[Footnote 179: Thus a patient, who had been treated by a young colleague without very much result, once said to me: "Certainly I made great progress with him, and I am much better than I was. He tried to analyse my dreams. It's true he never understood them, but he took _so much trouble_ over them. He is really a good doctor."] [Footnote 180: Defined in the Freudian sense, as the transference to the doctor of infantile and sexual phantasies. A more advanced conception of the transference perceives in it the important process of emotional approach [_Einfühlung_] which at first makes use of infantile and sexual analogies.] [Footnote 181: "Selected Papers on Hysteria and other Psychoneuroses." _Monograph Series_, No. 4, last edition.] CHAPTER X ON THE IMPORTANCE OF THE UNCONSCIOUS IN PSYCHOPATHOLOGY[182] When we speak of a thing as being "unconscious" we must not forget that from the point of view of the functioning of the brain a thing may be unconscious to us in two ways--physiologically or psychologically. I shall only deal with the subject from the latter point of view. So that for our purposes we may define the unconscious as "the sum of all those psychological events which are not apperceived, and so are unconscious." The unconscious contains all those psychic events which, because of the lack of the necessary intensity of their functioning, are unable to pass the threshold which divides the conscious from the unconscious; so that they remain in effect below the surface of the conscious, and flit by in subliminal phantom forms. It has been known to psychologists since the time of Leibniz that the elements--that is to say, the ideas and feelings which go to make up the conscious mind, the so-called conscious content--are of a complex nature, and rest upon far simpler and altogether unconscious elements; it is the combination of these which gives the element of consciousness. Leibniz has already mentioned the _perceptions insensibles_--those vague perceptions which Kant called "shadowy" representations, which could only attain to consciousness in an indirect manner. Later philosophers assigned the first place to the unconscious, as the foundation upon which the conscious was built. But this is not the place to consider the many speculative theories nor the endless philosophical discussions concerning the nature and quality of the unconscious. We must be satisfied with the definition already given, which will prove quite sufficient for our purpose, namely the conception of the unconscious as the sum of all psychical processes below the threshold of consciousness. The question of the importance of the unconscious for psychopathology may be briefly put as follows: "In what manner may we expect to find unconscious psychic material behave in cases of psychosis and neurosis?"