The question of the status of [[psychoanalysis]] and its relationship with other disciplines is also one to which [[Lacan]] devotes much attention.
In his pre-war writings, [[psychoanalysis ]] is seen unreservedly in scientific terms .<ref>{{e.g. [[Lacan]], L}} 1936</ref>. However, after 1950 [[Lacan]]'s attitude to the question becomes much more complex.
In 1953However, he states that in the opposition after 1950 [[science]] versus [[artLacan]], psychoanalysis can be located on the side of art, on condition that the term 'art' is understood in s attitude to the sense in which it was used in the Middle Ages, when the 'liberal arts' included arithmetic, geometry, music and grammar <ref>{{[[Lacan]]: 1953b: 224</ref>question becomes much more complex.
However=====Art=====In 1953, he states that in the opposition [[science]] versus religion[[art]], [[Lacanpsychoanalysis]] follows can be located on the side of [[Freudart]] in arguing , on condition that psychoanalysis has more in common with scientific discourse than religious discourse: 'psychoanalysis is not a religion. It proceeds from the same status as term "[[[[scienceart]]]] itself " is understood in the sense in which it was used in the Middle Ages, when the "liberal arts" included arithmetic, geometry, music and grammar.<ref>{{Sl1, 265[[Lacan]]: 1953b: 224</ref>.
If=====Religion=====However, as in the opposition [[science]] versus [[Lacanreligion]] argues, a [[scienceLacan]] is only constituted as such by isolating and defining its particular object of enquiry <ref>{{see follows [[LacanFreud]], 1946, where he argues in arguing that [[psychoanalysis ]] has actually set psychology on a scientific footing by providing it more in common with a proper object of enquiry - the imago - Ec, 188</ref>, then, when in 1965 he isolates the objet petit a as the object of psychoanalysis, he is in effect claiming a [[science|scientific status for psychoanalysis <ref>{{Ec, 863</ref>.discourse than [[religion|religious discourse]]:
However, from this point on [[Lacan]] comes increasingly to question this view of psychoanalysis as <blockquote>"Psychoanalysis is not a [[science]]religion. In It proceeds from the same year he states that psychoanalysis is not a status as [[science]] but a 'practice' itself."<ref>{{pratique</ref> with a 'scientific vocation' <ref>{{Ec, 863S11}} p. 265</ref>, though in the same year he also speaks of 'the psychoanalytic [[science]]' <ref>{{Ec, 876</refblockquote>. By 1977 he has become more categorical:
Psychoanalysis is not =====Scientific Status=====If, as [[Lacan]] argues, a [[science]]. It is only constituted as such by isolating and defining its particular object of enquiry,<ref>[[Lacan]] argues that [[psychoanalysis]] has no actually set [[psychology]] on a scientific status - it merely waits and hopes for footing by providing it. Psychoanalysis is with a delusion proper object of enquiry -- a delusion which is expected to produce a the [[scienceimago]]; 1946; {{Ec}} p. . . . It is 188</ref> then, when in 1965 he isolates the ''[[objet petit a scientific delusion]]'' as the [[object]] of [[psychoanalysis]], but this doesn't mean that analytic practice will ever produce he is in effect claiming a [[science|scientific status]] for [[psychoanalysis]]. <ref>{{[[Lacan]], 1976-7; seminar of 11 January 1977; Ornicar?, 14: 4Ec}} p.863</ref>.
However, even when [[Lacan]] makes such statements, he never abandons the project of formalising psychoanalytic theory in linguistic and mathematical terms. Indeed, the tension between the scientific formalism of the MATHEME and the semantic profusion of lalangue constitutes one of the most interesting features of [[Lacan]]'s later work.---
However, from this point on [[Lacan]] comes increasingly to question this view of [[psychoanalysis]] as a [[science]].
In the same year he states that [[psychoanalysis]] is not a [[science]]but a "practice" (''pratique'') with a "[[science|scientific vocation]]", 1, 7<ref>{{Ec}} p. 863</ref> though in the same year he also speaks of 'the [[science|psychoanalytic science]]."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 876</ref>. By 1977 he has become more categorical: <blockquote>Psychoanalysis is not a [[science]]. It has no scientific status - it merely waits and hopes for it. Psychoanalysis is a delusion -8a delusion which is expected to produce a [[science]]. . . . It is a scientific delusion, 10but this doesn't mean that analytic practice will ever produce a [[science]]. <ref>{{L}} 1976-7; seminar of 11January 1977; ''[[Ornicar?]]'', 1914: 4</ref></blockquote> =====Linguistics and Mathematics=====However, 34even when [[Lacan]] makes such statements, 39-40, 47, 77, 86, 151, 163, 225-6, 231, 234, 245-6, 259, * 264, 274, astrology he never abandons the project of [[formalizing]] [[psychoanalytic theory]] in [[linguistic]] and astronomy 152, chemistry 9, chinese astronomy 151-2, * economics, 210, ethology, animal, 279, genetics 151[[mathematical]] terms. Indeed, human the tension between the [[science|scientific formalism]]s, 7, 20, 43, 223, * physics, 10, 163, physilogy, 163,of the [[matheme]] and the semantic profusion of ''lalangue'' constitutes one of the most interesting features of [[Seminar XILacan]]'s later work.
[[Category:scienceScience]]
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]
[[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Terms]]
[[Category:Edit]]
__NOTOC__
