II. Part II – Who is I and where did I come Ifrom?where did Iand Partis Who– II PartIntroduction- I II. I. V PartPoetics- IV IV. PartPerceptionIII- III. Keywords Abstract .NarrativeModes d. Projection c. Shadow The b. OtherThe– Reflection a. .Silence b. Light a. MemoryImaginationand b. Perception of Phenomenology a. iii. Second Person – The OtherPersonThe – Second iii. iv. Phase Shift of Modesof PhaseShift iv. ii. First Person – The MePersonThe – First ii. .Roots i. The Phenomenology of Projected SelfPhenomenologyThe Projectedof The I Becomes theOther:I The Becomes Brett M. Wilbur, BA, BrettWilbur, RA,M. CCS

Page1 of invulnerability. The statement “I am afraid of the dark when I am alone” has richness and richnesshas amIthedark alone” whenof statementamafraid The “I invulnerability. of treacheryourexperience.of shirkingWetake wetheOtheras wanttohideblowthe own our transcends thataberration psychologicala is words,it on playa or semantics More than indifference.as itself experienceintrospectivetheinternalbut story-telling, of pleasure thesocial us skews allow to experience recoveran as to we- arepastourunable of shelves dustythe on darkness– themeaning,residememoryexperience thatof ultimatelyof subtlenessa and “feeling” discernible a withnarrationthe imbibeforms second and thefirstboth experiencesideas.orfirst-person Though narrative theirdescribe tothesecond-person uses person another levelwhen basica on identifiesOne being.”and body ownour becomesof part it self-identity; our becomes integratedwith domicile body. Ourourmemoryof wethethathavetherecognized,placesintowethathaveall towns visited, and thecities all Wetransfer rememberingplace. or spaceof a the basis as roleessentialan memoryhas embodied “An theSkin:EyesTheof in summarizes Pallasmaa Juhani Introduction introspection.methodologies,person Keywords:art, architecture,phenomenology, self,first perception, psychology, memory, self-generation.of nuances actualourselvesourfromUltimately,we isolatethings. of world memorytheoutside with and dreams,of imaginationworldtheinsideconcurrence of dimensionala as place,manifestsand space of and consciousness,and experience the essence perception The of of therealself. of extension an as off cast toois self sensualbecomesour moreself oculocentric,sense architecture.of our As thear mothertheof in general,specificallyart,of in and perceptionaffectsour phenomenologically reflectiveselfthis that posited also is Other.of expression an Itinto shifts phase momentarily Self identifieus each of me-nessthat Thevocabulary. mayprecedein choice confidence that lackof a fearthat and and ideas, of expressionthein part majora play colloquialismand habitsay thatgoesto also disease.generalizedexistentiala of It symptomaticbeto proposedis self one’ssense of tear in discursive experiencetheworld-as-is. of and reality, This cognition, second-person betweenand first- split dianoetica representsit fullybut shadow, theJungian just morethan embodies experience.This integrate to first-perthe abilitythe off cast toone leading self individuatedthe acceptanceof lackof a as proposed current Thetendencyis interaction.conversational casual in second-personthe of expressedusetheby is as self one’s of deniala tendencytowards ubiquitous Therecommon a appears Abstract Projected of Self Phenomenology WhyTheBecomesI You: behind the illusion thebehind . Our memoryOur . - and second-and - perceptual perceptual incarnate son disguises s as our as s s in s ts,

Page2 — DR. CARL GUSTAV JUNG GUSTAV CARLDR.— halves.”opposing intobe torn and perforce themust conflictout theact worldopposite, innerhis of becomenot does conscious and undivided remains whensay,thetoindividual is That fate. as outsidehappens it conscious, madenot is situationinnerwhenan thatsays rule psychological “The Shadow reflection.impure t relateddirectly totherefore,and,deliberateis that morereflectiona cognitive therreflection.purea Itis reflection. intuitiveor Second,termed is “introspection”that reimmediatetherethatSartre,First,is To therereflection. of were kinds two 187) p. Franz, (von at lookingis every itwhat existencethein of naturedream,of and example,clearer for obtaina notion vicebeversa,and, theseenobject egocan thattheas theSelfcan egothatof the from standpoint itself theegoaboutof ruminations narcissistic self-knowledge;everythinggenuine sourceof hencetheis theonly Self by us to up the heldmirror “ saysthat Psychology Jungianin Re-Collection and Projectionin Franzvon Marie-Louise Phenomenologyand Jung in quoted(as question.the asking is thethatpsyche of sensereflection a a in always is itself of shows the whatthatthe psyche, and about askquestions canthatpsychethe only is itarguedthatJung OtherThe– Reflection environment.influential current m stateour byof changed eachtimesubtlyitself;event in time,original an overover in played and is orderitas first is event, it but original the ordertosecond effe to ability realityand own itspowerand ownits with thing-in-itselfa event;is itoriginalthe event,it is northeoriginalmemory event.not is original the therealrealityof as as The weorder experience,experience. ratherdescribe second a which than m image about an As converealand longerare no being. of now-nessthe Memories in remainlongerwe no Existentially, pain. abhors naturally subconscious,oursafetya of - catch being integrate reluctanceto our thesedarkof parts presumesentence.or it thesameconversation cuewithin on mind stateof I this of outand in slip as randomly, occursus. This of partaccepthavethattonotwe thatselves do so our abouttalk selvestoourof we outsidestepif as Itis absolute.shared a as thefeeling minimizing and generalizing own ones of thesingularity lacks dark”theknow,reallyscary it’sin you’rewhen alone thestatement “You in “you” ubiquitousthe of theuse hand, otherthe essencegenuineness. it’sis On fear. reala existential of Phenomenologically, exclamation straight-forward simple, a is authenticity. It by RogerbyBrooke,63) p. ”. (von Franz, p. 187) She goes on to say that “ say thatto goeson 187) p. Franz, (von ”. She flection of the Self to itself to theSelfof flection he ego, a positional, or ego,positional,a he ind, and our currentourand ind, our mind; each mind; our experience, what weseewhat in e is a morea is e a simulation of simulationa so to say.to so Life emories areemories it is only is it ct us. Itis us. ct one canone psyche elseis is a is rt to to rt ”.

Page3 substantially similar, they are only superficially analogous. We can not gaze upon their depth just as we as justdepththeir gaze Weupon not can analogous. theysuperficially aresimilar,only substantially imagesare not conjoined us. The in is reflect whichtheythatas only muchas existence,in but their of inadequacycommentarythea muchon so not is buildingsour of aspect hidden This facades. building ourrealmasksselvestheclothe as we aretoownuseand material ouras hide we to use maskcontemporarystructuresourarebedazzlement.thatwondermere ocularour fordressing The of we orphans thetakeby Can theworkforcreditdone being.our retchedthe cast-off art,trof when arewhothemagicians us We thesurface.is believeto it it with idea the hauling consciousness to up risesand depths ourin dwells that aberrationshadowytheis itnot; is it penetratthethatI wethatis arecreativeit the mastersthatour spirit,of delusion Weselves. act conscious our becomewith oneand lighttheintoseep out they wouldwe could, existence,their discern weevenexist,if as coulddon’t inadequacies our pretend to us Theyallow t ourselves. on yearnto endeared,bethattovalidatedbe provide to we not can We Weyearnscrutiny. for social cinematicin livedimages, lives our menagerie hollowsoftof a reality– shoredour underminingbeingour of walls escapes thethin loneliness bodies.our Haughty we as buildings our dressup meaningless.architectureouris thattruth the seekhideto We w as the world, to being ourof truththeseekhideto inadequacies. fearsthoseand of projection We le nothingis architectureour it as is tooso areinside;seek thefromflawedbut perfection Weanother. upon poisetoaway us from sifting unconsciousfrailour of listlessness feelthe but not can inadequacy.of feelings Weunconscious ownour of projectioninferior becomesan the buildingas architecture,thearrogance modernmodern the of and in beautyaesthetic and depth lackof t explains selves.overownourand control This webeing,maintain By inferiortheOthermakingan creativity."seatthe of is shadow this—theof becauseperhapsdarkness—orreservoira as human for functionitsof spite "inthatexclaimed also Jung unconscious. ( experience"personalby - untouchable perhapsand untouched, - theunconsciouslayersuppertheof evendependenton notis and mind theconscious of independentlygoeson whichactivity "apsychicas deethis described experiences.Jung human all of contentspsychicform the archetypeswhich layers,however,theseUnderneathidiosyncraticrepression.a orforgetfulness,arethe simple another,to thingonefrom attention theof change as things such by the individualin unconscious experiences.Thesearedirectpersonalmade of manifestationsand flow meaningfulthe contain layetopThe shadow. thelayeroneup theremaking moreof thanbeing Hemadethesuggestion is."denseritblackerthe and life, conscious individual's animus thethreerecognizable of mostoneItis instincts. and theof parta is shadow The ness. heror I-his someof aspect dissociates and off splitsliterally individualan when is self— disowned the In Campbell Jungian psychology Jungian and the persona. "Everyone carries a shadow," Jung wrote, "and the less it is embodied in the in embodied"Everyoneis it wrote, theJung less persona.carriestheshadow,"a "andand , 1971). This bottom layer of the shadow is also what Jung referredJungwhatthecollectiveas also tois theshadow layerof bottom , This 1971). , the , shadow unconscious mind unconscious or "or shadowaspect [11] consisting of consisting archetypes " —also known as psychodynamic repression or or repression psychodynamicas known—also " [9] , the others being the,beingothersthe repressed weaknesses, shortcomings, es to the depths, but but depths, the to es uly it is the not us,the not is it uly he grand stage.grand he anima and anima our soul? It is no is soul? It our ss than the than ss approval sinceapproval architect, dressup

per layerper with thewith rs

for if for he s e

Page4 reason, it is sometimesreferredis reason,"itas to bytheoryThedevelopedwas recognize them.mind theconscious letting without desires or impulses unconsciousunwantedtheof expressionthe allowingreducesby anxiety Projection elsesomeone to are attributed feelings threateningorrepressedthenunacceptable and own person's a when occursthatdefenseseena mechanismalwaysas is projection psychology classicalIn them.understandingin greathas difficultiespeople otherto feelings owntheir ascribing of incapable Aper functioning.socialtheythatarenormal for is prerequisites projectionsviewA modern of truthful.being deceive thereforetodeceiversforwassureself-deceivedand behopebehave to as only t point the to improvedothers in detecttodeceptioncapacity intellectual sapiens'homowhen mechanismself-defense a as valuesurvivalhad probably faculty speaking,this Paleo-anthropologically ourselves.about keep ourselvesuninformed whichbymechanism fundamental the is It hidden. is nature itworkitsbybecause towith, difficult extremely processes,and psychological humanof subtle and profoundmostthe of oneis Projection world. theoutsidearetoascribedwhich the shadow, notablyemotions, and thoughts, attributes, own person's a of denialactof unconscioustheis bias) projection(or projectionPsychological Other.authentican seeas tolearnedpersonother thehaveornot t projectionstermsown their of in seeseachhimselfperson Since them. reflected self in Weseeingother;theare object.otherwethat notareof representationsseeingour reflectedourOtheris backtowe authentictake an which be to self projected Our therealworld. and betweenegothe ever an illusion forming bythickerof fog individualscripple and insulate projections power." its characteristicof somesituationother aboutbring one--or has it object--ifrealizeits canand freea archetype)has hand thenShadow(thefactor projection-making"The unrecognized these if writesthatJung else. someoneperceivedin a deficiencymoralinto inferiority pe a project:to turning proneis irrational, and instinctivebeing in Jung,shadow,thetoAccording Projection twists.knowtheselves.ourof reflectiona And wet wantthemtheywhichas revealthat us backto within hidesperceive real.as Truth whicthatof “know” returnseenbe ourselves,and by however,in notcanus they gazeupon Sigmund Freud Sigmund Freudian ProjectionFreudian and further refined by his daughterhis by furtherrefined and " [2][3] Anna FreudAnna self as distortedas self projections of ourof projections projections areprojections hey are not ableareheynot o see in them as seein o if theywere if h they h ;this for . [1] son hat thehat [10] rsonal These we

Page5 Direct( p.389).(Allport,wepossess. p.390) (Allport,others. of behaviorand intentions imagined (Allport, p.388).(Allport, wall, hoping someone will walk by who fits its outlines exactly….outlinesitsfits whowalkby will someone hoping wall, the say, might ontoyou projected this all gifts…dreams,yes, unrealized and and own one’s one’shopes of all imagecontains imageoverprojectedone, thatan projector…anloved theslide a from though image, as unrealistic an be to appearsinvestigation, upon actually, feeling, in enormous of flush That soul… otherthis we perfectiononto project beautyand of vision over-idealizedan mergingsomehowwithself,butpersonal a of keeping much ‘the‘theother,’ love:weidealize whenseeingthemare bothas itin first do We all becomesexclaims,an weperceivebeingare,Mart as separateweouras essentiallywhoof aspectfromitand witwesincearebutunfamiliar “I” ownreally our is us to unbeknownstwhich we“Thou”, the see is culture.our aboutourselvesand ourselves;aboutaccept Whataboutdesires we notcan narcissistic the reprTheseprojectionsego.elseis dance.eternaldeath recedes silenta reflections Allin infinite samethe t they as for areand one AND an relationship not theOther is with relationshipIThe you."intogazes also theabyss abyss an into long gazeyou whenAndbecome monster.not does a he himself that it tolook should monsters with "Hefightswho by anticipatedwasconceptThe archetypalimage". an project MythsCreationMirroredin Franz Von Marie-Louise HereAllport,(G.arethree projectiontypesof i.e. philosopherThe another."themto attributingdangerous—by obscene, too tooshameful, unacceptable—too PeterGay Mirrors of the OthertheMirrorsof features.similar remarretainshouseown our theOther,as thedarkbecause in dweller thisWe identifysingular. Mote-Beamprojection Complementary projectionComplementary , the idea that an anthropomorphic deity is the outward projection of man's anxieties and desiresand anxietiesman's of projection outward the is deity anthropomorphican that theidea , Neurotic) projectioNeurotic) describes it as "the operation of expelling feelings or wishes the individual finds wholly wholly finds theindividual wishesor feelings expelling of "the operationas it describes Ludwig FeuerbachLudwig It extended the view of projection to cover phenomena in in coverto phenomena projection theviewextended of outside of the unity between our selves and thebetweenselvesand ourthe unity of outside is exaggerating qualities in others that we both posses but that we do not know not wethatdo butposses we thatothersbothin exaggerating is qualities : "... wherevertherewhere"...weunknown,thereality stops, weknown touch : n is perceiving others as operating in ways we finds objectionable in our self. self. our in objectionable wayswefinds in operating perceivingas others is n is explaining and justifying our own state of mind by referenceby mindthe stateto of ownour justifying and explaining is [7] . Friedrich NietzscheFriedrich based his theory of religion in large part upon the idea of projection,of ideathe large upon part in religiontheory of his based The Nature The Prejudiceof :

[8] ): Thou . Separate, unique,. Separate, PatternsCreativityof I and the Thou’… not not theThou’…Iand in Buber in [4] heir esent esent kably h this h [5] .

Page6 ADD Pallasmaa quote: about all the places wememory.ourthehave placesbeen in are all containedquote: about PallasmaaADD duality.of discernmenta as selfsenseof a maintain to then,is function, only fragmentedtheof recollepiecesthemissing in” powertriggers “fills gestalta which unifying theexternalobject and subjectbetweentheegoFreud,mediatorthe wasinteriorthe theSe with identified beenreflected has backand imagewhich internalized thewith dialogue memoriesthesefuturefordreamsand holds object Each field. spatio-temporal theoutside being as objectthe Architecture.truememorieswith dreamsin is storeand our it Selves. So We westoreour which vessel the withinOtherthe is how us showsthat relationshipthisis Likewise, it looking-glass.any as candid beas I'll Nowaskmequestions. you. of Every inch INEZ:can. IBut properly.seeIcan'tI'mOh,there!myselftiny so But ESTELLE: see? you do Whateyes.my into Look Closer. closer. Comedown. Sit prettyhands. yourhands,your I'vematter?Ifsuffer, to itdoesit what got Still,me.hurt you'll moreINEZ: likelyMuch neverOnetell. can ESTELLE: you? hurtwantedIto if as lookI INEZ:Do yourself.it said You eachother.hurtwe'reButto--to going ESTELLE: INEZ:heOh,doesn'tcount. GARCIN.]toBut--[Points ESTELLE: sofa. my on Here'sdear.you formevisit, place a a pay and Come glass? be yourtotryIINEZ:Suppose can't. simply everfor and looking-glassa crooked.No, without do can'tII'mall sureI'veon itlipstick! put My de Oh . . keptthe. me. othersit sawas meAndsomehowalert, myselfseeing talking. watched myself seemyse Icould whichmadesure there in onenear by Iwas always people toItalkedabsent! When whichin They'reme.thecarpet,reflecting glass a the is,settee,it empty how thewindow--but Thereseethecan bedroom.are.ItheyBut them.my in mirrors I've big sleep. to onesix want Itmakes vague,it?so isn'tone's is headin on goeseverything that But mind. your Ahyes,in ESTELLE: conscious. Painfully mind. my myself--inof conscious I'malways INEZ:You'relucky. makemuch. to helpdoesn'tsure, just it but myself Ipat exist. truly and reallyI wonderif tobegin everyou Ican' queer.When Don'therself.]I[Shefeelget so taken way?pats that ESTELLE: Inez’eyestheyreflect wereto if herself as passagegoes:mirror.a The theroom, thereshe mirrors arein Since her vanity. no arrogant in heris she as make-up apply Sartre’seyestheEstelleseeOther.theNoExit,ourselvesof throughonlycan us. We to In r determineis whatprojections us. OurseeWearchitecture wein notwhatseecan thatin projection.divine humans) (for unlivabletheto up livethemthen,expecting to and person… another overit drapingand Perfection’ aloud,‘Wondrousdreaming unconsciously us bycaused becan this all magnitude…of projectioncomesa fromthat illusion optical theyforarecarryingodd an sheen…. quadruple triple, double,takeson but gifts, own their with shines only not one theloved Thus, may as well be atwell as may . Its senseof . Its t see myself Isee myself t needs to to needs eflected backeflected imaginary y don't seedon't y ction. Its lf. For I'm uses ever.I

lf. I lf. ar!

Page7 mind." (Cooley 1964)(Cooleymind." anot upon reflectioneffectthisof sentiment, the imagined imputed an ourselves, butof reflection merethe not m is shameor prideto movesthatus thing"Thesaid, Cooley respect thisto I you.' unto havethemdo wouldothers,you as unto 'Do of, notionthe is This others.empathyforas we arewho about identity an developothers,to wewithbegin interaction Through actualized. GeorgeHerbert Mead pass.'Reflectsthedothother that looking-glass eacha to 'Each Order,Naturethe Human Social and self,glass looking Cooley’sHortonCharles – others. of judgments the throughselfWeourdevelop (Self).identity our developssubsequentlywhich mentalof interworkinginterweavingand an is society that writingin it clarified Cooleyothers. percepttheand interactions society'sinterpersonal of growsoutself person's a that concept Createdby 1962). (Blumer actionsanother's one of meaning the ascertainingby orinterpretation, of theusebymediated is interaction human Thus, actions. such they attachwhich meaning theon based is instead butanotherone of actionsthe tomadedirectly Theirmerelyof eachother's reactingactions.to insteadeachother's actions'defin[ing]' interpret[ing]byothereachand interactwithpeople that Mead,claimed Blumer,following perspective:the thr setout interactionism," Herberttheterm"symbolic Blumercoined(1969),who interpretation.through modifiedand interactionare thesethem;have meanings derivedfor socialfromand things those meaning the on based theperspective:thingssummaryacttoward of people influential an forward HerbertBlumer theareacreative.wasin Another pioneerand purposive HerbertMead "Iam Symbolic interactionism is derivedAmericanfrom is interactionism Symbolic small 3. "These meanings are handled in, and modified through, an interpretative process used by the interpretative byan used process through, modified and in, are "Thesemeaningshandled 3. one thatinteraction socialtheof, derived from, out arises oris things such of meaning "The 2. things." those theyto ascribethemeanings of basis the on thingsacttowardbeings "Human 1. , but they see enormous things." - Rumi, MasnaviRumi,theythings."see butenormous - , so person in dealing with the things he/she encounters."he/shethingsthe withdealing in person thesociety." and otherswith

small Charles Horton CooleyHortonCharles I can barely be seen, how can this great love be inside me? Look at your your atme? Look great be inside lovethisbarely seen,becan canI how , who argued that people's selves are social products, but that thesethat selves arebut also products, selvesarepeople'sarguedthatsocial who , , a student and interpreter of Mead, coined the term "symbolic interactionism" and putand interactionism"termtheinterpreterMead, "symbolicand coined of student a , described self as "taking the role of the other," the premise for which the self is selftheother,"the premisethewhichof role the"takingforas self described in 1902(McIntyrein 2006),the New York:Scribner's,152: 1902,pp. pragmatism Charles CooleyCharles and particularly from the work of theworkfrom of particularly and looking-glass self symbols . and signification [1] is a is ee basic premisesof basic ee eyes sociological 'response' is not not 'response'is echanical , by , or . Theyare . ions of ions selves , as well well as , George her's

to has has n n

Page8 an This subject. thefor Ideal-Iegothe an imageas mirrorof an Thestage . setsotherup an externalobjects,upon dependent egothefundamentally as mirrortheLacan,stageForestablishes egoidentity. bourgeoning reinforce its reflectedthebackotherby and otherthein recognizedonly existenceis senseof itsand to arepartsIts imaginedself. actual its of totalitya notmirroredimageand incomplete imagean as falsea as internalized initiallyis self senseof individual'sThe autonomy. imaginary is totalitysenseof infant’stheLacan, another. desirethe of mirroredimageback in is its that For emergesonlychild’theselfthe withof development The mirror(m)other.the imageof identifieit untilrealized notis which of parts, thetotality fragmented various awarenessits of theof that beyond self-identification no has themirrorstage,to words,other prior In theinfant sameother that to rivalbittera and existenceown our areof ourselves.dependentoncetheat the otherof guarantoron as guarantor We other,the Thethe other. of gazethen,by mediated ourselves, becomesto is equal is image,which say“… Furthermore,to goesheon born”. theis ego whichof out autonomy thebetweenimaginaryproducedand fragmentedselfsense is the of infant’s Aconflict itself.to rival a as establishedtheexperiencetois the subjectfragmentation, of opposition in posited is unityof image In NewYorkReviewBooksof becausetheyare and others”. space, in us other people,by outsidebecause aretheylocated only exteriorbeseenunderstood can and real ourhelp;can photographsor mirrorsno whole,a and seeas exteriorone'scomprehend itown and even cannot one really Forculture.space, in time,in herorcreative his understanding—in theof object outside beto located understands the for whoperson important immensely is orderitunderstand,to“In that,explained once Bakhtin forces.socialand politicalexistingby influenced t others,theand influencingthework,theand reader, author,affecting and eachconstantly theinvolving context betweenand meaningrelation mutual a in beliefexpressed his Bakhtin Mikhail dialogic= polyphonic = Heteroglossia three theoryreducedbeto canfacets. sociological Cooley'sof rudimentsThe Jacques Lacan Jacques "other"    One develops a self-image via their reflection; that is, the judgments or critique of others. of critique or judgmentstheis, that reflection;theirviaself-image a develops One mayothers appearance. regarding bemakingthatthat judgmentthe imaginesOne others. theytoappearhowimagines One within the subject's experience of his or herorexperience his subject'stheof within , Sean Homer explains the following (p. 26): (p. followingtheHomer explainsSean , , June 10,June 1993., to exist one has to be recognized by an-other. But this means that ourthatmeans this an-other. be by recognizedto has one exist to But ”.

"I", a component of a "self" that is internally internally is that "self"a of component a “According to Lacan, from thefrommomentthe Lacan, to “According s recognitions be thebewhole to form and formto Ideal-I becomesIdeal-I he whole whole he s with thewith s

an an the on on

Page9 architectural dialogue)? Let us review the characters in this tragicreview drama.haveus an thisthecharactersin We dialogue)? architectural Let and (man objectstorythebetweenand narratorthesubject in is self, thewho of manifestations extthe created and betweenegocentricdialogueinternal the this within that wonders One characteristics.particularits disturbances)psychic it (and givepersonalityeachsubject'sframeworks willthat linguistic and social withinelaboratedbe "other" willlanguage,this throughrelationssocialenters matures intoand "individual" Asso-called the a the the dialogue between the internal and externalself,the and betweeninternalthe dialoguethe languag realmthe of entryintothechild’sstart the of themirror signalingphase, in step init the mirroris metaphoricalthis in reflection ownits with selfof identificationmistakenchild’sThe experiences. underdeveloped infant's physical vulnerability and weakness, and this vulnerability physical infant's underdeveloped thewithcorrespond not does body unifieda imagethebecauseof but selfhood, of perceptions Lacan outside?and inside bothlivesour of boundaries the across carriesthatforma itselfis shadow the possible it is my shadow, this aberration?this Is is etiquite.social of outsidealone, Whoimprisonment,state a of darknessin in lives column. spinal It my backvoice,theof deeperoccurs in thediscriminatingthejudge,and identifier,the narrator,mytheexertsforehead.somewhereitselfeye,nearbehindmy third slightly The who of Me-ness actualthehoverstherealityof above Me are Thesetermsself-ness. of theThou. The with I identifies whencetheythedialogue. partake in The the image the infant sees in the mirrorthedoesseesin imagethethe infant the stresses in Lacan that psychosis. and anxiety,as neurosis, such distresspsychicof forms for thefoundation lays also process self-image,thissubject'sthe within permanenta split establishing themselvescomeknow"I",toas to individuals human themirror stage whileallows observation: thison spin positivea put not doesLacan heror life. his strivethroughoutperpetuallywillsubject thewhich toward Ideal-I an as establishedis identifies) theinfant which with mirrorand metaphorical termthetakesreferup Lacanto image theinfant to the scenarios. and figures mythical of sharea emergethat imagos unconscious,with thecollectivefrom identifyingby personalitya divided Thou identifies with thewith identifies It , though mental, are of the realm of existence. The ergo, cogito sum, the “I think,ergo,sum, “Itheexistence.mental,aretherealmcogito of of though , The says: "what I seek in speech is the response of the other."theof response thesays:seekIspeech"whatis in . No thing beyond these terms exist beyond our perceptions of them,they as of comeinto perceptionstheseour termsbeyondbeyond exist Nothing . . The infant identifies with the image, which serves as a gestalt of the infant's emergingserves theimage,infant's the gestaltwhichof a as with identifies infantThe [12] It . These aretermstheother.of . These The not correspond to the actual physical reality the infant realityinfant thephysical actualthe to correspond It is that actually thinks. The voice I identify with with identify Ivoice thinks.actually that The is I and theand I and Thou Iand It imago , flourishes., are illusionary, while thewhile are illusionary, (For Jung, the individual forms Jung,individual the (For mind nearthe mind I therefoream”I , a a , e. It is herethatis e. It sees in the sees in banal self, banal Me ernal mirrorstage d reservoird ,an existence Me by It and and s ial ial

Page10 2 http://www.english.hawaii.edu/criticalink/lacan/terms 12. 11. 10. WestReligion:CW11:Inand Psychology Religion." and "Psychology (1938). Jung,C.G. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 2000 Prentice Hall Edition Sixth Wade, “Psychology” Tavris 1. P.131 TimeOurforFreud:ALife ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Retrievedon ^ Press ^ "Neuwirth, Rachel. " Simon.Shepard Jung, C.G. (1951). "Phenomenology of the Self" In The Portable Jung. P.147 Jung. Portable TheIn Self"the of "Phenomenology (1951). Jung, C.G. P.12East.Westand Religion:CW 11:In and Psychology"Answer(1952).Job." toJung, C.G. Jungian ProjectionJungian BritannicaEncyclopedia Karl Wolfe Psychological Projection Psychological KarlWolfe Beyond Good and Evil,and Good Beyond . Retrieved . on March07 Basic Psychological Mechanisms: Neurosis and Projectionand NeurosisMechanisms:PsychologicalBasic

March 07March A Case of Freudian ProjectionFreudian ACaseof , , trans. R. J. Hollindale (London: Penguin, 1973), p. 102.Penguin, 1973),p. (London: Hollindale J. R. trans. 2008 , page281,

. , , 2008 . .

". AmericanThinker ISBN 0-321-04931-4ISBN , December30 ". The HereticalThe

, and East. East. and 2006 .

Page11