In the following passage Jung addresses the idea of dreams being a collection of the days events. Generally we fail to give the unconscious credit for using what we feed it. Often we say, "Oh, I must've dreamt about horses because I watched the Kentucky Derby", dismissing the dream as our sleeping self simply processing something we witnessed that day. What Jung posits is the unconscious use of this content is equal to or greater than the thing which our waking self has seen (i.e. the unconscious's use of a horse in the dream is more proficient than the conscious/waking viewing of the Kentucky Derby). After making this realization, my frustration began to increase when I would hear others downplay a dream due to a direct link to something in their every day life. I began to examine more closely my relationship to these generally ignorable subjects and analyze my relationship with them when they would pop up in dreams. How do I really feel about horses? What have they ever meant to me? Culturally, horse meat is morally wrong to me, but why? What does this imply about my decision to not buy the horses?
"...Not only should the function of the unconscious be regarded as compensatory and relative to the content of the consciousness, but the content of consciousness would have to be regarded as relative to the momentarily constellated unconscious content. In this case active orientation towards goals and purposes would not be the privilege of consciousness alone but would also be true of the unconscious, so that it too would be just as capable of taking a finally oriented lead. The dream, accordingly, would then have the value of a positive, guiding idea or of an aim whose vital meaning would be greatly superior to that of the momentarily constellated conscious content." Jung, Carl. Dreams from the Collected Works of C. G. Jung VOLUMES 4,8.12,16. Princeton University Presss.