The dream typology assorts dreams into three major categories: dreams whose origin is endogenous, exogenous, or relational. Dreams of the first type arise from somatic needs, feelings, and states that accompany organismic adjustments to system requirements. Dreams of the second type are initiated by kinetic and dispositional tendencies toward engagement and exploration of the outer world. And dreams of the third type derive from interpersonal dispositions to interaction and relationship with other people. Within each category, dreams may occur at different levels of complexity. The dream typology permits the integration of psychoanalytic observations about the dreams from a variety of perspectives within a common framework. Freud's view that a dream is a wish fulfillment finds its primary niche in endogenous need, wish fulfillment, and convenience dreams. Kohut's observations about self-state dreams and inner regulation (1971, 1977) are accommodated to the middle range of endogenous dreams, and Jung's individuation dreams (1930) occupy the advanced range. Similarly, Bonime's interpersonal approach to dream interpretation (1962) is encompassed by relational dreams of the middle level. In addition, types and modes of dreams that are only infrequently encountered in clinical psychoanalysis are accommodated. The dream typology suggests that different psychoanalytic theories are like the position papers that might have derived from the fabled committee of learned blind who were commissioned to determine the appearance of an elephant. Each individual got a hold on some part, but could not see the whole; so for each, the part became the whole. The psychoanalytic theorist is in exactly an analogous position because, in fact, he is blind to the extent of the unconscious and is constrained to what he can infer. What he can infer depends on cohort, client population, and how he calibrates his observations. The result has been procrustean interpretation, dissention, and a remarkable stasis in the psychoanalytic theory of the unconscious. The theory of the unconscious that arises from the method of direct interpretation reflects a differentiated inner world with variegated landscapes of images and frameworks. The derivatives of the unconscious are determined by complex decision rules, symbol systems, and syntax. Images and dreams possess a primary autonomy from the conscious mind and arise through the configural mind, which serves the construction and synthesis of experience and knowledge. The derivatives emerge out of common human nature conjoined with concrete human experience. For this reason, dreams and images appear universal.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)