Mirror neurons and embodied simulation in the development of archetypes and self‐agency

Abstract

In this paper I explore the role of mirror neurons and motor intentionality in the development of self-agency. I suggest that this will also give us a firmer basis for an emergent view of archetypes, as key components in the development trajectory of self-agency, from its foundation in bodily action to its mature expression in mentalization and a conscious awareness of intentionality. I offer some ideas about the implications of these issues of self-agency for our clinical work with patients whose developmental trajectory of self-agency has been partially inhibited, so that their communications have a coercive effect. I discuss the possibility that this kind of clinical phenomenon may relate to Gallese and Lakoff's hypothesis that abstract thought and imagination are forms of simulated action, and that the same sensory-motor circuits that control action also control imagination, concept formation and understanding, but with a crucial development, that of an inhibition of the connections between secondary pre-motor cortical areas and the primary motor cortex. I shall speculate that in the earlier developmental stages of self-agency, the separation of secondary from primary motor areas is not complete, so that imagination and thought are not entirely independent of physical action.

Symbol/Meaning Paired-Associate Recall: An “Archetypal Memory” Advantage?

“…Nevertheless, there are emerging efforts to integrate ideas from analytical psychology and those drawn from cognitive psychology, neuroscience and even physics, e.g., [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9], etc. To date, these efforts have largely aimed at a theoretical or conceptual integration.…”

“…Among one of the most well formulated approaches is a model which theorizes that what Jung might have meant with the archetype is similar to the contemporary cognitive semanticists’ notion of image schemas [3,4,5,16,17,18], that is, a structure of sensorimotor experience that captures a “dynamic, recurring pattern of organism-environment interactions” ([19], p. 136), that can be—“recruited for abstract conceptualization and reasoning” ([19], p. 141). Image schemas are thought to be “preverbal and mostly nonconscious” ([19], p. 144).…”

Jung on the Nature and Interpretation of Dreams: A Developmental Delineation with Cognitive Neuroscientific Responses

“…To Jungians, this confirms the centrality of dream images, especially in archetypal or titanic dreams. Jean Knox [29,33], however, argues that Jungians have reified the unconscious structures, such as archetypes and the Self. The image schemas or archetypes that she challenges are “ an early developmental conceptual achievement rather than being an inherited innate psychic component ” ([32], p. 316).…”

“…The image schemas or archetypes that she challenges are “ an early developmental conceptual achievement rather than being an inherited innate psychic component ” ([32], p. 316). Moreover, although the concept of an archetype is “the earliest true concept,” it is developed “ after motor abstraction in the abstraction/de-coupling process ” has been completed ([33], p. 316). Knox [33] certainly has to explain more concerning how the activation of mirror neurons’ intentionality (however she defines intentionality) leads to the emergence of concept formation, not to mention the emergence of social or interpersonal interaction.…”

“…While Hobson mitigates his reductionism in this way, Knox arguably sidesteps a reductionist snare with recourse to attachment theory. Knox concludes that the clinical phenomena indicating that many patients are stuck at the teleological or any other of the six levels of self-agency “ may be seen as a failure to develop the abstract generalized image schema of self-agency that can integrate all the specific levels or frames of reference of self-agency ” ([33], p. 320). Image is one of the key words used in Jung’s interpretation of dreams.…”