<p>I've a first question so I apologize if the format is completely awry.</p>

<p>I'm reading <a href="http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/087477618X">Meeting the Shadow: The Hidden Power of the Dark Side of Human Nature</a> and I came across this passage by Edward C. Whitmont:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The shadow cannot be eliminated. It is the ever present dark brother or sister. Whenever we fail to see where it stands, there is likely to be trouble afoot. For then it is certain to be standing behind us. The adequate question therefore never is: Have I a shadow problem? Have I a negative side? But rather: Where does it happen to be right now? When we cannot see it, it is time to beware! <strong>And it is helpful to remember Jung's formulation that a complex is not pathological <em>per se</em>. It becomes pathological only when we assume that we do not have it; because then it has us.</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>The bold is my own addition to emphasize where my question stems from. This is the whole paragraph to the end of the chapter so as much context as I could give on it. To me (psychology as an interest/hobby with no classes or experience) this means that when we ignore the effects a complex has on us then it becomes pathological. </p>

<p>An example: Say I have an amputated hand and am lividly jealous at the sight of people doing things two-handed. By refusing to acknowledge and deal with this dilemma, I am relegating it to others to deal with by default and it thusly becomes pathological.</p>

<p>Is this accurate? Are there other important factors to take into consideration when considering a complex pathological?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-09-12T22:06:52.240Z
@LitheOhm Some other Jung-related questions that might be of interest: [1](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1116/29), [2](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1402/29), [3](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1553/29). If you are planning to use this site to learn more about your hobby, then [consider this advice](http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/a/414/29).
Artem Kaznatcheev
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-09-12T22:20:29.107Z
Thank you for the direction, I will keep the advice in mind. Is my question a clear sign of one who doesn't know enough then, or would the answer actually be useful to experts?
LitheOhm
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-09-12T22:27:42.840Z
I personally think your question is fine. It references a source, so you have done (some) initial research, and you have a *specific* question you're asking for clarification on. You have 3 upvotes and no flags or downvotes. So to me (another non-expert in the field) the question looks good!
Josh
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-09-12T22:30:07.347Z
Artem makes great points in the answer he posted, and his advice (the way I read it, please correct me if I am wrong @Artem!) is more of how to learn more about cognitive sciences *and* ask good questions. We often get questions which show *no* research effort. It's better to read up on topics (or answers on this site) and then ask 8specific* followup questions. Asking questions without researching at all will result in closed questions. (But you didn't do that)
Josh
<social-psychology><abnormal-psychology><jung><psychoanalysis>
At what point does a complex become pathological?
LitheOhm
# At what point does a complex become pathological?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-09-12)

I've a first question so I apologize if the format is completely awry.

I'm reading [Meeting the Shadow: The Hidden Power of the Dark Side of Human Nature](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/087477618X) and I came across this passage by Edward C. Whitmont:

> The shadow cannot be eliminated. It is the ever present dark brother or sister. Whenever we fail to see where it stands, there is likely to be trouble afoot. For then it is certain to be standing behind us. The adequate question therefore never is: Have I a shadow problem? Have I a negative side? But rather: Where does it happen to be right now? When we cannot see it, it is time to beware! **And it is helpful to remember Jung's formulation that a complex is not pathological *per se*. It becomes pathological only when we assume that we do not have it; because then it has us.**

The bold is my own addition to emphasize where my question stems from. This is the whole paragraph to the end of the chapter so as much context as I could give on it. To me (psychology as an interest/hobby with no classes or experience) this means that when we ignore the effects a complex has on us then it becomes pathological.

An example: Say I have an amputated hand and am lividly jealous at the sight of people doing things two-handed. By refusing to acknowledge and deal with this dilemma, I am relegating it to others to deal with by default and it thusly becomes pathological.

Is this accurate? Are there other important factors to take into consideration when considering a complex pathological?

**Tags:** social-psychology, abnormal-psychology, jung, psychoanalysis

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: @username_0 Some other Jung-related questions that might be of interest: [1](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1116/29), [2](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1402/29), [3](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1553/29). If you are planning to use this site to learn more about your hobby, then [consider this advice](http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/a/414/29).  
> **username_0**: Thank you for the direction, I will keep the advice in mind. Is my question a clear sign of one who doesn't know enough then, or would the answer actually be useful to experts?  
> **username_2**: I personally think your question is fine. It references a source, so you have done (some) initial research, and you have a *specific* question you're asking for clarification on. You have 3 upvotes and no flags or downvotes. So to me (another non-expert in the field) the question looks good!  
> **username_2**: Artem makes great points in the answer he posted, and his advice (the way I read it, please correct me if I am wrong @Artem!) is more of how to learn more about cognitive sciences *and* ask good questions. We often get questions which show *no* research effort. It's better to read up on topics (or answers on this site) and then ask 8specific* followup questions. Asking questions without researching at all will result in closed questions. (But you didn't do that)  

---

## 0 answers

