babbling , thumb-sucking, rocking, repeating songs, fantasizing, and dreaming— also serve the child in having a me-yet-not-me, transitional experience (Cwik, 1991, p. 100; Eigen, 1991, p. 69; Summers, 1994, p. 148). In addition to soothing the child’s separation anxiety and beginning the process of building a sense of self,1 Winnicott saw transitional objects/phenomena as critical in introducing the child to play, creativity, and an intermediate area of experience between reality and fantasy: [3...

Share