Reference
Jung, C. G. (1968) 2nd Ed. Aion, Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self. The collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 9ii. Bollingen Series XX, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J. First edition 1959

§1 “We understand the ego as the complex factor to which all conscious contents are related. It forms, as it were, the centre of the field of consciousness; and, in so far as this comprises the empirical personality, the ego is the subject of all personal acts of consciousness. The relation of a psychic content to the ego forms the criterion of its consciousness, for no content can be conscious unless it is represented to a subject.” Emphasis mine

τ §2 “With this definition we have described and delimited the scope of the subject. (Emphasis mine - I think it important to grasp the work 'scope' in this context…much of consciousness is discussed in terms of scope and the potential of what may become conscious, i.e., what may come into scope.)
Empirically, however, it always finds its limit when it comes up against the unknown.
The unknown falls into two groups of objects: those which are outside and can be experienced by the senses, and those which are inside and are experienced immediately. The first group comprises the unknown in the outer world; the second the unknown in the inner world. We call this latter territory the unconscious.”

τ §3 “The ego, as a specific content of consciousness, is not a simple or elementary factor but a complex one which, as such, cannot be described exhaustively. Experience shows that it rests on two seemingly different bases: the somatic and the psychic. The somatic basis is inferred from the totality of endosomatic perceptions, which for their part are already of a psychic nature and are associated with the ego, and are therefore conscious. They are produced by endosomatic stimuli, only some of which cross the threshold of consciousness. A considerable proportion of these stimuli occur unconsciously, that is, subliminally. … Sometimes they are capable of crossing the threshold, that is, of becoming perceptions. But there is no doubt that a large proportion of these endosomatic stimuli are simply incapable of consciousness and are so elementary that there is no reason to assign them a psychic nature - …
I have therefore suggested that the term “psychic” be used only where there is evidence of a will capable of modifying reflex or instinctual processes. Here I must refer the reader to my paper ”On the Nature of the Psyche,“¹ where I have discussed this definition of the “psychic” at somewhat greater length.”
¹_{Pars. 371ff.}
Emphasis mine. It's important here to note how Jung is using the word 'psychic'. It is used like an adjective similar to how he uses the word 'psychoid' in the same essay; On the Nature of the Psyche. Clearly he uses psyche and psychic in more expansive contexts elsewhere but this using of words as adjectives is an important part of how Jung describes things and doesn't label them.

τ §4 “The somatic basis of the ego consists, then, of conscious and unconscious factors.
The same is true of the psychic basis (note the way Jung means psychic, xRef para.3 above): on the one hand the ego rests on the total field of consciousness, and on the other, on the sum total of unconscious contents. These fall into three groups:
[1] first, temporarily subliminal con- tents that can be reproduced voluntarily (memory);
[2] second, unconscious contents that cannot be reproduced voluntarily;
[3] third, contents that are not capable of becoming conscious at all.”

τ Jung's model of the scope of Ego Content

§5 “When I said that the ego “rests” on the total field of consciousness I do not mean that it consists of this. Were that so, it would be indistinguishable from the field of consciousness as a whole. The ego is only the latter's point of reference, grounded on and limited by the somatic factor described above.”

τ §6 “… the ego is a conscious factor par excellence. It seems to arise in the first place from the collision between the somatic factor and the environment, and, once established as a subject, it goes on developing from further collisions with the outer world and the inner.” By implication then the Ego is a space-time phenomena. It develops, therefore there is a progression, a past and present, a before > now > and to be. Psychologically speaking then our ego cannot just be there, it cannot just appear complete as it were. Therefore, consciousness - and psychology - is a time-space concept. Consciousness as a principle must be evolved, it must develop and therefore is of a linear time based nature. Consciousness is not something that can just happen.

§7 “Despite the unlimited extent of its bases, the ego is never more and never less than consciousness as a whole. … a total description of the personality is, even in theory, absolutely impossible, because the unconscious portion of it cannot be grasped cognitively.”

§8 “Clearly, then, the personality as a total phenomenon does not coincide with the ego, that is, with the conscious personality, but forms an entity that has to be distinguished from the ego. …” Jung touches on jurisprudence in this paragraph in relation to unconscious contents.

§9 “I have suggested calling the total personality which, though present, cannot be fully known, the self. The ego is, by definition, subordinate to the self and is related to it like a part to the whole. … just as our free will clashes with necessity in the outside world, so also it finds its limits outside the field of consciousness in the subjective inner world, where it comes into conflict with the facts of the self. … the self acts upon the ego like an objective occurrence which free will can do very little to alter.”

§11 “Since it is the point of reference for the field of conscious- ness, the ego is the subject of all successful attempts at adaptation so far as these are achieved by the will.
… though it retains its quality as the centre of the field of consciousness, it is questionable whether it is the centre of the personality. It is part of the personality but not the whole of it. As I have said, it is simply impossible to estimate how large or how small its share is; how free or how dependent it is on the qualities of this “extra-conscious” psyche. (i.e., the discovery that consciousness and all things psychic is not the entirety of the psyche but that there are additional = “extra-conscious” aspects that we must now consider…the unconscious being the major one.)”

§12 “… from the standpoint of the psychology of consciousness, the unconscious can be divided into three groups of contents. (xRef para. 4 above) But from the standpoint of the psychology of the personality a twofold division ensues: an “extra-conscious” psyche whose contents are personal, and an “extra-conscious” psyche whose contents are impersonal and collective. … the second group forms, as it were, an omnipresent, un- changing, and everywhere identical quality or substrate of the psyche per se. This is, of course, no more than a hypothesis. But we are driven to it by the peculiar nature of the empirical material, not to mention the high probability that the general similarity of psychic processes in all individuals must be based on an equally general and impersonal principle that conforms to law, just as the instinct manifesting itself in the individual is only the partial manifestation of an instinctual substrate common to all men.” This hypothesis as Jung presents here is important as it essentially underpins the 'objective psyche'…emphasis on the word objective in that it is common to all men as with the instincts.

back to top

§13 “Whereas the contents of the personal unconscious are acquired during the individual's lifetime, the contents of the collective unconscious are invariably archetypes that were present from the beginning. … The archetypes most clearly characterized from the empirical point of view are those which have the most frequent and the most disturbing influence on the ego. These are the shadow, the anima, and the animus. The most accessible of these, and the easiest to experience, is the shadow …”

§14 “The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. …”

§15 “Emotion, incidentally, is not an activity of the individual but something that happens to him. Affects occur usually where adaptation is weakest, and at the same time they reveal the reason for its weakness, namely a certain degree of inferiority and the existence of a lower level of personality. On this lower level with its uncontrolled or scarcely controlled emotions one behaves more or less like a primitive, who is not only the passive victim of his affects but also singularly incapable of moral judgment.” Emphasis mine

Projection

§16 “Although, with insight and good will, the shadow can to some extent be assimilated into the conscious personality, experience shows that there are certain features which offer the most obstinate resistance to moral control and prove almost impossible to influence. These resistances are usually bound up with projections, which are not recognised as such, and their recognition is a moral achievement beyond the ordinary.” (Emphasis mine) There is an interesting point here about the moral implications associated with the shadow. Cf. end of the last para., where Jung talks of moral judgement. The fact that the shadow relates to our moral judgement on both a personal level, but then also, does this imply a collective moral agenda?…morality at the collective level? At the moment, morality in this context seems to exist as a result of the evolution of the conscious mind, i.e., with the coming to consciousness comes morality. Thus, the lack of moral judgement or agenda is a regression to the less conscious, undeveloped aspect, more primitive and instinctual levels. xRef para. 15.

§17 “The projection-making factor then has a free hand and can realize its object—if it has one—or bring about some other situation characteristic of its power. As we know, it is not the conscious subject but the unconscious which does the projecting. Hence one meets with projections, one does not make them. The effect of projection is to isolate the subject from his environment, since instead of a real relation to it there is now only an illusory one.” Emphasis mine

§19 “One might assume that projections like these, which are so very difficult if not impossible to dissolve, would belong to the realm of the shadow -that is, to the negative side of the personality. This assumption becomes untenable after a certain point, because the symbols that then appear no longer refer to the same but to the opposite sex, in a man’s case to a woman and vice versa.The source of projections is no longer the shadow - which is always of the same sex as the subject - but a contrasexual figure. …(Emphasis mine)
Though the shadow is a motif as well known to mythology as anima and animus, it represents first and foremost the personal unconscious, and its content can therefore be made conscious without too much difficulty.
With a little self-criticism one can see through the shadow — so far as its nature is personal. But when it appears as an archetype, one encounters the same difficulties as with anima and animus. In other words, it is quite within the bounds of possibility for a man to recognize the relative evil of his nature, but it is a rare and shattering experience for him to gaze into the face of absolute evil.”

back to top

§20 “What, then, is this projection-making factor? The East calls it the “Spinning Woman” …” The mother, Maya

§21 “If this situation is dramatized, as the unconscious usually dramatizes it, then there appears before you on the psychological stage a man living regressively, seeking his childhood and his mother, fleeing from a cold cruel world which denies him understanding.

The task of growing up is to emancipate oneself from the embrace of the mother…
§22 “For this he would need a faithless Eros, one capable of forgetting his mother and undergoing the pain of relinquishing the first love of his life.” It is hard to turn Eros faithless.
“The mother, foreseeing this danger, has carefully inculcated into him the virtues of faithfulness, devotion, loyalty, so as to protect him from the moral disruption which is the risk of every life adventure. He has learnt these lessons only too well, and remains true to his mother. This naturally causes her the deepest anxiety (when, to her greater glory, he turns out to be a homosexual, for example) and at the same time affords her an unconscious satisfaction that is positively mythological. For, in the relationship now reigning between them, there is consummated the immemorial and most sacred archetype of the marriage of mother and son. What, after all, has commonplace reality to offer, with its registry offices, pay envelopes, and monthly rent, that could outweigh the mystic awe of the hieros gamos? Or the star-crowned woman whom the dragon pursues, or the pious obscurities veiling the marriage of the Lamb?”
In the context here of a man relinquishing his adolescent role, and taking on the mantel of being a man, of leaving the mother so as to no longer return to the incestuous relationship with the mother. Cf. para. 330ff., CW 5, also, an interesting footnote from para. 351, CW5 ….I'm not sure it's exactly the same context when he uses the word incest here, but worth noting:

§23 “This myth, better than any other, illustrates the nature of the collective unconscious.” Emphasis mine

§24 “In the case of the son, the projection-making factor is identical with the mother-imago, and this is consequently taken to be the real mother. …”

§25 “This image is “My Lady Soul,” as Spitteler called her. I have suggested instead the term “anima,” as indicating something specific, for which the expression “soul” is too general and too vague.”

§26 “The projection-making factor is the anima, or rather the unconscious as represented by the anima. … She is not an invention of the conscious, but a spontaneous product of the unconscious. Nor is she a substitute figure for the mother. On the contrary, there is every likelihood that the numinous qualities which make the mother-imago so dangerously powerful derive from the collective archetype of the anima, which is incarnated anew in every male child.”

§28 “Just as the mother seems to be the first carrier of the projection-making factor for the son, so is the father for the daughter.” xRef. para 6, CW9i

§29 ”… I have called the projection-making factor in women the animus, which means mind or spirit. The animus corresponds to the paternal Logos just as the anima corresponds to the maternal Eros.“
More in this paragraph on the interaction between man and woman, anima and animus. …
“Men can argue in a very womanish way, too, when they are anima-possessed and have thus been transformed into the animus of their own anima.” So the animus of my anima?
”… no man can converse with an animus for five minutes without becoming the victim of his own anima.“

Basically, there's a lot here about projection, anima, animus …and the fact that we don't know our partners very well outside of what we think we know in projection. Cf. para. 37.
§30 ”…when animus and anima meet, the animus draws his sword of power and the anima ejects her poison of illusion and seduction.“

§31 “In both its positive and its negative aspects the anima/ animus relationship is always full of “animosity,” i.e., it is emotional, and hence collective. Affects lower the level of the relationship and bring it closer to the common instinctual basis, which no longer has anything individual about it.”
xRef this with paras. 15 & 16 above: Emotion indicates an inferior level of personality, a more primitive level where moral judgement is almost impossible. At the more primitive level a more collective consciousness dominates.

§32 “Whereas the cloud of “animosity” surrounding the man is composed chiefly of sentimentality and resentment, in woman it expresses itself in the form of opinionated views, interpretations, insinuations, and misconstructions, which all have the purpose (sometimes attained) of severing the relation between two human beings.”

§33 “Like the anima, the animus too has a positive aspect. Through the figure of the father he expresses not only conventional opinion but — equally — what we call “spirit,” philosophical or religious ideas in particular, or rather the attitude resulting from them. Thus the animus is a psychopomp, a mediator be- tween the conscious and the unconscious and a personification of the latter. Just as the anima becomes, through integration, the Eros of consciousness, so the animus becomes a Logos; and in the same way that the anima gives relationship and relatedness to a man’s consciousness, the animus gives to woman’s consciousness a capacity for reflection, deliberation, and self-knowledge.

§34 “The effect of anima and animus on the ego is in principle the same. This effect is extremely difficult to eliminate because,
1) in the first place, it is uncommonly strong and immediately fills the ego-personality with an unshakable feeling of Tightness and righteousness.
1) In the second place, the cause of the effect is projected and appears to lie in objects and objective situations. Both these characteristics can, I believe, be traced back to the peculiarities of the archetype. For the archetype, of course, exists a priori. … Consciousness is fascinated by it, … Very often the ego experiences a vague feeling of moral defeat and then behaves all the more defensively, ….” Emphasis mine. Moral defeat by the archetype setting up a feeling of inferiority on the part of consciousness, our ego, and in so doing creates resentment towards the archetypes not relationships.

§35 “As I said, it is easier to gain insight into the shadow than into the anima or animus. … Firstly, there is no moral education in this respect, (in respect to anima and animus. Personal shadow morality is all around is in our education and daily lives)
and secondly, most people are content to be self-righteous and prefer mutual vilification (if nothing worse!) to the recognition of their pro- jections.
Indeed, it seems a very natural state of affairs for men to have irrational moods and women irrational opinions.”

§36 The anima and animus are “empirical concepts”

§37 With regards the projection of our parents “Up till now everybody has been convinced that the idea “my father,” “my mother,” etc., is nothing but a faithful reflection of the real parent, … but a supposition of identity by no means brings that identity about. This is where the fallacy of the enkekalymmenos ('the veiled one') comes in.^4
4_{The fallacy, which stems from Eubulides the Megarian, runs: “Can you recognize your father?” Yes. “Can you recognize this veiled one?” No. “This veiled one is your father. Hence you can recognize your father and not recognize him.”}

I like this next bit:
§39 “Not all the contents of the anima and animus are projected, however. Many of them appear spontaneously in dreams and so on, and many more can be made conscious through active imagination. In this way we find that thoughts, feelings, and affects are alive in us which we would never have believed possible.” Emphasis mine

§40 “The autonomy of the collective unconscious expresses itself in the figures of anima and animus. They personify those of its contents which, when withdrawn from projection, can be integrated into consciousness. To this extent, both figures represent functions which filter the contents of the collective unconscious through to the conscious mind. They appear or behave as such, however, only so long as the tendencies of the conscious and unconscious do not diverge too greatly. Should any tension arise, these functions, harmless till then, confront the conscious mind in personified form and behave rather like systems split off from the personality, or like part souls. …
The reason for their behaving in this way is that though the contents of anima and animus can be integrated they themselves cannot, since they are archetypes. As such they are the foundation stones of the psychic structure, which in its totality exceeds the limits of consciousness and therefore can never become the object of direct cognition. Though the effects of anima and animus can be made conscious, they themselves are factors transcending consciousness and beyond the reach of perception and volition. Hence they remain autonomous despite the integration of their contents, … constant observation pays the unconscious a tribute that more or less guarantees its co-operation. …
The complementary and compensating function of the unconscious ensures that these dangers, which are especially great in neurosis, can in some measure be avoided. It is only under ideal conditions, when life is still simple and unconscious enough to follow the serpentine path of instinct without hesitation or misgiving, that the compensation works with entire success. The more civilized, the more unconscious and complicated a man is, the less he is able to follow his instincts. xRef para. 17 CW 7…
it is especially important to picture the archetypes of the unconscious not as a rushing phantasmagoria of fugitive images but as constant, autonomous factors, which indeed they are.” Emphasis mine

§41 “Together they (The anima and animus archetypes) form a divine pair,⁵ one of whom, in accordance with his Logos nature, is characterized by pneuma and nous, rather like Hermes with his ever-shifting hues, while the other, in accordance with her Eros nature, wears the features of Aphrodite, Helen (Selene), Persephone, and Hecate. Both of them are unconscious powers, “gods” in fact, as the ancient world quite rightly conceived them to be. …for their (The anima and animus) power grows in proportion to the degree that they remain unconscious.”
⁵_{Naturally this is not meant as a psychological definition, let alone a metaphysical one. As I pointed out in ”The Relations between the Ego and the Unconscious” (pars. 296ff.), the syzygy consists of three elements:
1) the femininity pertaining to the man and/or the masculinity pertaining to the woman;
2) the experience which man has of woman and vice versa; and,
3) finally, the masculine and feminine archetypal image.
The first element can be integrated into the personality by the process of conscious realization, but the last one cannot.}

§42 ”… I should like to emphasize that the integration of the shadow, or the realization of the personal unconscious, marks the first stage in the analytic process, and that without it a recognition of anima and animus is impossible.
The shadow can be realized only through a relation to a partner, and anima and animus only through a relation to a partner of the opposite sex, because only in such a relation do their projections become operative.
The recognition of the anima gives rise, in a man, to a triad, one third of which is transcendent:
1) the masculine subject,
2) the opposing feminine subject,
3) and the transcendent anima. With a woman the situation is reversed. The missing fourth element that would make the triad a quaternity is, in a man, the archetype of the Wise Old Man, which I have not discussed here, and in a woman the Chthonic Mother. These four constitute a half immanent and half transcendent quaternity, an archetype which I have called the marriage quaternio.⁷ …
Clement of Alexandria … said that he who knows himself knows God.⁸“

back to top

§43 ”… integration of the contents of the collective unconscious - … Their (Unconscious Contents) assimilation augments not only the area of the field of consciousness but also the importance of the ego, especially when, as usually happens, the ego lacks any critical approach to the unconscious. “

motif ego to self assimilation
§44 “I should only like to mention that the more numerous and the more significant the unconscious contents which are assimilated to the ego, the closer the approximation of the ego to the self, even though this approximation must be a never-ending process. This inevitably produces an inflation of the ego,³ unless a critical line of demarcation is drawn between it and the unconscious figures. But this act of discrimination yields practical results only if it succeeds in fixing reasonable boundaries to the ego and in granting the figures of the unconscious - the self, anima, animus, and shadow - relative autonomy and reality (of psychic nature). To psychologize this reality out of existence either is ineffectual, or else merely increases the inflation of the ego. … No more than a flight of steps or a smooth floor is needed to precipitate a fatal fall. …
Inflation magnifies the blind spot in the eye, and the more we are assimilated by the projection-making factor, (The ego assimilated by the projection-making factor, the self) the greater becomes the tendency to identify with it. A clear symptom of this is our growing disinclination to take note of the reactions of the environment and pay heed to them.”Emphasis and underlining mine. Note 'psychic nature' where psychic is defined above, para. 3

τ §45 “It must be reckoned a psychic catastrophe when the ego is assimilated by the self. The image of wholeness then remains in the unconscious, so that on the one hand it shares the archaic nature of the unconscious and on the other finds itself in the psychically relative space-time continuum that is characteristic of the unconscious as such.⁴ Both these qualities are numinous and hence have an unlimited determining effect on ego-consciousness, which is differentiated, i.e., separated, from the unconscious and moreover exists in an absolute space and an absolute time. It is a vital necessity that this should be so. If, therefore, the ego falls for any length of time under the control of an unconscious factor, its adaptation is disturbed and the way opened for all sorts of possible accidents.” Here is the space where extreme sports or sport at the highest level operates - where for the briefest moments the ego is consumed by the numinous of a relative space-time environment (= unconscious) and shares in the image of wholeness that resides in the unconscious. For just a brief moment this is where these athletes go and return as quickly.

§46 Both moral and intellectual virtues are required to anchor the ego to the world of consciousness.

motif self to ego assimilation
§47 “However, accentuation of the ego personality and the world of consciousness may easily assume such proportions that the figures of the unconscious are psychologized and the self consequently becomes assimilated to the ego. … followed by the same result: inflation. …
In the first case (ego to self), mobilization of all the virtues is indicated; in the second (self to ego), the presumption of the ego can only be damped down by moral defeat. …
It is not a question, as one might think, of relaxing morality itself but of making a moral effort in a different direction.” Jung spends some time discussing the 'moral' confrontations required here and they are not related to jurisprudence in the traditional sense.

§48 “Since real moral problems all begin where the penal code leaves off, their solution can seldom or never depend on precedent, much less on precepts and commandments. The real moral problems spring from conflicts of duty.
- Anyone who is sufficiently humble, or easy-going, can always reach a decision with the help of some outside authority.
- But one who trusts others as little as himself can never reach a decision at all, unless it is brought about in the manner which Common Law calls an “Act of God.” The Oxford Dictionary defines this concept as the “action of uncontrollable natural forces.” In all such cases there is an unconscious authority which puts an end to doubt by creating a fait accompli. …One can describe this authority either as the “will of God” or as an “action of uncontrollable natural forces,” though psychologically it makes a good deal of difference how one thinks of it.
- Natural forces / instincts: The rationalistic interpretation of this inner authority as “natural forces” or the instincts …an offence to our moral esteem” Emphasis mine
- Will of God / divine forces
§49 “If, on the other hand, the inner authority is conceived as the “will of God” (which implies that “natural forces” are divine forces) … A moral confrontation and challenge of a different kind
The problem seems to me unanswerable, because we do not know where the roots of the feeling of moral freedom lie; and yet they exist no less surely than the instincts, which are felt as compelling forces.” Emphasis mine

§50 “All in all, it is not only more beneficial but more “correct” psychologically to explain as the “will of God” the natural forces that appear in us as instincts. In this way we find our- selves living in harmony with the habitus of our ancestral psychic life; that is, we function as man has functioned at all times and in all places.” Underlining mine. Note 'psychic nature' where psychic is defined above, para. 3

§51 “I should also like the term “God” in the phrase “the will of God” to be understood not so much in the Christian sense…
The Greek words daimon and daimonion express a determining power which comes upon man from outside, like providence or fate, though the ethical decision is left to man. He must know, however, what he is deciding about and what he is doing. Then, if he obeys he is following not just his own opinion, and if he rejects he is destroying not just his own invention.” Emphasis mine. Morality then as a confrontation comes with consciousness, i.e., 'following not just his own opinion' …here Jung is saying that if when making a decision - he says ethical - and if we understand the source we make it with knowledge of who we are making it with, so we are conscious of the forces that influence the moral confrontation. Morality is part of consciousness??

τ §52 “But the psychic phenomenon cannot be grasped in its totality by the intellect, for it consists not only of meaning but also of value, and this depends on the intensity of the accompanying feeling-tones. Hence at least the two “rational” functions⁵ are needed in order to map out anything like a com- plete diagram of a given psychic content.” Think AI - AGI - and what it means to be human.

xRef para. 61. Feeling value : strong or weak, positive or negative.
and feeling tone : what it means (to me); positive or negative, encouraging, uplifting, rejection, enlightenment, power, humility, etc.

§53 ”… The feeling-value is a very important criterion which psychology cannot do without, because it determines in large measure the role which the content will play in the psychic economy. … The shadow, for instance, usually has a decidedly negative feeling-value, while the anima, like the animus, has more of a positive one. Whereas the shadow is accompanied by more or less definite and describable feeling-tones, the anima and animus exhibit feeling qualities that are harder to define. Mostly they are felt to be fascinating or numinous. Often they are surrounded by an atmosphere of sensitivity, touchy reserve, secretiveness, painful intimacy, and even absoluteness. …
In order of affective rank they stand to the shadow very much as the shadow stands in relation to ego-consciousness. The main affective emphasis seems to lie on the latter (Ego consciousness) … But if for any reason the unconscious gains the upper hand, then the valency of the shadow and of the other figures increases proportionately, so that the scale of values is reversed. What lay furthest away from waking consciousness and seemed unconscious assumes, as it were, a threatening shape, and the affective value increases the higher up the scale you go: ego-consciousness, shadow, anima, self.“

§54 “I am speaking here of the subjective feeling-value, which is subject to the more or less periodic changes described above. But there are also objective values which are founded on a consensus omnium - moral, aesthetic, and religious values, for instance, and these are universally recognized ideals or feeling- toned collective ideas (Lévy-Bruhl's “representations collectives”).⁶ The subjective feeling-tones or “value quanta” are easily recognized by the kind and number of constellations, or symptoms of disturbance,⁷ they produce. Collective ideals often have no subjective feeling-tone, but nevertheless retain their feeling-value. … ”

§55 “The problem has a practical aspect, since it may easily hap- pen that a collective idea, though significant in itself, is—be- cause of its lack of subjective feeling-tone—represented in a dream only by a subsidiary attribute, as when a god is represented by his theriomorphic attribute, etc. …”

§57 “The first case we mentioned, where the collective idea is represented in a dream by a lowly aspect of itself, is certainly the more frequent: the “goddess” appears as a black cat, and the Deity as the lapis exilis (stone of no worth). Interpretation then demands a knowledge of certain things which have less to do with zoology and mineralogy than with the existence of an historical consensus omnium in regard to the object in question.” Jungian psychology requires an expansive knowledge in order to understand the unconscious content

§58 “This knowledge is an essential prerequisite for any integration - that is to say a content can only be integrated when its double aspect has become conscious and when it is grasped not merely intellectually but understood according to its feeling-value. Intellect and feeling, however, are difficult to put into one harness - they conflict with one another by definition…. Therefore, anyone who wants to achieve the difficult feat of realizing something not only intellectually, but also according to its feeling-value, must for better or worse come to grips with the anima /animus problem in order to open the way for a higher union, a coniunctio oppositorum. This is an indispensable prerequisite for wholeness.” The syzygy

τ §59 “Although “wholeness” seems at first sight to be nothing but an abstract idea (like anima and animus), it is nevertheless empirical in so far as it is anticipated by the psyche in the form of spontaneous or autonomous symbols. These are the quaternity or mandala symbols, … What at first looks like an abstract idea stands in reality for something that exists and can be experienced, that demonstrates its a priori presence spontaneously. Wholeness is thus an objective factor that confronts the subject independently of him, like anima or animus; and just as the latter have a higher position in the hierarchy than the shadow, so wholeness lays claim to a position and a value superior to those of the syzygy. The syzygy seems to represent at least a substantial portion of it, if not actually two halves of the totality formed by the royal brother- sister pair, and hence the tension of opposites from which the divine child⁹ is born as the symbol of unity.” Emphasis mine. We can experience - potentially - wholeness. That is not the same as achieving wholeness. As an experience though, this is within our reach.

§60 “Unity and totality stand at the highest point on the scale of objective values because their symbols can no longer be distinguished from the imago Dei.'''
If this insight were purely intellectual it could be achieved without much difficulty, for the world-wide pronouncements about the God within us and above us, about Christ and the corpus mysticum, the personal and suprapersonal atman, etc., are all formulations that can easily be mastered by the philosophic intellect. This is the common source of the illusion that one is then in possession of the thing itself. But actually one has acquired nothing more than its name, despite the age-old prejudice that the name mag- ically represents the thing, and that it is sufficient to pronounce the name in order to posit the thing's existence.”

τ Here is an argument against the case of AGI ever existing:</fc>
§61 “It would seem that one can pursue any science with the intellect alone except psychology, whose subject - the psyche - has more than the two aspects mediated by sense-perception and thinking. The function of value - feeling - is an integral part of our conscious orientation and ought not to be missing in a psychological judgment of any scope, otherwise the model we are trying to build of the real process will be incomplete. Every psychic process has a value quality attached to it, namely its feeling-tone. This indicates the degree to which the subject is affected by the process or how much it means to him (in so far as the process reaches consciousness at all). It is through the “affect” that the subject becomes involved and so comes to feel the whole weight of reality. The difference amounts roughly to that between a severe illness which one reads about in a textbook and the real illness which one has. In psychology one possesses nothing unless one has experienced it in reality. Emphasis mine
Hence a purely intellectual insight is not enough, because one knows only the words and not the substance of the thing from inside.” In relation to AI - AGI - This last statement makes me think of the Chinese Room experiment proposed by John Searle. Intellectually computers could achieve and perform but AI will never have understanding.

§63 “The shadow, the syzygy, and the self are psychic factors of which an adequate picture can be formed only on the basis of a fairly thorough experience of them.”

§64 “Outside the narrower field of professional psychology these figures meet with understanding from all who have any knowledge of comparative mythology. They have no difficulty in recognizing
the shadow as the adverse representative of the dark chthonic world, a figure whose characteristics are universal.
The syzygy is immediately comprehensible as the psychic prototype of all divine couples. Finally
the self, on account of its empirical peculiarities, proves to be the eidos behind the supreme ideas of unity and totality that are inherent in all monotheistic and monistic systems.” Emphasis mine

back to top

§267 “we are confronted, at every new stage in the differentiation of consciousness…with the task of finding a new interpretation appropriate to this stage, in order to connect the life of the past that still exists in us with the life of the present, which threatens to slip away from it. If this link-up does not take place, a kind of rootless consciousness comes into being …With the loss of the past, now become 'insignificant,' devalued, and incapable of revaluation, the saviour is lost too, for the saviour is either the insignificant thing itself or else arises out of it [symbolised as the archetypal lost child, puer aeternus, or child-god] …In folklore the child motif appears in the guise of the dwarf or the elf as personifications of the hidden forces of nature. To this sphere also belongs the little metal man of late antiquity, …who, till into the Middle Ages on the one hand inhabited the mine-shafts, and on the other hand represented the alchemical metals…“
Emphasis mine

§390 ^79
79_{Most people do not have sufficient range of consciousness to become aware of the opposites inherent in human nature. The tensions they generate remain for the most part unconscious, but can appear in dreams. Traditionally, the snake stands for the vulnerable spot in man: it personifies his shadow, i.e., his weakness and unconsciousness. The greatest danger about unconsciousness is proneness to suggestion. The effect of suggestion is due to the release of an unconscious dynamic, and the more unconscious this is, the more effective it will be. Hence the ever-widening split between conscious and unconscious increases the danger of psychic infection and mass psychosis. With the loss of symbolic ideas the bridge to the unconscious has broken down. Instinct no longer affords protection against unsound ideas and empty slogans. Rationality without tradition and without a basis in instinct is proof against no absurdity.} (Emphasis mine)