14: Symbolization
The process of symbolization assigns uncomfortable feelings to a different object - but unlike the scapegoating process of reaction formation, symbolization does not seek out a single and identifiable thing on which to pin these emotions, but broadens to a class of things.
(EN: From a linguistic perspective, symbol-izaion refers to the process of assigning a concept to an object. This is different to interpreting symbols that have already been created, or that are assumed to exist. I am somewhat apprehensive about psychological focus on symbol interpretation, as much of this seems quite specious, but the process of creating a seems far less contrived than the process of interpreting one.)
That is, reaction formation may cause a person to feel uneasy at the sight of a specific statue, but symbolism causes them to feel uneasy at the sight of any statue (or perhaps any marble statue of a bearded man).
Consider phobias: a person ascribes his fear to a class of things, such as a spiders, ladders, dogs, and the like. The source of this fear may be something specific such that a rational correlation exists - he was bitten by a dog, and now fears all dogs. But it may also be incidental: his attention was focused on a dog when he received the news of a parent's death. In that manner, symbolism can become abstract: a fear of bridges may have nothing to do with the obvious dangers of falling or drowning, but might be a fear of making changes or transitions (a bridge representing movement from one shore to the other).
(EN: I recall reading that symbolism can also over time - the association between emotion and object occurs over a course of several encounters. For example, many people have a sense of apprehension when seeing the color red, because each time they were injured or saw another person injured, the color of blood became associated with the sense of shock, fear, pain, etc. So it's often not as simple as finding one key moment when an association occurred.)
The psychology of dreams and visions often relies on this abstract symbolism, such that any object in a dream is a symbol for an apparently unrelated concept. The interpretation of dreams as a method of psychological analysis is a notion that has come in and out of fashion.
Freud in particular was fond of re-interpreting perceptions as symbols. The notion of the "Freudian slip" seizes on anything a person misspeaks as disclosing hidden and symbolic truths that are cast in a different context, genuinely a sexual one, to convince the speaker of his own unconscious beliefs and desires.
In spite of the specious nature of mystical approaches to psychology, there are instances in which the claim of symbolism is plausible - in which a dream of being in a cage does correlate to a real-life situation of being trapped in an unpleasant situation, or a person's fear of spiders does relate to some sexual incident.
(EN: Per my earlier comment, symbol interpretation is different to symbolization. It's very often that an armchair analyst will propose a symbolic link that does not exist, and insist that a person is either denying or only aware on the subconscious level of his own machination. Though interestingly, people who attempt to psychoanalyze others in this manner often end up revealing a great deal more about themselves than the person they propose to be analyzing.)
Outside of dreams and phobias, symbols are a method of communicating ideas that are profound, yet vague and ineffable. They are used heavily in much of western literature, and even in real life, in quite an effective manner.
Insofar as self-deception is concerned, symbolism enables a person to deal with unpleasant emotions by transferring them to an object, while remaining unaware of the real cause of their discontent. As usual, there is a distinction to be drawn between a rational association and an irrational one, as well as a functional association and a dysfunctional one.