Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Absence

1,822 bytes added, 04:27, 30 July 2006
no edit summary
==Symbolic==
The [[symbolic order]] is characterized by a binary opposition between [[absence]] and '''[[presence''']].<ref>{{S4}} p.67-8</ref>
In the [[symbolic order]] "nothing exists except upon an assumed foundation of [[absence]]."<ref>{{Ec}} p.392</ref>
<blockquote>"There is no absence in the real. There is only absence if you suggest that there may be a presence there where there isn't one."<ref>{{S2}} p.313</ref></blockquote>
==Absence and Presence==
==Presence and Absence==
==Word==As [[Roman Jakobson]] showed with his analysis of [[phoneme]]s, all [[linguistic]] phenomena may be entirely characterized in terms of the [[presence]] or [[absence]] of certain distinctive features. [[Lacan]] sees the game of ''[[fort-da|fort!/da!]]'', which [[Frued]] describes in ''[[Beyond the Pleasure Principle]]'', as a primitive phonemic opposition representing the child's entry into the [[symbolic order]].
[[Lacan]] notes that The two sounds made by the [[symbol]] -- or [[word]] -- is child, O/A, are "a presence made pair of absence" because:# the sounds modulated on [[symbolpresence]] is used in the and [[absence]] of , and these sounds are related "to the [[thingpresence]] and# [[signifiers]] only exist insofar as they are opposed to other [[signifiersabsence]]of persons and things."<ref>{{E}} p.65, 109, n.46</ref>
== Fort-Da ==
According to [[Lacan]], the game of [[fort-da]], introduced by [[Freud]] in "[[Beyond the Pleasure Principle," represents the [[child]]'s entrance into the [[symbolic]] [[order]].
==Word==The phonemic opposition - "fort" and "da" - are "a pair of sounds modulated on presence and absence."<ref>{{E}} p.65</ref>
[[Lacan]] notes that the [[symbol]] -- or [[word]] -- is "a '''presence''' made of [[absence]]" because:== Language ==# the The [[symbol]] is used in the [[absence]] of the [[thing]] and# [[signifiers]] only exist insofar as they are opposed to other [[signifiers]].<ref>{{E}} p.65</ref>
[[Lacan]] argues that the [[word]] is a "presence made of absence."<ref>{{E}} p.65</ref>
[[Absence]] has a positive [[existence]] in the [[symbolic]] as [[presence]].
[[Lacan]] argues that "the nothing" (''le rien'') is in itself an [[object]] (or '[[partial object]]').<ref>{{S4}} p.184-5</ref>
==Word==
[[Lacan]] notes that the [[symbol]] -- or [[word]] -- is "a [[presence]] made of [[absence]]" because:
# the [[symbol]] is used in the [[absence]] of the [[thing]] and
# [[signifiers]] only exist insofar as they are opposed to other [[signifiers]].<ref>{{E}} p.65</ref>
==The Presence of Absence==
Because of the mutual implication of [[absence]] and [[presence]] in the [[symbolic order]], [[absence]] can be said to have an equally positive existence in the [[symbolic]] as [[presence]].
This is what allows [[Lacan]] to say that "the nothing" (''le rien'') is in itself an [[object]] (a [[partial object]]).<ref>{{S4}} p.184-5</ref>
==Phallus==
It is around the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[phallus]] that [[sexual difference]] is [[symbolically]] apprehended by the [[development|child]].
[[Sexual difference]] is apprehended by the [[child]] [[symbolic]]ally around the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[phallus]].
==See Also==
* [[Absencesymbolic]]* [[presence]]* [[object]]* [[fort-da]]* [[child]]
==References==
<references/>
Root Admin, Bots, Bureaucrats, flow-bot, oversight, Administrators, Widget editors
24,656
edits

Navigation menu