Dialogue occupies a structurally ambiguous but indispensable position within the depth-psychological corpus. Its appearances range from the technical and intrapsychic — the staged encounter between ego and autonomous complexes in active imagination — to the intersubjective and constitutive, where dialogue is understood as the very medium through which selfhood is formed. Samuels, drawing on Zinkin's reading of Buber, presses the case that dialogue precedes self-awareness, a challenge to Jung's model which, as Zinkin argues, provides no mechanism for the self's relational function. Smythe extends this line by mapping Jung's dialogical currents onto contemporary dialogical self theory, arguing that the self is not a monological encapsulate but is irrevocably embedded in a matrix of real and imagined exchanges. Moore deploys the term operationally, treating active imagination dialogue as a technique for holding conversation with archetypal energy forms. Woodman locates it at the generative threshold of soul-making: the dialogue between ego and Self is, on her account, nothing less than the creation of soul. Clarke's use of the term situates it at the cross-cultural level, invoking Gadamerian hermeneutics to argue for a genuine East-West fusion of horizons. Taken together, these positions reveal a field in which dialogue is simultaneously method, structure, and ontological condition.
In the library
13 passages
The dialogical self is a notion that has gained increasing currency in psychology since the 1990s, in response to the limitations of traditional notions of the self, based on monological, encapsulated consciousness.
Smythe argues that Jung's analytical psychology harbours dialogical currents that anticipate and converge with contemporary dialogical self theory, positioning dialogue as the corrective to encapsulated, monological selfhood.
Smythe, William E., The Dialogical Jung: Otherness within the Self, 2013thesis
Zinkin draws on Martin Buber to place the principle of dialogue as the central distinguishing feature of personal relationships.
Samuels reports Zinkin's Buberian argument that dialogue, not ego or self, is the operative centre of interpersonal relations — a lacuna in Jung's structural model that demands remediation.
Samuels, Andrew, Jung and the Post-Jungians, 1985thesis
The dialogue between the ego and the Self creates the soul. The crystals and the snowflakes and the teardrops, all manifestations of spirit in concrete form, are gradually woven into the rainbow's threads of heaven.
Woodman identifies dialogue between ego and Self as the generative act of soul-making, giving the term an explicitly teleological and transformative meaning.
Woodman, Marion, Addiction to Perfection: The Still Unravished Bride: A Psychological Study, 1982thesis
Active imagination dialogue is one important technique for actually holding conversations, board meetings, conference calls with these energy forms that wear our faces but are timeless and universal.
Moore operationalises dialogue as the central technique of active imagination, framing it as a structured encounter between the ego and the timeless archetypal energies that inhabit the masculine psyche.
Moore, Robert, King Warrior Magician Lover: Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Masculine, 1990thesis
by persistently keeping after them and letting them know that she was ready to talk and to listen, she pulled them out of their resentment and got the dialogue going.
Johnson presents dialogue as the practical pivot of active imagination, the moment at which passive observation of dream images gives way to conscious reciprocal engagement.
Johnson, Robert A., Inner Work: Using Dreams and Active Imagination for Personal Growth, 1986supporting
there is no compelling reason why [Gadamer's] hermeneutical concepts and perspectives should not be applicable in a wider, trans-cultural context.
Clarke invokes Gadamerian hermeneutics to argue that cross-cultural dialogue between East and West is not epistemologically foreclosed but requires an honest reckoning with one's own historical prejudices.
Clarke, J. J., Jung and Eastern Thought: A Dialogue with the Orient, 1994supporting
it is only when confronted with the other that we can honestly mirror our critical attention back on ourselves; the encounter with a text from the past can provide us with the stimulus whereby it becomes possible to identify the burden of historical prejudice.
Clarke argues that genuine hermeneutical dialogue — even with a textual other — generates the self-critical distance necessary for authentic cross-cultural understanding.
Clarke, J. J., Jung and Eastern Thought: A Dialogue with the Orient, 1994supporting
Burkitt, I. Dialogues with self and others: Communication, miscommunication, and the dialogical unconscious. Theor. Psychol. 2010, 20, 305–321.
Smythe's bibliography signals a broader scholarly network linking Jungian psychology to dialogical self theory, including the concept of a dialogical unconscious.
Smythe, William E., The Dialogical Jung: Otherness within the Self, 2013supporting
Leibniz was certainly engaged in a wide-ranging dialogue in which he was finding support and inspiration in what he was learning from Chinese philosophy, and to this extent can be likened to Jung.
Clarke uses Leibniz as a historical precedent for Jung's cross-cultural dialogue with the East, suggesting that such intellectual borrowing is corroborative rather than merely appropriative.
Clarke, J. J., Jung and Eastern Thought: A Dialogue with the Orient, 1994supporting
Plato is a courageously self-critical philosopher; he not only revises previous positions, he even subjects them to criticism within his dialogues themselves.
Nussbaum identifies the Platonic dialogue as a form of internal self-criticism, anticipating the depth-psychological notion of dialogue as a self-correcting encounter with otherness.
Martha C. Nussbaum, The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy, 1986aside