18. Adaptive-defensive mechanisms

In the previous chapter, I mentioned adaptive-defensive mechanisms. It was while I discuss the qualities of the Elements, which I took from Aristotle’s work entitled “On Generation and Corruption”.

Among others, I said that Aristotle divided qualities of Elements into:

• active (or power of action, or act upon, or molding forces),
• susceptible (or suffer action, or act under, or underlines forces as a matter).

Active qualities consist of:
— “hot”, and
— “cool-cold”.

In turn, susceptible qualities consist of:
— “moist-wet”, and
— “dry”.

I also presented the above division in the diagram.

As we can see above, qualities create two opposing pairs:

• “hot”—“cool-cold”, and
• “dry”—“moist-wet”.

The above division was very interesting for me because I associated it with adaptive-defensive mechanisms. These mechanisms, like qualities, we can also divide into two opposing pairs. It means:

• Extraversion—Introversion, and
• Perceiving—Judging

From the above pairs:

• Extraversion—Introversion
  in my opinion, is analogous to the pair:
  — “hot”—“cool-cold”,
  that is, active qualities.
• Perceiving—Judging
  in my opinion, is analogous to the pair:
  — “dry”—“moist-wet”
  that is, susceptible qualities.

I will also present the above summary in the table and in the diagram.

So, I said that adaptive-defensive mechanisms are analogous to the qualities of Elements from Aristotle’s theory. And as we can see in the diagram above, these mechanisms are other elements that I have placed on four auxiliary reference points of our psyche.

In that case, let us say what these adaptive-defensive mechanisms are?

As I said above, these mechanisms consist of:

• Extraversion—Introversion,
• Perceiving—Judging.

So, we have two opposite pairs of mechanisms, that is, four mechanisms in total.

Where did these mechanisms come from?

These mechanisms came from Carl Gustav Jung’s work. I will use here a short quote from his book “Psychological Types”.

I think that before I go into further considerations, I should point out that the term “empathy” derived from the German word „Einfühlung”. „Einfühlung” means “feeling into” or enter into the spirit of.

The word “empathy” comes from this that in 1909 the American psychologist E. B. Titchener translated „Einfühlung” as empathy. And next with time, empathy became a very popular term.

So, in the above quote, Jung says that adaptive-defensive mechanisms include:

• Empathy,
• Abstraction,
• Introversion, and
• Extraversion.

And here is a very interesting thing, because Jung, despite the fact that he distinguished four adaptive-defensive mechanisms, he ultimately focused only on two mechanisms, namely:

• Introversion, and
• Extraversion.

As for:

• Empathy, and
• Abstraction,

Jung ultimately did not use these two mechanisms for his typology—“Psychological Types”.

Instead, Jung:

• “Empathy” considered as a similar to “Extraversion”, and
• “Abstraction” as a similar to “Introversion”.

These considerations we can find in chapter “VII. The type problem in aesthetics” of his book “Psychological Types”.

Jung in this chapter based, among others, on the work of:

• German art historian Wilhelm Worringer (author among others of the book “Abstraction and Empathy” („Abstraktion und Einfühlung”).
• And the German philosopher and analytical psychologist Theodor Lipps who acknowledge “Einfühlung”, as an important philosophical and psychological concept.

As for the terms “Abstraktion” and “Einfühlung”, the term “Einfühlung” is particularly interesting.

The creator of “Einfühlung” is Robert Vischer, who used this word in aesthetics. This term meant a process where one’s own sensitivity is transferred to a given object. So, the term expresses the “feeling into” or “entering into the spirit of” something. For example, the artist can “feel into”, that is, emphasize, with his creation. Thanks to this, he transfers his sensitivity to the work he creates. The effect of this can be that a given work can emanate, for example, a state of mind, emotions, various mental states, a specific atmosphere, etc.

Later the term “Einfühlung” also used the German philosopher Wilhelm Dilthey. He used this term as — ability to emphasize (or feel into) with other people.

Thus, “Einfühlung” become a term used in psychology and aesthetic (or art).

In psychology, however, the English version of “ ”, that is, “empathy” become more popular.

In aesthetics, in turn, an example of “Einfühlung” according to the above-mentioned—Wilhelm Worringer is:
— synthetism (an art movement initiated by Paul Gauguin),
— expressivism (to this art movement we may include Paul Cézanne and Vincent van Gogh).

In turn, to the second term mentioned above, namely, “abstraction” we can associate with the art movement:
— abstractionism.

The precursors of this movement are Wassily Kandinsky and Edward Munch.

When it comes to abstraction in psychology, it involves abstracting. It means:
— among some elements, distinguishing, what makes them different.
— and highlighting elements, which have something in common.

Such elements can be information, traits of something or someone, concepts, ideas, problems, matters, etc.

For example, if we are dealing with someone’s characteristics:
— we distinguish traits that are different from ours,
— and we distinguish traits which have something in common with our traits (or with traits we have previously distinguished in others).

So, it is the opposite process to empathy, because we empathize with someone to discover:
— what connects us with each other,
— or what makes us different.

Thanks to the Mandala of Characters, we can also say that:

• in the process of Empathy are involved in mainly two basic functions, that is:
  — Intuition, and
  — Feeling.
• and in the process of Abstraction are involved in mainly the next two functions, that is:
  — Thinking, and
  — Sensation.

As I mentioned above, Jung connected:
— Empathy with Extraversion, and
— Abstraction with Introversion.

In retrospect, however, I think that Jung underestimated Empathy and Abstraction, namely, in German “Einfühlung” and “Abstraktion”.

I think that here we should agree with the researches whom Jung mentioned in his considerations about “Einfühlung” and “Abstraktion”, that is, with:
— Wilhelm Worringer, who wrote about the significance of abstraction and empathy in aesthetics,
— Theodor Lipps, who wrote about the significance of empathy in philosophy and psychology.

In my opinion, these researches were right, believing that these are key concepts.

However, Jung assumed that there are two main adaptive-defensive mechanisms.

In the Mandala of Characters, I assumed that there are four mechanisms, not two. So, abstraction and empathy are “parts” that are very useful for me.

My assumption that there are four mechanisms, not two, was based on inspiration from Ancient Typology and other factors. I will talk about some of these factors in a while in this chapter. And about the other factors, I will talk in the next chapters.

So, one of the factors leading me to the fact that there is a third and fourth adaptive-defensive mechanism appeared later in the works of Katharine Cook Briggs, and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers. Although, these mechanisms are named differently by these personality researches, however, they are nevertheless. It means these two mechanisms are described as—preferences. And these two preferences are:
— Perceiving, and
— Judging.

Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers were one of the most famous continuators of Jung’s work on personalities. They also greatly contributed to the popularization of Jung’s ideas. They are the most known from Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®, MBTI® for short. It is one of the most popular indicators of personality. It is important here that it is the indicator, not a test. The word “test”, among others, is somewhat stressful because of the result of the test. While personality, according to the above researchers, is a gift worth understanding to be able to use this gift in the best possible way. So, it is better to indicate personality than testing it.

Returning to the terms “Perceiving” and “Judging”, they become popular. Besides, they are also very relevant. That is why I decided to use them in the Mandala of Characters. I also used them earlier in this chapter.

As I mentioned above, I think that these terms are analogous to the mentioned above, Empathy and Abstraction. It means:
— the equivalent of “Empathy” is the concept of “Judging,
— and the equivalent of “Abstraction” is the concept of “Perceiving”.

For greater clarity, I will put the above terms in the table.

So, in general, I decided to make a synthesis:
— Jung’’s “Psychological Types”, and
— Cook Briggs and Briggs Myers typology.

I present this synthesis in the table below. In this table, I also placed the basic psychological functions that I discussed in earlier chapters.

My synthesis here is that:

• from Jung’s Psychological Types I used the division into:
  — basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, and Feeling),
  — and adaptive-defensive mechanisms (Introversion and Extraversion).
• and from Cook Briggs and Briggs Myers typology I took two so-called preferences, namely, — Perceiving, and
  — Judging,
  and I treated them as two adaptive-defensive mechanisms, that is, as equivalents to the above-mentioned “Abstraction” and “Empathy”

So on the Mandala of Characters we have:

• four basic psychological functions:
  — Intuition,
  — Sensation,
  — Thinking, and
  — Feeling,
• and four adaptive-defensive mechanisms:
  — Introversion,
  — Extraversion,
  — Perceiving (or Abstraction) and
  — Judging (or Empathy).

In the diagram below, I present how the above functions and mechanisms are arranged on the Mandala of Characters.

In the above diagram, I also put Jung’s terms regarding “Perceiving” and “Judging”, which Jung considered but did not treat them as separate mechanisms. It means:
— “Abstraction”—which is the equivalent of “Perceiving”,
— “Empathy”—which is the equivalent of “Judging”.

Returning to the above synthesis of Jung’s “Psychological Types” and Cook Briggs and Briggs Myers typology division into: — basic psychological function, and — adaptive-defensive mechanisms

is also analogical to other elements that I described in previous chapters. And I will describe in the next chapters of this description the construction of the Mandala of Characters.

While in this chapter, I am talking about the fact that:
— the above functions and mechanisms from Jung’s typology are analogical
— to the main Elements and qualities that we have the Ancient Typology.

In the diagram below, I show how are arranged the above functions and mechanisms, and the main Elements and qualities.

In the following table, for the record, I list the main Elements and basic psychological functions.

Now, I will return to the considerations of adaptive-defensive mechanisms.

Below, I recall the table I used earlier in this chapter. And this table concerns the qualities of Elements and adaptive-defensive mechanisms.

Now, I think it’s worth saying why I believe that the qualities and mechanisms are analogical.

In the table above, we can see that qualities are divided into two groups. It means:

1. Active qualities that contain:
   • “hot”, and
   • “cool-cold”.
2. And susceptible (suffer action) qualities that contain:
   • “dry”, and
   • “moist-wet”.

Adaptive-defensive mechanisms can also be divided into two groups. To this end, I will use the division that is used in mentioned above typology created by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. In studies of their typology, we can often find such two phrases:

1. “Energy source” that include:
   • Introversion, and
   • Extraversion.
2. And “lifestyle” that include:
   • Perceiving, and
   • Judging.

Now, I will add to the previous table the phrases “energy source” and “lifestyle”.

I will also place the phrases “energy source” and “lifestyle” on the diagram that I used above.

And now we can see that:
— “active qualities” (or power of action) are analogical to “energy sources”, and
— susceptible qualities (which suffer action) are analogical to “lifestyle.

So, phrases from Aristotle’s theory are analogical to phrases from the works of researches who are developing Jung’s theory.

Regarding the “lifestyle”, we can ask yet, what this “lifestyle” actually is for Perceiving and Judging?

Here, I will use the table from the previous chapter regarding qualities “dry” and “moist-wet” from Aristotle’s theory, and I will modify it a little.

Of course, here I am guided by the idea that the above terms and phrases we can use in the symbolic sense. The symbolism of these terms and phrases can have many different associations.

For example, we can say that:

• “dry” lifestyle (Perceiving, Abstraction),
  — on the one hand can be hard, rigid, and rough,
  — and on the other hand, can be dry, crispy, and delicate.
• in turn, the “moist-wet” lifestyle (Judging, empathy),
  — one the one hand can be flexible, elastic, fine, and fluent,
  — and on the other hand, can be slight, flabby, limp, and small.

As for the next two adaptive-defensive mechanisms, that is, Introversion and Extraversion, we can see in the diagram above, that they are defined by two phrases:

• active qualities or power of action—phrases from Aristotle’s theory,
• energy source—phrase from Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers typology.

Here we can clearly see that both phrases (ancient and modern) in their meanings are very similar. And all in all, we know what the terms Introversion and Extraversion are related to.

However, if we ask what the term Introversion and Extraversion mean, then the matter is more complicated.

This is complicated because Introversion and Extraversion are commonly considered as personality traits. Ant so often very unfairly:
— Extravert is defined as an open and cooperative,
— Introvert, in turn, as a closed and withdrawn.

Unfortunately, the above understanding of Introversion and Extraversion is far from what the creator of these terms, namely Carl Gustav Jung, thought about them.

First of all, Jung did not consider Introversion and Extraversion as personality traits. We can see it, for example, in the following quote:

Besides, Jung creating these concepts to a large extent based on his work as a psychiatrist. We can see it in the next quote:

Jung, therefore, assumed that the mechanisms which occur in diseases such as hysteria and schizophrenia to some extent also occur in healthy people. Specifically:
— schizophrenia—corresponds to the excess of mechanism, which is—Introversion,
— hysteria—corresponds to the excess of mechanism, which is—Extraversion.

What characterizes these two mechanisms?

Extraversion reduces the importance of this what is inside, and focuses more on this what is outside. In other words, we are dealing here with focusing on the object that is outside of us.

In turn, Introversion reduces the importance of this what is outside, and focuses more on this what is inside. In other words, we are dealing here with focusing on the object that is inside of us. Of course, in relation to people, we do not say that people have objects inside their psyche. Then, in Introversion, we should say that it is about focusing on the subject. It means focusing:
— on ourselves,
— on our interior, or on our inner world,
— on our psyche,
— on this, what is in our psyche,
— on this, what is happening in our psyche,
— etc.

Summarizing:

• When we “turn on” our Introversion mechanism:
  — we are giving priority to what is happening in our inner world,
  — and we postpone what is happening in our surroundings.
  In other words, we direct our energy to the inner world, that is, to the subject we are.
• In turn, when we “turn on” our Extraversion mechanism:
  — we give priority to what is happening in our outer world,
  — and we postpone what is happening inside us.
  In other words, we direct our energy to the outer world, that is to the external object. For example, to something that is outside of us, or is outside of ourselves.

For me, in the above definitions, it is important that Introversion and Extraversion are mechanisms that we turn on or off depending on our needs and our attitude. Similarly, we can also turn on and off the other two mechanisms, namely:
— Perceiving (Abstraction), and
— Judging (Empathy).

The fact that we can turn on or off our adaptive-defensive mechanisms means that they are something auxiliary to basic psychological functions. Therefore, these mechanisms should be placed in our four additional reference points of our psyche.

At this point, we have the following terms at these auxiliary reference points.

And, this is how my first approach to adaptive-defensive mechanisms looks like. The first approach, because at this point, I will not finish describing these mechanisms. Personally, what I wrote above was not clear and understandable enough for me. It means it was not clear to me at the time when I was creating the Mandala of Characters. I had the feeling that I still do not really know what these mechanisms mean? Besides, we have differences in the common understanding of these mechanisms. Especially, I have in mind here that the popular understanding of Introversion and Extraversion is different from Jung’s understanding, that is, the creator of these concepts.

So, I had dilemmas related to my feeling that I did not fully understand what these mechanisms were about, and that the meaning of adaptive-defensive mechanisms is understood differently.

To solve these dilemmas, I decided to create my own definitions of adaptive-defensive mechanisms. Such definitions that would be short enough to fit into the Mandala of Characters and understandable enough to know what they actually mean.

The individual parts of the definitions of adaptive-defensive mechanisms I will present in the next few chapters of this description of the construction of the Mandala of Characters.

Bibliografia