Father archetype. Return to Archetype
Father archetype
The father figure in traditional psychoanalysis is the figure that breaks the mother-child dyad. In early Jungian psychoanalysis, it was believed that the figure of the father appears after the formation of an established mother-child dyad. The Father archetype can be personified as King, King, Heavenly Father, Law and the Logos Principle (as opposed to the Mother archetype, which represents the Eros Principle). If the attributes of passivity, receptivity, acceptance, kindness are inherent in the feminine, which suck a person like a swamp, then the principles of activity, orientation, dominance, and achievement are attributed to the masculine. Both principles - both male and female - must be somehow balanced with each other.
In the girl, the figure of the father merges with the Animus, as a result, the archetypes of the Father and the Animus are mixed in her. We can say that a woman's father influences what she will later have.
A woman will project her Animus onto men who are somewhat similar to her father (or vice versa if there was a bad relationship with her father)
If the girl did not have a father at all, then the situation is very complicated. Such a girl can be deliberately “correct”, in an attempt to unconsciously compensate for the absence of her father (the archetype of the Father is associated with law, order, etc.). In cases where there is no father, and the girl’s mother is a type of “I am both a woman and a man” (we go to burning huts, stop galloping horses, then everywhere), then the situation becomes very difficult, because then the girl begins to have serious problems with understanding of what is masculine in principle.
The well-known Jungian analyst E. Samuels believed that a person has several stages of the passage of consciousness, which he designated as oneness, twoness, threeness and fourness.
The first stage of oneness ("singularity")
It is predominantly prenatal and ends at two months of age. This is the autistic stage of our development, to which a person can “regress” even in adulthood. At the stage of oneness there is no distinction between "I" and "not-I". In the pathological version, this is autism (in this case, Asperger's syndrome is not meant. We are talking about "real" autism), when I either do not see the other at all, or perceive him so threatening that I simply dissociate him (for example, in the case of a trauma ). A person falls into the so-called "autistic pocket" when he does not understand whether he is "in the asset" or "in the liability." The state of autism is expressed in the loss of a sense of self-agency: I am not acting, I am not a subject. The stage of oneness can be compared to bliss in the womb, to union with God in ecstasy.
At the next stage, twoness ("binary")
The division “I-you” / “I-other” is already emerging. René Papodopoulos identifies two variants of this "other":
A) "heteros" (another one that arouses interest as a woman in a man);
B) “alos” (another one that causes alertness and fear - meaning any traumatic experience that we do not want to see and experience again - at best it is in the Shadow, at worst - go even lower when a person even thinks does not want to talk about the traumatic aspect of reality. For example, if I am filled with aggression, then for me the awareness of my own aggression and anger is a nightmare. And the larger this improvised abscess, the more part of reality is closed from me by a "blind spot").
The third stage of threeness ("trinity", triadic structure)
It is distinguished by the appearance of triangulation, which can also be divided into three stages. On the first of them, it has the form of "mom-dad-me". Sometimes such an option as pseudo-triangulation is possible, when we have the relationship “I am mom, I am dad, mom is dad”. Triangulation is a big conflict. On the one hand, this rigid structure gives stability to the human psyche and consciousness. If we take the logical level, then here we have the law of the excluded middle, syllogisms and logical contradictions. At the same stage, a person has the idea of a primary schema in traditional psychoanalysis (or the archetype of Sisegeia = the archetype of the merge of mom and dad). We have an understanding that there is also some kind of relationship between mom and dad - and if I love mom and mom loves dad, then I shouldn’t hate dad (just because mom loves dad does not guarantee that her love not enough for me). Nevertheless, we have a rivalry, which results in a rather dramatic episode of life (“who do you love more - mom or dad?” - the answer “equally” returns a person to the stage of oneness, when mom and dad are perceived as one person). If Samuels' state of duality is about trust and connectedness, the ability to bear ambivalence, then in the state of trinity we can already bear conflicts.
At the last stage of fourness ("quaternary")
We are moving from a state of conflict into a state of some wise calmness and absolute harmony, in the theory characteristic of sages and prophets.
Luigi Zoya, in his book "The Father", considers the appearance of the figure of the father in the history of culture and its function. Why do we need a father when a mother can do everything? Zoya connects the appearance of the figure of the father with the emergence of consciousness. If the mother, on her instincts, feeds the children who are next to her and protects the hearth, then the father goes far with the hunters to get a mammoth. He brings down this mammoth, but instead of eating it right on the spot, he remembers the family and brings her pieces of this mammoth. The father knows not only how to leave, but also how to return. This is a necessary stage for our cognitive development, which in formal logic is called reversibility (e. g. If 2+4=7, then 7-5=2). In the plane of dyadic relations between mother and child, the father builds a certain vertical. It is not for nothing that in myths the father was associated with the sky, while the mother was associated with the earth. If the mother and child are connected by instinct, then the father is not connected with the child by instincts (in many ancient tribes, there was no connection between sexual intercourse and the birth of a child at all, and the man who lives with this woman, and not the biological father, was considered the father).
If we consider the father as a certain principle in our psyche, which allows consciousness to separate from the unconscious (“having arisen like a bump in a swamp” ©), then several stages can also be distinguished in the growth of this “bump of consciousness”. This bump means that between the father (consciousness) and the mother (unconscious) there is some kind of connection. There are a number of parenting options here.
Murray Stein proposed to describe 3 types / stages of paternity, using different Greek mythologems as analogies. It is believed that every person must go through these three stages:
- Uranus;
- Kronos;
- Zeus.
On the Uranian state of consciousness, we cannot plan anything, everything happens unexpectedly, and there are no reasons for this. You yourself do not participate in this, because you are in the womb of your mother. As a result, Kronos killed Uranus (his father). With the advent of Kronos, the themes of parricide, the competition between father and son, also appear (this was very interesting for Freud). Kronos also had an incestuous marriage with his own sister. He was afraid of death from his children (similar to how he himself killed Uranus) and swallowed them, thereby separating them from mother/earth. Here the analogy is as follows: the "absorbing" maternal instinct is placed inside the man. A man takes children inside himself, but he does not bear them to give birth, but stupidly kills them. If we talk about a chronic / chronic state of mind, then this is, first of all, a state of uncomplaining obedience. Kronos is supposed to set boundaries. If we take Kronos at the level of our development in ontogeny, then it corresponds to the stage of ontogeny at which we learn to control the products of our own body (potty training, etc.). Swallowing children, Kronos blocks any spontaneity (“where he wanted, he defeated there - this is spontaneous”) and creativity beyond the canons. As soon as a person acquires the rules of behavior, he loses this creativity. A new important characteristic appears in our minds - time (actually, chronos). There is an understanding that there is duration and that there is an event and the boundaries of an event.
Now we understand when one event ends and another begins, etc. After that, we are already able to compose some kind of narratives. A person from the age of 3 can build such structures. If we return to the state of Uranus, when it is completely merged with Gaia (the state of unitarity, then the very oneness), then in essence this is a diffuse affective state without a clearly defined beginning and end. This correlates well with the results of modern neuroscience research, according to which it is really extremely difficult to outline the beginning and end of an affect. With the help of modern equipment, one can be convinced that the moment of awareness of an affect occurs much later than the affect itself.
In the early 1970s, Tikhomirov conducted research in the laboratory of Moscow State University, in which the concept of an emotional decision was introduced. The subjects were blind chess players of a fairly high level, who had GSR written. It is clear that such subjects a priori have a mental map of the chessboard, but besides this, when choosing a solution, they could feel the pieces standing in front of them. It turned out that while chess players were fumbling around with their hands in the area of the future chess move, they recorded an emotional decision, which manifested itself in the GSR. A person does not yet know that he knows the solution, but his emotion already tells him that he knows this solution. This is close to the “aha-experience”, the concept of which was introduced in the Würzburg school. "Aha-experience" runs through the brain at the level of emotion - but it does not reach the top of consciousness and, as a result, is not realized.
Therefore, Uranus can be compared with such a "deaf" emotion: if it's bad, then it's bad - and it is not clear when it became bad. This is what we have in the Unconscious – there are no categories of “was” and “will be”. But Kronos is already cutting the timeline into separate events. Therefore, children who have a “chronic” father do everything according to plan and are generally very dogmatic. Arpeggios from one to two, English from three to five, gymnastics from six to seven, etc. So right, so right. Structured mode - on the one hand, this is very good, because this is the next stage in the development of consciousness. But there may be twists here. The same Kronos is often seen as the god of impotence, associated with a ban on sexual expression (and true sexual expression involves spontaneity - no plans!) Ideally, it would be nice to have some kind of harmonious combination between spontaneity and order. In the stage of Kronos, the categories of dimension, duration, measure (more/less, better/worse, etc.) appear in consciousness, and such a characteristic as pauses and the inability to endure waiting appear. People in a good, harmonious chronic state are not late, while in a disharmonious variant they are endlessly late.
Another sign of this stage is intolerance. The client wanted an interpretation of his dream - give him an interpretation this very second! All of these are signs of a conflicted Kronos. These people are very obsessive in matters of time - they can be late or violate other rules of conduct (accepted this way, but I'll soak it that way). Their preoccupation with time is central to them, and as a result, they may complain that they are wasting their time or that time slips through their fingers. Complaints about time trouble or a real hit in it are not uncommon. The problem of Kronos is a problem of control in the broadest sense of the word (either fear of control, or fear of losing control, or a feeling of inability to control something). Sometimes in therapy, a chronic state of consciousness manifests itself in the fact that the client asks when the therapy will end or what will happen in its next stage.
The last stage of consciousness is associated with the name of Zeus. The wife of Kronos was insanely sorry for her children, who were swallowed by her faithful, and instead of one of them, she slipped him a stone. Kronos swallowed the stone, and the saved baby was named Zeus. At the stage of Zeus, a hierarchy is built in the mind, which gives us the opportunity to subordinate the main goal and subgoals, to single out the main and the secondary. On the other hand, among other things, Zeus was a thief and a kidnapper of other people's women. And in the consciousness at the same stage, the figure “as if” appears, symbolizing deceit and cunning, theft and shifts. And Zeus is a totalitarian control over everything. Theft and deceit are attempts to change the course of time. One of the classic variants of Zeus' consciousness is the refrain "We are ours, we will build a new world!" We will destroy everything, and then we will build something new. And all in my honor. At the stage of Zeus, many authorities and important structures appear, the ability to evaluate and compare develops. Correlating A and B, I do not lose sight of C. On the one hand, I can build a multidimensional picture of the world, and on the other hand, I still have the opportunity to steal and rebuild something (and this is Trickster in its most pure and canonical form). In its normal form, this is expressed in creativity and spontaneity (Zeus himself turned into everything in order to take possession of another woman). Here - a rigid family structure (Zeus has Hera), and an intricate ability to intrigue. A father a la Zeus is a father who encourages competition and spurs rivalry. But it should be a healthy rivalry that doesn't lead to murder. In the state of Zeus, a person can experience guilt. Perhaps this is the most heuristic state of consciousness, although it leads to a greater number of conflicts (whereas, for example, at the Uranian stage, you can generally not take anyone into account and do everything your own way).
The question of the ideal form of consciousness is rather rhetorical. There is an option for every situation. For example, in a state of acute trauma, Zeus's consciousness is contraindicated - a breakdown and suicide are possible. The dumber the better here.
Archetypes of the collective unconscious and complexes of the personal unconscious. The relationship "archetype - mental" and "instinct - bodily". The mother archetype as the basis of the mother complex. Typical forms of the mother archetype. Aspects of the mother symbol. Positive and negative aspects of the mother complex. Daughter's mother complex. Son's mother complex. Typical forms of the father archetype. Negative father complex in women. Negative father complex in men. Negative components of the archetype of the child. The positive side of the child archetype is the desire for independence. Child's motive.
Guidelines. When studying this topic, it is recommended to pay special attention to the understanding that archetypes are a psychological case of a “stereotype of behavior” that endows all living beings with their special specific properties; on understanding the distinctive feature of the archetype - numinosity.
Literature
Analytical Psychology: Past and Present / C. G. Jung, E. Samuels, V. Odainik, J. Hubback. - M.: Martis, 1995. - 320 p.
Johnson R. A. He. Deep aspects of male psychology. - Moscow: Institute for Humanitarian Studies; Kharkov: Folio Publishing House, 1996. - 186 p.
Johnson R. A. She. Deep aspects of female psychology. - Moscow: Institute for Humanitarian Studies; Kharkov: Folio Publishing House, 1996. - 124 p.
Zelensky VV Analytical psychology. - St. Petersburg: B.S.K., 1996.- 324 p.
Psychological Encyclopedia / Ed. R. Corsini, A. Auerbh. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2003. - 1096 p.
Edinger E.F. Ego and archetype. - M.: PentaGraphic LLC, 2000. - 264 p.
test questions
The methodological principle according to which psychology deals with the products of the unconscious is that the contents of an archetypal nature manifest the processes taking place in the collective unconscious. Give examples that demonstrate this principle.
According to K.G. Jung, there are five groups of instinctive factors: creativity, reflection, activity, sexuality, hunger. Please comment on this position.
The archetypes to which C. G. Jung paid the most attention in his writings are: the shadow, the anima and animus, the wise old man, the great mother, the infant, and the self. According to the doctrine, these archetypes are widely included in interpersonal experience, often projected onto other people. Give examples in the context of the discipline being studied.
Comment on Scott's statement: "A falcon rarely flies out of a kite's nest."
Topic 7. Birth order and personality development
Birth order experience. First child. Second child. Average child. Last child. The only child. interval between births. Siblings: relationships, rivalry, status descriptions. Sibling relationships throughout life. Influence of siblings. Academic achievements. mental health. Marriage. Delinquency. Occupation. Twins.
Birth order and personality. Firstborn. Middle children. Younger children. The only child. Stepsons and stepdaughters. Stepfathers and stepmothers. Adopted children.
Guidelines. When studying this topic, it is recommended to pay special attention to understanding the theory of maturation by A. Gesell, the theory of J. Bowlby and M. Ainsworth about human attachment, Piaget's theory of cognitive development, the stages of moral development according to L. Kohlberg, the theory of stages by E. Erickson, the theory of separation / individuation by M. Mahler, E. Schachtel's concept of childhood experiences, the theory of maturity by C. G. Jung.
Literature
Crane W. Theories of development. Secrets of personality formation. - St. Petersburg: prime-EVROZNAK, 2002. - 512 p.
Leonhard K. Accentuated personalities. - Rostov n / D .: Phoenix Publishing House, 1997. - 544 p.
Myasishchev VN Psychology of relations. / Ed. A. A. Bodaleva. - M .: Publishing house "Institute of Practical Psychology", - Voronezh: NPO "MODEK", 1995. - 356 p.
Psychological Encyclopedia. / Under the editorship of R. Corsini and A. Auerbach - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2003. - 1096 p.
Handbook of psychology and psychiatry of childhood and adolescence / Ed. ed. Tsirkina S. Yu. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house "Piter", 1999. - 752 p.
Freud A. Psychology I and protective mechanisms. - Moscow: "Pedagogy-Press", 1993. - 134 p.
Jung KG The structure of the psyche and the process of individuation. - M.: Nauka, 1996. - 269 p.
test questions
Expand this topic as a resource for improving the efficiency of your professional activities.
Model a situation or give a real example, with the help of which the application of this topic in practice is able to regulate and model the behavior of an object or subject of lobbying and sponsorship.
List the components and levels of mental health.
Provide examples that demonstrate that needs or demands that affect lifestyle are consistent with the perceived birth order of a particular subject.
It is believed that the only child in the family has 2 possible developmental outcomes: he can remain childishly dependent and helpless, or make every effort to become a competent and wealthy adult. Please provide an explanation for this statement.
Comment on the statement of J. J. Rousseau "Let childhood ripen in childhood."
Return to Archetype
CHAPTER 8
FATHER
While a vast body of literature in recent decades has grown on the importance of the mother-child bond, fathers have been relatively neglected. Perhaps this is only because our culture still continues to move away from the "patrism" of the nineteenth century to the "matristism" of the present. However, this certainly goes too far to argue, as some sociologists and feminists have done, that fathers are fundamentally unimportant to the well-being of their offspring, that their sex is unimportant, and that their only useful contribution to the upbringing of children must occasionally function as a breastless substitute for a mother. Such a degree of contempt for fatherly virtues would contrast sharply with the clinical experience of psychiatrists and the personal experience of most of us, that fathers do indeed have a great deal of influence in the lives of their sons and daughters. Fortunately, this disagreement between theory and fact has led to some interesting research in recent years, the implications of which we will explore in this chapter. In general, the results are consistent with Jung's (1909) belief that the father plays a decisive psychological role in "man's destiny".
FATHER ARCHETYPE
It was in his writings in 1909 that Jung first expressed his view that the seemingly "magical" influence of parents on their children was not simply a function of their individuality or the relative helplessness of the child, but was mainly due to the supernatural parental archetypes activated by them in the child's psyche. “The father inevitably embodies the archetype that endows his figure with such gripping power. The archetype acts as an intensifier, increasing the effects from the father as much as they correspond to the inherited archetype” (SS 4, para. 744).
In myth, legend and dreams, the father archetype personifies the Elder, the King, the Heavenly Father. As Legislator, he speaks with the voice of collective power and is the living embodiment of the principle of the Logos: his word is law. As the Defender of the Faith and the Kingdom, he is the guardian of the status quo and the bulwark against all enemies. Its attributes are activity and penetration, differentiation and judgment, abundance and destruction. His symbols are heaven and sun, lightning and wind, phallus and weapon. Heaven symbolizes the spiritual aspirations of the male principle, and he, as the Father, is its main bearer, but in almost all religions and mythologies, heaven is by no means the sphere of universal Good: it is also the source of natural disasters and catastrophes, the place from which divinity decides and whence he punishes with thunderbolts and rewards with blessings; they are the throne room of the original patriarch, where he freely exercises his powers over the life and death of his wives and children. Because both the Mother and the Father have a Terrible side: he has the dual aspect of Jehovah and the fruitfulness and destruction of the Hindu god Shiva. He is Kronos who prevents his sons from replacing him by eating them alive.
As long as the growing child is interested, all Jungians agree that the father archetype is activated later in the ontological sequence than the mother archetype, although opinions about exactly when this activation occurs are rather vague. Jung believed that the father archetype does not manifest much until about the fifth year of a child's life, but later on there is a greater influence on the development of the child's personality than from the mother archetype, and this influence is also felt during puberty. As we shall see, however, there is good reason to believe that the father begins to exert significant influence much earlier than Jung believed.
Obviously, the first archetypal constellation through which the Self gropes its way from the ouroboros into conscious reality is the Mother, but it is probable that the post-uroboric "Mother" is, in fact, still in the stage of the (undifferentiated) "Parent": only later, with the emergence of ego-consciousness and the formation of attachment ties with both parents, the "Separation of Parents" arises, the parental archetype becomes differentiated into maternal and paternal poles.
The fact that the process of separation of parents begins already in the second year of life and is fully revealed in the fourth is confirmed by a number of studies. For example, Biller (1974) found that paternal deprivation before the age of four had a more damaging effect on a child's development than father absence later in life. In a study by Leichty (1960), a group of people whose fathers were at home during their early childhood were compared with a group whose fathers went into the army when they were three to five. These "fatherless" people experienced considerable difficulty adjusting to the return of their fathers, some finding it impossible to identify with them or perceive them as a male ideal. Burton (1972) studied the effect of fatherlessness on the development of gender identity in children in Barbados and found that the presence of a father during the first two years of childhood was important in avoiding the development of a feminine orientation in boys. In addition, Money and Erhardt (1972) and others have collected evidence that strongly demonstrates that sexual identification was usually achieved by eighteen months. Attempts to correct the wrong sexual attitude after this age entailed great difficulties. From this it is clear that the father means much more to the child than the accidental replacement of the mother, and that the archetype of the father becomes both differentiated and active at an earlier stage than Jung intended.
But where Jung was right was in identifying the contribution of the father to psychogenesis: it is through the relationship between father and child that sexual consciousness emerges. Gradually, the boy begins to understand that his connection with his father is based on identity ("I and father are one"), while the girl regards the connection on the basis of difference (i.e. the father is, both spiritually and sexually, her first significant experience " otherness" of men). Jung believed that the presence of a father was extremely important for the realization in the mind and behavior of the boy of his own masculine potential. Since the formation of the maternal connection precedes the onset of sexual consciousness, this connection is based on the identity of the mother for the boy no less than for the girl. And so the girl does not have to reorganize her original sense of identity with her mother, while the boy undergoes a revolutionary transformation from identity with mother to identification with father. The absence of a father makes this transition difficult, and sometimes completely impossible. Many studies confirm the high level of sexual disorder in boys who grow up without fathers and the relative absence of such disorder in fatherless girls.
However, there is no doubt that fathers do influence daughters to a significant degree in the manner in which their daughters experience their femininity in relation to a person. His assurances of love can go a long way in helping her accept her feminine role, while his rejection or ridicule can cause a deep wound that will never heal. Girls who mature without fathers may not doubt their femininity at first, but when it comes to living with a man as a partner, they may feel hopelessly lost and completely unprepared.
However, a father's influence on the development of his children extends far beyond the issue of sexual orientation and related relationships. In the vast majority of patrilineal societies, the father serves as a bridge between family life and the life of society as a whole. This is what Talcott Parsons (Parsons and Bales 1955) calls the father's instrumental role, in which he differs from the mother's expressive role. Almost everywhere the father had a centrifugal orientation (i.e. towards society and the outside world) as opposed to the centripetal involvement of the mother (i.e. home and family), although in our culture this distinction is much less distinct than it used to be. By representing society to the family and his family to society, the father facilitated the child's transition from home to the world at large. He contributed to the development of the skills necessary for successful adult adaptation, while at the same time teaching the child the values and mores that prevail in the social system. That he performed - and in many parts of the world continues to perform - in this function is not just a cultural accident: it rests on an archetypal basis. Whereas the mother in her eternal aspect represents the unchanging earth, the transpersonal [i.e. archetypal], the father represents consciousness, moving and changing. In this sense, the father is subject to time, subject to aging and death; his image changes with the culture he represents (von der Heydt 1973). Traditionally the Mother is timeless and dominates the sphere of feelings, instincts and the subconscious; The Father is connected to the events that take place in the material world in the context of space and time - events that are approached, controlled and changed through consciousness and the use of desire. The father not only represents attitude to work, social success, politics, and the right to develop his children's relationships, but he also represents for them the full extroverted potential of the world as a place that is familiar and habitable. As he succeeds in this role, he frees them from their mother infatuation and promotes the necessary autonomy (ego-self axis) for effective living. In turn, the mother's expressive function continues to provide the emotional support and security that allows them to go out and face the problems of the world.
That fathers and mothers are constitutionally adapted to their respective social and personal roles does not, of course, negate the existence of an "effective" potential in the mother or an "emotional" potential in the father. What we are discussing are those archetypal tendencies and ways of functioning which are the hallmarks of archetypal expression. Sure, men can function in the same role as women and vice versa, but that's not something they're better equipped to do. When it comes to expressing Eros, for example, the archetype is realized characteristically differently in men and women in relation to their children. It is as if, as Wolfgang Lederer (1964) put it, fathers and mothers had two different ways of loving: it is usually sufficient for a mother that her child simply exists—her love is absolute and mostly unconditional; the father's love, however, is more demanding - it is an occasional love, a love that depends on the productivity of the world. Thus, Eros is realized by the mother directly through her expressive role; while in the father it is inextricably linked with his instrumental function. A mother's love is an a priori prerequisite for bonding with her child; father's love is something that must be won through achievement. And since the father's love must be earned, it becomes an incentive to develop autonomy and confirm this autonomy as it is achieved. The growth of the ego-self axis, therefore, which begins through the relation to the mother, is further unified and confirmed through the connection with the father.
PATHER BEHAVIOR IN ANIMALS
From a biological point of view, fathers are clearly less important than mothers from the moment fertilization occurs. However, it would be surprising if the role of the father, so important among our species, would not be obvious in other mammals. Given the fact that marital relations in most mammalian species tend to be promiscuous or non-existent, and therefore it is often impossible to decide which male is the father of which child, nevertheless, adult males in many species do show some interest and personal involvement in the lives of mothers and infants as a justification for the use of the paternal term, even if this behavior differs somewhat in its expression from that of a human father.
In most primate species, for example, adult males communicate freely with young ones, showing their personal interest in behaviors such as grooming, play fighting, retrieving, providing food, defending against attack, and so on. Some species are more paternalistic than others. For example, the New World of titi monkeys, where living in a monogamous union, most of his time is spent cuddling with a child who is transferred to the mother's care only when it is necessary to feed. The Gibbon, a small Asiatic monkey which is also "monogamous", has a less idiosyncratic relationship with its offspring, but nonetheless takes a direct part in the care until about eighteen months old, when paternal interest wanes. Male hamadryas baboons, usually tough on each other, often exhibit behavior that seems almost maternal when in contact with the young - they carry and hug the cubs with obvious signs of interest and affection. Quite often in this species, babies lose their mothers and are adopted by mature males. In addition, in the entire population of baboons, the transfer of affection from mother to adult male occurs in the second year of life of the cubs, at a time when the mother usually gives birth to another baby and loses interest in the first. This paternal care lasts until about thirty months, when the teenager begins to seek his position in the hierarchy of subordination of the group. A similar form of male acceptance occurs in Japanese macaques at the birth of a younger offspring, the "adopting father" gaining the status of the highest rank in the hierarchy of subordination. With the exception of his inability to breastfeed the baby, his behavior for several months is very similar to that of the mother. In most primate species, the males act as a source of refuge for the young when they are frightened, and intervene when quarrels break out between them. Less directly, adult males also contribute to the well-being of the young by protecting the group and their territory from conspecifics and predators.
As in human culture, there is considerable variation among primates in the form paternal behavior takes, but the potential for such behavior seems to be present in most of them. Even among those species where males tend to be indifferent or hostile to young, there is evidence that, under certain conditions, they will form close relationships with offspring. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that paternal behavior is "planned" in the genome of all male primates: whether it is activated and expressed depends on environmental demands. When it is activated, the father archetype in animals seems to become very similar to the paternal archetype in humans.
FATHER (updated)
Social changes over the past two decades have destroyed the once clear distinction between the instrumental role of the father and the expressive role of the mother. Now that most mothers go to work, and fathers, as a result, involve themselves more in the daily care of their children, women have become more "instrumental (effective)" and fathers perhaps a little more "emotional." This could be useful, since, theoretically, it contributes to the individualization of both parties. However, these current models are causing more and more problems, as the time spent by parents with children decreases, mothers become stressed when trying to reconcile work schedules with mothering responsibilities, which inevitably led to love more unpredictable and less unconditional than before. . There is hardly any evidence that fathers compensate for this deficiency by providing love on a less random basis than hitherto. Indeed, the father archetype is becoming less significant in Western society than at any time in the history of the West. This is partly due to the success of the feminist aggression against "Patriarchy" and the rise in the socio-economic status of women, but also due to the dramatic changes in reproductive control exercised by the two sexes. Effective oral contraception and legalized abortion allowed women to decide unilaterally when and with whom they would have children, thus increasing the degree of “paternity uncertainty” on the part of men. This, in turn, led to a reluctance on the part of men to take on the long-term obligations of fatherhood.
An attempt to explain the expressive and instrumental roles of mothers and fathers was made by Alice Eagley (1987) in terms of the social division of labor (which, in her opinion, arose historically and independently of biological considerations) between the role of "housewife" and "full-time employee ". Once established, these different roles have given rise to different expectations about the personal characteristics associated with them. Thus, the role of a housewife became associated with "communal" functions, such as caring and compliance, and the role of an employee with "active" functions, such as assertiveness and efficiency. Contrary to evolutionary archetypal theory, "social role theory" Eagley proposed that sex differences in social behavior evolved from these "communal" and "active" expectations in the process of learning and socialization without any reference to human biology.
An evolutionary approach to these differences goes beyond the cultural history of social roles to explore how these forms of social behavior may have come about. And once having arisen, how did they contribute to the conformity of the personalities who exhibited them? From this point of view, modern tendencies in human behavior can be seen as an adaptation that has been successful in the development of our species. In other words, the evolutionary past holds the key to the social present. Thus, the division of labor was formed in the hereditary times of the hunter-gatherer, when women raised and raised children, gathered vegetables and fruits in women's groups, while men were responsible for hunting, war and protection. Marriage and male dominance emerged as a result of sexual selection and as a means of securing paternal confidence.
It was Charles Darwin (1871) who first explained the decisive differences in the behavior of males and females in terms of sexual selection as a result of competition between males for the right to access desired females and between females for the right to choose suitable males. One hundred years later, Robert Trivers (1972) came to the realization that a sex (usually female), which contributes more to future offspring, becomes a valuable resource that is in dire need of a field (usually male), which in turn contributes less. Because the female sex is much more limited than the male in the number of potential offspring it can produce on account of its greater contribution to each, different pressures are exerted on the two sexes. The females maximize their form by being more discriminating than the males, thus producing a male with good genes, personal loyalty, and access to valuable resources. The males, in turn, maximize their form by seeking to mate with as many females as possible. To succeed in this, they not only have to compete with other males, but also display qualities that are attractive to females.
Here lies the main difference and the main source of conflict between the two sexes - the huge sexual asymmetry with the minimum reproductive investment required to produce a child who rightly gets a chance to survive. A man can perform the famous "four-minute act" and immediately walk away with impunity, leaving a woman burdened for the next fourteen years of her life. And a man who leaves can produce many more children, unlike a man who does a noble deed and stays to help. Male reproductive success can be achieved by preferring quantity over quality, while for a woman the opposite is true. Women's cautious intelligibility contradicts men's cheerful promiscuity. Be that as it may, the basic requirement of our species is that mothers and children must be protected until they can manage on their own. The fundamental function of human kinship systems, as Lionel Tiger (1999) puts it, italicized for greater persuasiveness, is “to protect the bond between children and mothers from the tenuous and fluid bond between men and women” (p. 22). Our biology is instinctive enough, Tiger says, to move people forward in love affairs, but much less efficient at keeping them together. From here, as we have seen, the development of the institution of marriage began. Once entrusted to a woman, a man must be sure that the children he feeds and protects are his own. How can he be sure they are his? The answer is that he cannot. Since fertilization takes place in the woman's body and is hidden from view, a man can never know for sure that the child is his own. A woman, on the other hand, can know beyond any doubt that the child that emerges from her womb is her own and equipped with her genes. Therefore, there was a choice to increase paternal confidence. Male sexual jealousy, dominance and possessiveness can be seen as the result of selection pressure to achieve some assurance that a man is indeed the father of his wife's children.
An evolutionary analysis of the heterosexual behavior of men and women can thus provide a compelling explanatory insight. However, this understanding more clearly corresponds to the social circumstances of traditional communities, where the consequences of sexual intercourse inevitably entailed the concept of childbirth and the care of children. In our society, all this changed significantly in the 1960s with the advent of reliable contraception in the form of the Pill. This, combined with readily available abortion, achieved a complete transformation in sexual politics, which was cataloged by Lionel Tiger in his book The Decline of Males (1999). “For the first time in the history of human experience,” writes Tiger, “perhaps in nature itself, one sex is able to control the birth of children.” Women can now not only enjoy sex without fear of pregnancy, but, as a result of a radically changed mores, many have children without husbands; some have children without sexual intercourse at all. Paternal uncertainty has correspondingly increased significantly among men as they no longer have a firm grasp of who their children are.
Fatherly insecurity is not an irrational anxiety: it has always been a sexual reality. Numerous DNA studies have confirmed that about 10% of the children of married people are genetically not their own. Under the current circumstances of increased insecurity, it is relatively easy for men to convince themselves that the child is not theirs. In turn, it may be impossible for the mother to convince the man otherwise. As a result, forced marriages are a thing of the past. In the 1890s, an astonishing 30 to 50% of American marriages occurred when the bride was already pregnant. The father acknowledged his responsibility and "performed a worthy deed." Nowadays, a large number of men no longer feel this sense of duty. When the condom became the primary form of contraception, the man was forced to take responsibility if his partner became pregnant. With the advent of oral contraception, this responsibility has passed to the woman. If she becomes pregnant, her father can easily claim that it is her fault and that she must deal with the consequences herself. She will have to decide whether to have an abortion or raise a child without his support. A growing number of women are choosing the latter option. The UK has the highest rate of underage mothers in the industrialized world, with 87% of births occurring to unmarried mothers aged 15-19. In the United States, it is estimated that by 2004 almost half of all births will be due to single mothers. In the UK, 30% of births are by unmarried women. Of these, 40% are registered as single but cohabiting couples; 60% are women living alone. If the family of a single mother is not yet statistically "normal", then soon it will be. Inevitably, this goes along with a diminished male inclination towards the productive and reproductive areas of life. This reinforces the spiritual impoverishment of our society, as it means that millions of people now go through life without the emotional rewards of raising children and, more importantly, millions of children grow up without the love, protection, and “effective” support of a father.
Lionel Tiger believes this sad state of affairs could change if DNA paternity testing becomes readily available: it would provide men with the means to establish their paternity beyond doubt and encourage them to commit more to fatherhood. However, it can also cause controversy: for example, it would expose a man to exploitation if a woman who became pregnant after a “one-time night” decides to keep the child without consulting the father, and then sues him for maintenance.
While DNA testing can reduce a man's propensity to avoid their fatherhood, it is unlikely to have much of an impact on divorce rates. Approximately three-quarters of divorced men remarry (as opposed to two-thirds of divorced women), so many of them end up as stepfathers. In the United States, 60% of children who never lived with their biological fathers live with their stepfathers until the age of 18. While many stepfathers succeed in establishing a good relationship with their stepchildren, some do not, as Daly and Wilson have demonstrated. When stepfathers are abusive, the biological explanation is that they are against investing in a child who carries the genes of another man. This behavior may be particularly evident in some mammals, such as the lion, which, after taking possession of a pride, kills the offspring of its predecessor. Sarah Hrdy (1977), while a primatologist at the University of California, described how dominant males in langur monkey society kill off feeding offspring from a displaced male so that their mother will ovulate again and be ready to conceive new offspring. Although, fortunately, few Western stepfathers go so far (with the exception of Yanomamo) that the biological urges responsible for their violent behavior are similar to the examples given from the animal world.
It should be emphasized again that these urges operate on an unconscious level. When a man becomes violent towards his stepsons and stepdaughters, it is because he is possessed by a form of "biophysical takeover": an autonomous complex with a powerful genetic base takes over and holds him in a vice. As with any other complex, it must be the duty of depth psychology to make it conscious, only when a person places his complex in the realm of consciousness, when he becomes aware of the power of complexes over himself and where they come from, does he become able to do anything with them. do. Consciousness gives him the capacity for ethical choice: he becomes able to decide whether he should overcome complexes.
As we can see, the father archetype is not as simple and unambiguous in its influence as Jungian psychology originally intended it to be. Its basis is in the genetic lower layer of the collective unconscious, which means that its expression depends on the perception that the children for whom it assumes parental responsibility are the product of its loins. If they are not his own, he needs to do psychological work to effectively express himself in his fatherly role if it is important for him to promote the well-being of his stepchildren and avoid harming them. Such is the size of the male population that finds itself in such a position that their willingness to make an ethical commitment to achieving personal consciousness becomes the crux of the biggest social (and psychiatric) problem.
The Daughter archetype is the first female age archetype. This is the first experience of self-awareness, love, alienation, separateness. It's time for awareness
their desires and tastes. Time for experiments. The time of carelessness, which must have time to enjoy.
How the Daughter archetype manifests itself in style:- short lengths of things (mini skirts, crop tops, cropped trousers, baby dollar dresses ...),
- pure shades, often light, marshmallow, - bold or cute prints and patterns on clothes (hearts, cats, birds, cartoons, skulls ... Why
skulls? because the rebellious age of the girl is included here),
- shoes with a rounded toe, cute jumper straps, bows, etc.,
- desire for experimentation. Everything is allowed! There is no single direction (by the way, interestingly, the love of some stylists for a constant cardinal
change of image - is this the unlived archetype of the Daughter? It would be interesting to hear the opinion of a psychologist. They say that choosing a profession is deeply neurotic)
- fast fashion, there is no value in good things, it is important to change clothes and do it easily, according to mood, according to trends,
- “girlish” details (bows, ruffles, headbands with a flower, hairpins, if they are not concise) and rebellious elements
(I repeat, this period includes adolescence, when a girl protests),
- hairstyles. It can be paired braids or bumps, often bangs (although not all), small curls - makeup is delicate and fresh or not.
The Daughter archetype should ideally be lived on time, that is, the bright side of the archetype is from birth to 7 years (have time to play enough, get approval and
admiring others, experimenting without looking back), the dark side of the archetype - from 8 to 15 (revolt, protest, get your right to make a mistake,
in order to understand what responsibility is in the future).
In case the archetype was not lived in time, your Girl will again and again try to work out scenarios from the past and try to earn
love. Hence the ruffled bows on adult women, the desire to attract attention at any cost, everyone likes it.
A timely lived archetype gives us confidence in who we really are (outwardly as well), acceptance of our appearance, even if
she is nonstandard.
And yet - the understanding of what we like. Not to my mother, not to my girlfriend, but to ME.
IMPORTANT! The younger archetypes are organically integrated into the older ones if they have been fully lived.
A woman in the Mother archetype, allows herself cute details that suit her, although they are not the basis of her image.
For example, Sarah Jessica Parker has become quite restrained, and even pragmatic, in her choice of outfits, but still allows herself creative
details that reflect her character, occupation and are suitable, perhaps, only for her))). This one is the built-in archetype of the Daughter in more
older archetype.
In case you are not Sarah Jessica, the Daughter archetype will be expressed more traditionally: brighter colors, greater amplitude in the linearity of the silhouette, etc.