biology ({{Topp}}biologie) Freud's work is full of references to biology. Freud{{Bottom}}
==Sigmund Freud==[[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|work]] is [[full]] of references to [[biology]]. [[Freud]] regarded [[biology ]] as a [[model ]] of [[scientific rigour ]] rigor on which to base the new[[science]] of [[psychoanalysis]].
science of psychoanalysis. ==Jacques Lacan==[[Lacan]], however, is strongly opposed to any attemptto [[construct]] [[psychoanalysis]] upon a [[biology|biological model]], arguing that the direct application of [[biological]] (or [[nature|ethological]]/[[psychology|psychological]]) [[:category:concepts|concepts]] (such as [[adaptation]]) to [[psychoanalysis]] will inevitably be misleading and will obliterate the essential [[distinction]] between [[nature]] and [[culture]].
Such [[biology|biologizing explanations]] of [[human|human behavior]] ignore, according to construct psychoanalysis upon a biological model[[Lacan]], arguing that the direct''primacy'' of the [[symbolic order]] in [[human]] [[existence]]. [[Lacan]] sees this "[[biology|biologism]]" in the [[work]] of those [[psychoanalyst]]s who have confused [[desire]] with [[need]], and [[drives]] with [[instinct]]s, [[:category:concepts|concepts]] which he insists on distinguishing.
application ===History===These arguments are evident from the very earliest of [[Lacan]]'s [[psychoanalytic]] [[Works of Jacques Lacan|writings]]. In his [[{{Y}}|1938]] [[Jacques Lacan:Bibliography|work]] on the [[family]], for example, he rejects any attempt to explain [[family]] [[structure]]s on the basis of purely [[science|biological (or ethologicaldata]], and argues that [[human]] [[psychology]] is regulated by [[complex]]es rather than by [[instinct]]s.<ref>{{1938}} pp. 23-4</psychological) concepts (such asref>
ADAPTATION) ====Science====[[Lacan]] argues that his [[refusal]] of [[science|biological reductionism]] is not a ''[[contradiction]]'' of [[Freud]] but a ''[[return]]'' to psychoanalysis will inevitably be misleading the [[essence]] of [[Freud]]'s [[Works of Sigmund Freud|work]].When [[Freud]] used [[biology|biological models]], he did so because [[biology]] was at that [[time]] a model of [[science|scientific rigor]] in general, and will obliter-because the [[science|conjectural science]]s had not then achieved the same degree of rigor.
ate [[Freud]] certainly did not confuse [[psychoanalysis]] with [[biology]] or any [[other]] exact [[science]], and when he borrowed [[:category:concepts|concepts]] from [[biology]] (such as the essential distinction between NATURE and culture[[:category:concepts|concept]] of the [[drive]]) he reworked [[them]] in such a radical way that they become totally new [[:category:concepts|concepts]]. For example, the [[:category:concepts|concept]] of the [[death instinct]] "is not a question of biology."<ref>{{E}} p. 102</ref> [[Lacan]] expresses this point with a [[paradox]]:<blockquote>"[[Freudian]] biology has [[nothing]] to do with biology."<ref>{{S2}} p. Such biologising75</ref></blockquote>
explanations =====Phallus=====[[Lacan]], like [[Freud]], uses [[:category:concepts|concepts]] borrowed from [[biology]] (i.e. [[imago]], dehiscence), and then reworks them in an entirely [[symbolic]] framework. Perhaps the most significant example of this is [[Lacan]]'s [[concept]] of human behaviour ignorethe [[phallus]], according to which he conceives as a [[signifier]] and not as a [[body|bodily organ]]. Thus while [[Freud]] conceives of the [[castration complex]] and [[sexual difference]] in [[terms]] of the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[penis]], [[Lacan]] theorizes them in [[biology|non-biological]], [[biology|non-anatomical]] terms -- the primacy [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[phallus]]. This has been one of the main attractions of [[Lacan]]ian [[theory]] for certain [[feminist]] writers who have seen it as a way of constructing a [[biology|non-essentialist]] account ofgendered [[subjectivity]].
=====Culture=====However, while [[Lacan]] consistently rejects all forms of [[science|biological reductionism]], he also rejects the [[culture|culturalist]] [[position]] which completely ignores the relevance of [[biology]]. If "[[biology|biologizing]]" is [[understood]] correctly (that is, not as the reduction of [[psychic]] phenomena to crude [[biology|biological determination]], but as discerning the precise way in which biological data impact on the symbolic order [[psychical]] field), then [[Lacan]] is all in human existencefavor of [[biology|biologizing thought]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 723</ref> The clearest examples of this are [[Lacan sees this ]]'biologisms appeals to examples from [[animal]] [[nature|ethology]] to demonstrate the [[power]] of [[image]]s to act as releasing mechanisms; hence [[Lacan]]' s references to pigeons and locusts in his account of the [[mirror stage]],<ref>{{E}} p. 3</ref> and to crustaceans in his account of [[mimicry]].<ref>{{S11}} p. 99</ref> Thus in his account of [[sexual difference]], [[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]]'s [[rejection]] of the work[[false]] dichotomy between "anatomy or convention".<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis]]'', [[SE]] XXII, 1933a. p. 114</ref>
of those psychoanalysts who have confused desire with need, and drives with==See Also=={{See}}* [[Absence]]* [[Adaptation]]* [[Castration complex|Castration]]||* [[Complex]]* [[Death drive]]* [[Desire]]||* [[Drive]]* [[Imago]]* [[Instinct]]||* [[Mirror stage]]* [[Nature]]* [[Need]]||* [[Phallus]]* [[Science]]* [[Sexual difference]]{{Also}}
instincts, concepts which he insists on distinguishing.==References==<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small"><references/></div>
These arguments are evident from the very earliest of Lacan's psycho-{{OK}}[[Category:Freudian psychology]][[Category:Science]][[Category:Sexuality]]
analytic writings. In his 1938 work on the family, for example, he rejects any attempt to explain family structures on the basis of purely biological data, and argues that human psychology is regulated by complexes rather than by instincts (Lacan, 1938: 23-4). Lacan argues that his refusal of biological reductionism is not a contra- diction of Freud but a return to the essence of Freud's work. When Freud used biological models, he did so simply because biology was at that time a model of scientific rigour in general, and because the conjectural sciences had not then achieved the same degree of rigour. Freud certainly did not confuse psychoanalysis with biology or any other exact science, and when he bor- rowed concepts from biology (such as the concept of the drive) he reworked them in such a radical way that they become totally new concepts. For example, the concept of the death instinct 'is not a question of biology' (E, 102). Lacan expresses his point with a paradox: 'Freudian biology has nothing to do with biology' (S2, 75). Lacan, like Freud, uses concepts borrowed from biology (e.g. imago, dehiscence), and then reworks them in an entirely symbolic framework. Perhaps the most significant example of this is Lacan's concept of the PHALLUS, which he conceives as a signifier and not as a bodily organ. Thus while Freud conceives of the castration complex and sexual difference in terms of the presence and absence of the penis, Lacan theorises them in non- biological, non-anatomical terms (the presence and absence of the phallus). This has been one of the main attractions of Lacanian theory for certain feminist writers who have seen it as a way of constructing a non-essentialist account of gendered subjectivity. However, while Lacan consistently rejects all forms of biological reduction- ism, he also rejects the culturalist position which completely ignores the relevance of biology (Ec, 723). If 'biologising' is understood correctly (that is, not as the reduction of psychic phenomena to crude biological determi- nation, but as discerning the precise way in which biological data impact on the psychical field), then Lacan is all in favour of biologising thought (Ec, 723). The clearest examples of this are Lacan's appeals to examples from animal ethology to demonstrate the power of images to act as releasing mechanisms; hence Lacan's references to pigeons and locusts in his account of the mirror stage (E, 3), and to crustaceans in his account of mimicry (Sll, 99) (see GESTALT). Thus in his account of sexual difference, Lacan follows Freud's rejection of the false dichotomy between 'anatomy or convention' (Freud, 1933a: SE XXII, 114). Lacan's concern is not to privilege either term but to show how both interact in complex ways in the process of assuming a sexual position.__NOTOC__
