Interiority, as treated across the depth-psychological corpus, is not a simple spatial metaphor for what lies ‘inside’ the subject. It is, rather, a contested and philosophically charged concept whose meaning ranges from the imaginal privacy of psychic life (Hillman) to a rigorous logical structure constitutive of psychology itself (Giegerich), and from the biological topology of the living membrane (Simondon) to Hegel’s philosophical interiorization refracted through phenomenology (Derrida, Thompson). Hillman insists that the ‘in-ness’ of soul is imaginal and metaphorical, not literal or spatial — soul is not owned by the person but rather person exists within soul’s inhuman reaches. Giegerich radicalizes this: interiority is psychology’s proper discipline, but the interiority in question resides not in any subject but in psychology’s own Notion, which reflects all things through the mirror of its internal infinity. This move — absolute-negative Er-innerung, the interiorization of interiorization itself — distinguishes Giegerich’s logical psychology from both Hillman’s imaginal stance and conventional introspective models. Simondon, approaching from ontogenesis rather than hermeneutics, locates interiority at the threshold of living individuation: the membrane that polarizes interior from exterior is the structural condition for all vital processes. Taken together, these positions reveal a shared conviction that interiority cannot be literalized as a container, yet disagree profoundly about where it properly resides — in image, in Notion, or in process.
Psychology is the discipline of interiority. But this interiority is not in me, not in you, not in anybody, also not in the depth of any thing out there. It is in its (psychology’s) own Notion itself.
Giegerich defines psychology’s proper domain as interiority, but radically displaces it from any subject or object, locating it instead in psychology’s own self-reflecting Notion.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020thesis
The sense of “in-ness” refers neither to location nor to physical containment. It is not a spatial idea, but an imaginal metaphor for the soul’s nonvisible and nonliteral inherence, the imaginal psychic quality within all events.
Hillman argues that psychic interiority is an imaginal rather than spatial or literal phenomenon, denying ownership or physical containment while affirming an inherent ‘in-ness’ of soul across all events.
, Re-Visioning Psychology, 1975thesis
the membrane is polarized asymmetrical nature of cellular permeability… characterized as what separates a region of interiority from a region of exteriority: the membrane is polarize
Simondon identifies the living membrane as the ontogenetic structure that establishes the interiority/exteriority polarity fundamental to all vital individuation.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020thesis
the borderline cases between inert matter and the living being are precisely cases of processes that unfold according to the dimensions of exteriority and interiority. These cases include the individuation of crystals.
Simondon uses the crystal-to-living-being continuum to show that interiority/exteriority dimensionality marks the threshold between inert and living individuation.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020supporting
Psychology has to turn, not just introspectively to the literal “inside,” but to the same outside facts that all the different sciences turn to, but via itself, via its own center, its own internal Notion.
Giegerich distinguishes genuine psychological interiority — passage through psychology’s own Notion — from mere introspection, which remains literalistic and self-defeating.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
Consciousness is an outside that is inside, and an inside that is outside… It is precisely “in” me when, and to the extent that, it is “out there.”
Giegerich develops a dialectical account of interiority in which inside and outside are not simply opposed but constitutively interpenetrating, dissolving the psychologistic split.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
absolute-negative Er-innerung / interiorization 96, 97, 98, 100, 147, 195, 243, 253, 256, 278 as corruption ever deeper into itself
The index entry confirms absolute-negative interiorization as a structuring concept throughout Giegerich’s argument, signaling its systematic importance for the logical notion of soul.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
does it have to be understood literally, in terms of a simple undialectical opposition of inward and outward… The literal and positive move outward through the window to the “cosmos”… is an escape
Giegerich criticizes Hillman’s literal turn toward the world as an evasion of genuine interiorization, which requires dialectical Er-innerung rather than spatial reorientation.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
Catching up with what has been projected far out into space or into the future does not imply a journey to it at all. It implies conversely that the intuited reality affects you while you are staying right here… This is what is meant by “absolute-negative interiorization.”
Giegerich explicates absolute-negative interiorization as the soul’s self-return from projection — not spatial movement outward but being reached from within by what was cast outward.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
Both psychology and sociology are two viewpoints that fabricate their own object based on interiority or exteriority; the psychological approach to the social is formed by the intermediary of small groups.
Simondon argues that psychology and sociology are perspectival abstractions from the human whole, each artificially foregrounding either interiority or exteriority as its constitutive standpoint.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020supporting
sublated psychology, as a logic of the soul, absolved from the positive opposition of inside and outside. Exactly by firmly staying within itself, even unconditionally interiorizing itself into itself, into its own Notion, it reaches the real world.
Giegerich argues that genuine interiorization — staying rigorously within the soul’s Notion — paradoxically achieves contact with the real world, overcoming the inside/outside opposition.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
the interiority group and the exteriority group… the group is a syncrystallization of several individual beings, and it is the result of this syncrystallization that constitutes the group personality.
Simondon applies the interiority/exteriority polarity to collective individuation, distinguishing groups constituted through shared interiority from those defined relationally through exteriority.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020supporting
Time and sound, now united to conceptual representation… are the modes of interiority and belong to the concept of poetry.
Derrida, reading Hegel’s aesthetics, identifies time and sound as the modes proper to interiority, situating poetry as the art form most adequate to the interior life of spirit.
, Margins of Philosophy, 1982supporting
soul, is defined as internal reflection. Internal reflection is in psychology more than a methodological option with which we can approach its subject matter. It is already “objectively” inherent in the subject matter itself.
Giegerich identifies soul with internal reflection, arguing that interiority is not merely a methodological posture but is objectively constitutive of psychology’s subject matter.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020supporting
myth is an indefinite reserve of possible judgments; it has the value of a paradigm and is turned toward group interiority, rather than toward beings exterior to judging relative to group norms.
Simondon distinguishes myth from opinion by its orientation toward group interiority, treating mythic thought as the collective analogue of reflexive individual judgment.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020aside
The sublation has to be “remembered,” “er-innert,” interiorized into the form of psychology. It is the decomposition of the subject as substance or substrate and its going under into its own attribute.
Giegerich insists that the sublation of the imaginal stance must itself be Er-innert — interiorized into psychology’s form — rather than acted out literally as an external event.
, The Soul’s Logical Life Towards a Rigorous Notion of, 2020aside