Changes

[[biology]] (''[[{{Topp}}biologie]]'') {{Bottom}}

==Sigmund Freud and Biology==[[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]].

==Jacques Lacan's Critique of 'Biologism'==[[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 [[:category:culture|culture]]. Such biologising explanations of human behaviour ignore, according to Lacan, the primacy of the [[symbolic]] [[order]] in human [[existence]]. Lacan sees this '[[biologism]]' in the work of those [[psychoanalysts]] who have confused [[desire]] with [[need]], and [[drives]] with [[instincts]], concepts which he insists on distinguishing.

These arguments are evident from the very earliest Such [[biology|biologizing explanations]] of [[human|human behavior]] ignore, according to [[Lacan]], the ''s psychoanalytic writingsprimacy'' of the [[symbolic order]] in [[human]] [[existence]]. In his 1938 [[Lacan]] sees this "[[biology|biologism]]" in the [[work on the family]] of those [[psychoanalyst]]s who have confused [[desire]] with [[need]], for exampleand [[drives]] with [[instinct]]s, [[:category:concepts|concepts]] which he rejects any attempt to explain family structures insists on the basis of purely biological data, and argues that human psychology is regulated by complexes rather than by instinctsdistinguishing.<ref>Lacan, 1938: 23-4</ref>

Lacan argues that his refusal of biological reductionism is not a contradiction of Freud but a return to ===History===These arguments are evident from the essence very earliest of Freud[[Lacan]]'s [[psychoanalytic]] [[Works of Jacques Lacan|writings]]. In his [[{{Y}}|1938]] [[Jacques Lacan:Bibliography|work. When Freud used biological models]] on the [[family]], for example, 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 rejects any attempt to explain [[family]] [[structure]]s on the same degree basis of rigour. Freud certainly did not confuse psychoanalysis with biology or any other exact purely [[science|biological data]], and when he borrowed concepts from biology (such as the concept of the drive) he reworked them in such a radical way argues that they become totally new concepts. For example, the concept of the death [[human]] [[psychology]] is regulated by [[complex]]es rather than by [[instinct "is not a question of biology]]s."<ref>E, 102</ref> {{1938}} pp. Lacan expresses his point with a paradox: "Freudian biology has nothing to do with biology."<ref>S2, 7523-4</ref>

====Science====[[Lacan, like ]] argues that his [[refusal]] of [[science|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]], uses concepts borrowed from he did so because [[biology (e.g. imago, dehiscence)]] was at that [[time]] a model of [[science|scientific rigor]] in general, and because the [[science|conjectural science]]s had not then reworks them in an entirely symbolic frameworkachieved the same degree of rigor.

==Phallus==Perhaps the most significant example of this is Lacan's concept of the [[phallusFreud]], which he conceives as a certainly did not confuse [[signifierpsychoanalysis]] and not as a bodily organ. Thus while Freud conceives of the with [[castration complexbiology]] and or any [[sexual differenceother]] in terms of the exact [[presencescience]] , and when he borrowed [[absence:category:concepts|concepts]] of the from [[penisbiology]], Lacan theorises them in non-biological, non-anatomical terms (such as the presence and absence [[:category:concepts|concept]] of the phallus[[drive]])he reworked [[them]] in such a radical way that they become totally new [[:category:concepts|concepts]].This has been one of For example, the main attractions of Lacanian theory for certain [[:category:feminist theoryconcepts|feministconcept]]of the [[death 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 [[essentialism|non-essentialistparadox]]:<blockquote>"[[Freudian]] account of gendered biology has [[subjectivitynothing]]to do with biology."<ref>{{S2}} p.75</ref></blockquote>

==Culturalism===Phallus=====However[[Lacan]], while Lacan consistently rejects all forms of biological reductionismlike [[Freud]], he also rejects the culturalist position which completely ignores the relevance of uses [[:category:concepts|concepts]] borrowed from [[biology]] (i.<ref>Ec, 723</ref>e.If 'biologising' is understood correctly (that is[[imago]], not as the reduction of psychic phenomena to crude biological determination, but as discerning the precise way in which biological data impact on the psychical fielddehiscence), and then Lacan is all reworks them in favour of biologising thoughtan entirely [[symbolic]] framework.<ref>Ec, 723</ref>The clearest examples Perhaps the most significant example of this are is [[Lacan]]'s appeals to examples from animal ethology to demonstrate [[concept]] of the power [[phallus]], which he conceives as a [[signifier]] and not as a [[body|bodily organ]]. Thus while [[Freud]] conceives of images to act as releasing mechanisms; hence Lacan's references to pigeons the [[castration complex]] and locusts [[sexual difference]] in his account [[terms]] of the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[mirror stagepenis]]<ref>E, 3</ref>[[Lacan]] theorizes them in [[biology|non-biological]], [[biology|non-anatomical]] terms -- the [[presence]] and to crustaceans in his [[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 of mimicrygendered [[subjectivity]].<ref>Sll, 99</ref>

=====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> 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]]'', 1933a: [[SE ]] XXII, 1933a. p. 114</ref> 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.

==See Also==* [[Biogenetics]]   [[Category:Terms]]{{OK}}[[Category:ConceptsFreudian psychology]]