Regulating the Psyche: The Essential Contribution of Kant

Jung’s difficult relationship with Philosophy is well known and has, to some extent, carried over into later work in the field, which tends to view ideas of a philosophical provenance with some suspicion. Nowhere is this more apparent than with ‘archetype’ and the perceived problems with the Kantian noumenal with which it is felt to be inevitably connected. My concern is that such suspicion is rarely psychological, that is, it does not take into consideration enough the psychological aspects and roles of such putatively questionable philosophical ideas. This is another aspect of not really appreciating the psychological aspects of some philosophy due to the illusion of disparity created by what often amounts to a difference of vocabulary rather than of fundamental concerns. I will examine some of the central Kantian concepts that I believe are fundamentally psychological and essential if we are to retain concerns that distinguish Analytical Psychology from related disciplines. We may feel a scientific or philosophical embarrassment when faced with ideas such as ‘noumena’ but my feeling is that, psychologically, there is little to be embarrassed about: such ideas are extremely important in giving some substance to defining concepts of the field of Analytical Psychology.