Changes

[[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]].

[[Lacan]], however, is strongly opposed to any attempt to [[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 [[Lacan]], the 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. ==Complex==These arguments are evident from the very earliest of [[Lacan]]'s [[psychoanalytic]] [[Works of Jacques Lacan|writings]]. In his 1938 work on the [[family]], for example, he rejects any attempt to explain [[family]] [[structure]]s on the basis of purely biological data, and argues that [[human]] [[psychology]] is regulated by [[complex]]es rather than by [[instinct]]s.<ref>{{1938}} pp. 23-4</ref> ==Science==[[Lacan]] argues that his refusal of [[biology|biological reductionism]] is not a contradiction of [[Freud]] but a [[return]] to 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 rigour]] in general, and because the [[science|conjectural science]]s 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 borrowed [[:category:concepts|concepts]] from [[biology]] (such as the [[: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. 75</ref></blockquote>

==Phallus==Such [[biology|biologizing explanations]] of [[human|human behavior]] ignore, according to [[Lacan]], like the ''primacy'' of the [[Freudsymbolic order]]in [[human], uses ] [[existence]]. [[Lacan]] sees this "[[:category:conceptsbiology|conceptsbiologism]]" in the [[work]] of those [[psychoanalyst]] borrowed from s who have confused [[biologydesire]] (i.e. with [[imagoneed]], dehiscence)and [[drives]] with [[instinct]]s, and then reworks them in an entirely [[symbolic:category:concepts|concepts]] framework/which he insists on distinguishing.

Perhaps ===History===These arguments are evident from the most significant example very earliest of this is [[Lacan]]'s concept [[psychoanalytic]] [[Works of Jacques Lacan|writings]]. In his [[{{Y}}|1938]] [[Jacques Lacan:Bibliography|work]] on the [[phallusfamily]], which for example, he conceives as a rejects any attempt to explain [[family]] [[structure]]s on the basis of purely [[signifierscience|biological data]] , and not as a bodily organargues that [[human]] [[psychology]] is regulated by [[complex]]es rather than by [[instinct]]s.<ref>{{1938}} pp. 23-4</ref>

Thus while ====Science====[[FreudLacan]] argues that his [[refusal]] conceives of the [[castration complexscience|biological reductionism]] and is not a ''[[sexual differencecontradiction]] in terms '' of [[Freud]] but a ''[[return]]'' to the [[presenceessence]] and of [[absenceFreud]] of the 's [[penisWorks of Sigmund Freud|work]], .When [[LacanFreud]] theorizes them in used [[biology|non-biologicalmodels]], he did so because [[biology|non-anatomical]] terms -- the was at that [[presencetime]] and a model of [[absencescience|scientific rigor]] of in general, and because the [[phallusscience|conjectural science]]s had not then achieved the same degree of rigor.

This has been one [[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 [[:category:concepts|concept]] of the main attractions of [[Lacandrive]]) he reworked [[them]] in such a radical way that they become totally new [[:category:concepts|concepts]]ian . For example, the [[theory:category:concepts|concept]] for certain of the [[feministdeath instinct]] writers who have seen it as "is not a way question of constructing biology."<ref>{{E}} p. 102</ref> [[Lacan]] expresses this point with a [[biology|non-essentialistparadox]]:<blockquote>"[[Freudian]] account of gendered biology has [[subjectivitynothing]]to do with biology."<ref>{{S2}} p.75</ref></blockquote>

==Culture===Phallus=====However[[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 the [[phallus]], 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]] consistently rejects all forms of theorizes them in [[biology|non-biological reductionism]], he also rejects [[biology|non-anatomical]] terms -- the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the culturalist position which completely ignores [[phallus]]. This has been one of the relevance main attractions of [[Lacan]]ian [[theory]] for certain [[feminist]] writers who have seen it as a way of constructing a [[biology|non-essentialist]] account of gendered [[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 [[psychical ]] field), then [[Lacan]] is all in favor of [[biology|biologizing thought]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 723</ref>  The clearest examples of this are [[Lacan]]'s 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> ==Sexual Difference== Thus in his account of [[sexual difference]], [[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]]'s [[rejection ]] of the [[false ]] dichotomy between "anatomy or convention".<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis]]'', [[SE]] XXII, 1933a. p. 114</ref>