It would thus appear that we have good reasons for rejecting the view that the apparently sexual manifestations of love by the child towards its parents are only symbols of the desire to return to the state of tutelage and protection enjoyed in early years. It does not follow, however, that the whole of Jung's conclusions as regards the relation of the parent complexes to the development of individuality in the child are to be rejected. On the contrary, it is almost certain that they contain valuable truths which had to some extent been overlooked, or at any rate had received less attention than they deserved, in some of the earlier investigations. Even as regards the symbolisation of the developmental tendencies in the incest fancies, Jung may be right in a number of important points. It is only so far as he would maintain that such symbolisation exhausts the whole significance of the incest tendencies that he is almost certainly in error. [Sidenote: Overdetermination and the multiple interpretation of symbols] The possibility of a further analysis of the incest tendencies in a non-sexual sense is implied by what Freud has himself taught as regards the laws governing the formation of symbols, more especially by the doctrine of Overdetermination[23], according to which a single dream symbol or neurotic symptom may often be found to constitute a complete or partial fulfilment of two or more distinct wishes or conative tendencies. Moreover, at least two authors besides Jung have carried out analyses in this sense. Silberer[24] has shown that a number of myths and fairy tales may be interpreted in at least two ways:--first, as an expression of the Œdipus complex as outlined in our previous chapters; secondly, as the expression of certain moral or religious strivings, which he calls the anagogic aspect; the symbolism in this latter case being of the "functional" kind (_i. e._ expressive of mental processes and tendencies rather than of the objects of feeling and cognition), to the existence of which Silberer had already drawn attention in his earlier works[25]. Ferenczi[26] (following Schopenhauer) has seen in the Œdipus myth the existence of certain functional symbolisms in virtue of which the character of Œdipus and Jocasta (as drawn by Sophocles) stand for opposing tendencies in the mind brought out by the tragic situation, _viz._ the tendency, on the one hand, to bring all the facts of the case into the clear light of consciousness, even at the risk of painful discoveries; and on the other hand the contrary tendency to repress and prohibit all further inquiry for fear of such discoveries. [Sidenote: Overdetermination in the case of the Œdipus Complex]