Abstract
In light of the inherent significance of symbols and their nevertheless manifold variety of meanings, we present a method for investigation. In the theory behind this method, the person is viewed as an organized process of self-reflection, always oriented from a particular point in time and space toward the past, present, and future. As this orientation varies, different valuations emerge, with avaluation being a unit of meaning seen by the person as particularly relevant in his or her own life. A distinction is made between “symbolic” valuations, which usually have a pictorial character (for example, “I am impressed by the roots of a tree”), and “ordinary” valuations, which typically have a conceptual character (for example, “I have a strong bond with my family”). These types of experiences are combined and organized in a system of valuations, from where the symbol receives its personal meaning. We present a method of self-investigation for studying the interrelation between the valuation of symbols and the valuation of daily life, the affective properties of these valuations, their motivational implications, and their long-term development. We illustrate the proposed methodology with the case study of a woman who incorporated the “tree” as a symbol of purification into her valuation system and show how this allowed her to reintegrate certain negative experiences out of her past in her actual self.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Heisig, J.W., “Symbolism.” In Eliade, M., ed.,The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol.14. New York, MacMillan Company, 1988, p. 198.
Kahler, E., “The Nature of the Symbol.” In May, R., ed.,Symbolism in Religion and Literature. New York, George Braziller, 1960, pp. 70–74.
Tillich, P., “The Religious Symbol.” In May, R., ed.,Symbolism in Religion and Literature,op. cit., pp. 75–75.
Ibid., pp. 76–77.
Ibid., p.77.
Eliade, M.,Patterns in Comparative Religion. London, Sheed and Ward, 1958.
Ibid., p. 451.
May, R., “The Significance of Symbols.” In May, R., ed.,Symbolism in Religion and Literature, op. cit., pp. 11–49.
Ibid., pp. 14–15.
Ibid., pp. 15–16.
Ibid., p. 48.
Frese, P.R., and Gray, S.J.M., “Trees.” In Eliade, M., ed.,The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 15. New York, MacMillan Company, 1988, pp. 26–33.
Hermans, H.J.M., “Self as an Organized System of Valuations: Toward a Dialogue With the Person,”J. Counseling Psychology, 1987,34, 10–19; “The Dream in the Process of Valuation: A Method of Interpretation,”J. Personality and Social Psychology, 1987,53, 163–175; “On the Integration of Idiographic and Nomothetic Research Method in the Study of Personal Meaning,”J. Personality, 1988,56, 785–812; “The Meaning of Life as an Organized Process,”Psychotherapy, 1989,26, 11–22.
James, W.,The Principles of Psychology, vol. 1. London, MacMillan, 1890; Merleau-Ponty, M.,Phénoménologie de la perception [Phenomenology of Perception]. Paris, Gallimard, 1945.
Hermans, H.J.M.,; Hermans-Jansen, E.; and Van Gilst, W.,De grondmotieven van het menselijk bestaan: hun expressie in het persoonlijk waarderingsleven [The Basic Motives of Human Existence: Their Expression in Personal Valuation]. Lisse, Swets & Zeitlinger, 1985.
Bakan, D.,The Duality of Human Existence. Chicago, Rand-McNally, 1966.
Angyal, A.,Neurosis and Treatment: A Holistic Theory. New York, Wiley, 1965.
Klages, L.,Characterkunde [Characterology]. Zürich, Switzerland, Hirzel, 1948.
McAdams, D.P.,Power, Intimacy, and the Life Story. Personological Inquiries into Identity. Chicago, Dorsey Press, 1985 (reprinted by Guilford Press).
op cit., pp. 14–20.
Chomsky, N.,Aspect of the Theory of Syntax. Massachusetts, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1967.
Foulkes, D.,A Grammar of Dreams. Sussex, England, Harvester Press, 1978.
op cit., pp. 20–26.
Hermans, H.J.M., “The Dream in the Process of Valuation: A Method of Interpretation,”J. Personality and Social Psychology, 1987,53, 166.
Jacobi, J., “Der Baum als Symbol,”Analytische Psychologie, 1975,6, 336–367.
Ibid., p. 338.
op cit., p. 48.
op cit., p. 204.
op cit., pp. 15–16.
Tillich,op cit., pp. 75–98.
Hermans, H.J.M.; Fiddelaers, R.; De Groot, R.; and Nauta, J., “Self-Confrontation as a Method for Assessment and Intervention in Counseling,”J. Counseling and Development, 1990,69, 156–162.
Sandfort, Th.G.M., “Sex in Pedophiliac Relationships: An Empirical Investigation Among a Nonrepresentative Group of Boys,”J. Sex Research, 1984,20, 123–142.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The authors thank Wim van Gilst for writing the computer program, Roos Bos for placing all the data of the case study at their disposal, and Lee Ann Weeks for her detailed editorial comments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hermans, H.J.M., van Loon, R.J.P. The personal meaning of symbols: A method of investigation. J Relig Health 30, 241–261 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986401
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986401