Method, Process or Function

Before turning to the paper itself, which focuses mainly on how the transcendent function operates, it is worth asking the question what is the transcendent function exactly? Is it the expression of the relationship between conscious and the unconscious? Is it the process that ensues out of such opposition? Is it the method one can use to conduct the process? Is it the final result, the third thing that emerges? Or is it some combination of all of these?

Looking at quotes in the Collected Works it seems that Jung used the term in varying ways:

The whole process is called the “transcendent function.” It is a process and a method at the same time. The production of unconscious compensations is a spontaneous process; the conscious realisation is a method. The function is called “transcendent” because it facilitates the transition between one psychic condition to another by means of mutual confrontation of the opposites. (Jung 1958, p489)

This passage highlights how Jung used the term differently to describe function, process and method. The dialogue between conscious and unconscious is a function because it reflects a relationship between them. In the opening paragraph of “The Transcendent Function,” for example, Jung focuses on the relational aspect explaining that the transcendent function “means a psychological function” that “arises from the union of conscious and unconscious contents” (Jung 1960, p69). But what flows from the relationship is a process through which the polarities are discharged. In “On the Psychology of the Unconscious” (1953), Jung calls the transcendent function a “process of coming to terms with the unconscious” (p80). In another example, in Mysterium Coniunctionis (1963) he describes the transcendent function as the “continual process of getting to know the counter-position in the unconscious” (p200). Jung then also writes that the conscious practice of it can become a method:

But it can be used as a method too; that is, when the contrary will of the unconscious is sought for and recognised in dreams and other unconscious products. In this way the conscious personality is brought face to face with the counter position of the unconscious…Hence the transcendent function is only usable in part as a method, the other part always remains an involuntary experience. (Jung 1973a, p268)

Jung also calls the new thing that emerges, the third, the transcendent function in various places. An example of this is when, in describing a patient’s enormous shifts through joining the conscious and the unconscious, he concludes, “The result…is the transcendent function born of the union of the opposites” (Jung 1953, p223). Similarly, in working with a patient’s dream during a seminar, Jung refers to the animal in the dream as symbolising the reconciliation of the opposites: “From this reconciliation a new thing is always created, a new thing is realised. That is the transcendent function.” (Jung 1984, p648)

As the quote above demonstrates, the other question that comes to mind is whether the transcendent function is a natural process that occurs spontaneously in the psyche or a method that can be prompted or both. The ambiguity around the term the transcendent function, and whether it is a natural process or not, can be better understood in terms of individuation. On the one hand, individuation is an archetypal process pulling all people toward a purpose that can only be realised by the integration of the material in the unconscious. This archetypal vision would see the transcendent function as a natural and ongoing process on that road. Jung spoke of the natural occurrence of the transcendent function:

The transcendent function…is a natural process, a manifestation of energy that springs from the tension of the opposites…The natural process by which the opposites are united came to serve me as the model and basis for a method. (Jung 1953, p80)

On the other hand, consciousness and the unconscious are separated by opposites the very nature of which are almost impossible to reconcile. Therefore the transcendent function is in no way assured to happen and needs artificial help. Having observed the organic workings of the psyche and how it deals with tension of the opposites Jung seems to have developed his method that became practically known as active imagination. At the end of the “Transcendent Function” essay he questions whether the process is purely natural by stating that if the psychological attitude is not correct then it is unlikely to happen at all:

Consciousness is continually widened through the confrontation with previously unconscious contents, or - to be more accurate - could be widened if it took the trouble to integrate them. That is naturally not always the case. Even if there is sufficient intelligence to understand the procedure, there may yet be lack of courage and self-confidence, or one is too lazy, mentally and morally, or too cowardly, to make the effort. (Jung 1960, p91)

So it would seem that the transcendent function is both natural (instinctive) and can be prompted or assisted (developed). The two aspects can occur together, sometimes independently, and sometimes in rhythm with each other.