Difference between revisions of "Cause"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
| − | The concept of causality forms an important thread that runs throughout Lacan's entire | + | The concept of [[causality]] forms an important thread that runs throughout [[Lacan]]'s entire work. |
| − | + | It first appears in the context of the question of the [[cause]] of [[psychosis]], which is a central concern of [[Lacan]]'s doctoral thesis <ref>Lacan, 1932</ref>. | |
| − | + | [[Lacan]] returns to this question in 1946, where the [[cause]] of [[madness]] becomes the very essence of all psychical [[causality]]. | |
| − | In | + | In the 1946 paper he reiterates his earlier view that a specifically psychical [[cause]] is needed to explain [[psychosis]]; however, he also questions the possibility of defining 'psychical' in terms of a simple opposition to the concept of matter, and this leads him, in 1955, to dispense with the simplistic notion of 'psychogenesis' <ref>{{S3}} p.7</ref>. |
| − | Lacan | + | In the 1950s [[Lacan]] begins to address the very concept of [[causality]] itself, arguing that it is to be situated on the border between the [[symbolic]] and the [[real]]; it implies "a mediation between the chain of symbols and the real."<ref>{{S2}} p.192</ref>. |
| − | + | He argues that the concept of [[causality]], which underpins all [[science]], is itself a non-scientific concept; "the very notion of cause ... is established on the basis of an original wager."<ref>{{S2}} p.192</ref>. | |
| − | + | In the [[seminar]] of 1962-3, [[Lacan]] argues that the true [[meaning]] of [[causality]] should be looked for in the phenomenon of [[anxiety]], for [[anxiety]] is the cause of doubt. | |
| + | He then links this with the concept of [[objet petit a]], which is now defined as the [[cause]] of [[desire]], rather than that towards which [[desire]] tends. | ||
| − | + | In 1964, [[Lacan]] uses [[Aristotle]]'s typology of [[cause]]s to illustrate the difference between the [[symbolic]] and the [[real]]. | |
| − | < | + | |
| + | [[Lacan]] returns to the [[subject]] of [[causality]] in his 1965-6 [[seminar]], where he distinguishes between [[magic]], [[religion]], [[science]] and [[psychoanalysis]] on the basis to their relationship to [[truth]] as [[cause]].<ref>Lacan, 1965a</ref> | ||
| + | [[Lacan]] also plays on the ambiguity of the term, since besides being "that which provokes an effect," a [[cause]] is also "that for which one fights, that which one defends." | ||
| + | [[Lacan]] clearly sees himself as fighting for "the Freudian cause," although this fight can only be won when one realises that the [[cause]] of the [[unconscious]] is always "a lost cause."<ref>{{Sll}} p.128</ref>. | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
| + | * [[Chance]] | ||
| + | * [[Desire]] | ||
| + | * [[Unconscious]] | ||
| − | + | ==References== | |
| + | <references/> | ||
| + | * cause, causality, 21, 23, 52, 70, 128 [[Seminar XI]] | ||
[[Category:Philosophy]] | [[Category:Philosophy]] | ||
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | [[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | ||
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]] | [[Category:Jacques Lacan]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Dictionary]] | ||
Revision as of 17:31, 21 June 2006
The concept of causality forms an important thread that runs throughout Lacan's entire work.
It first appears in the context of the question of the cause of psychosis, which is a central concern of Lacan's doctoral thesis [1].
Lacan returns to this question in 1946, where the cause of madness becomes the very essence of all psychical causality.
In the 1946 paper he reiterates his earlier view that a specifically psychical cause is needed to explain psychosis; however, he also questions the possibility of defining 'psychical' in terms of a simple opposition to the concept of matter, and this leads him, in 1955, to dispense with the simplistic notion of 'psychogenesis' [2].
In the 1950s Lacan begins to address the very concept of causality itself, arguing that it is to be situated on the border between the symbolic and the real; it implies "a mediation between the chain of symbols and the real."[3].
He argues that the concept of causality, which underpins all science, is itself a non-scientific concept; "the very notion of cause ... is established on the basis of an original wager."[4].
In the seminar of 1962-3, Lacan argues that the true meaning of causality should be looked for in the phenomenon of anxiety, for anxiety is the cause of doubt.
He then links this with the concept of objet petit a, which is now defined as the cause of desire, rather than that towards which desire tends.
In 1964, Lacan uses Aristotle's typology of causes to illustrate the difference between the symbolic and the real.
Lacan returns to the subject of causality in his 1965-6 seminar, where he distinguishes between magic, religion, science and psychoanalysis on the basis to their relationship to truth as cause.[5]
Lacan also plays on the ambiguity of the term, since besides being "that which provokes an effect," a cause is also "that for which one fights, that which one defends."
Lacan clearly sees himself as fighting for "the Freudian cause," although this fight can only be won when one realises that the cause of the unconscious is always "a lost cause."[6].
See Also
References
- ↑ Lacan, 1932
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.7
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.192
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.192
- ↑ Lacan, 1965a
- ↑ Template:Sll p.128
- cause, causality, 21, 23, 52, 70, 128 Seminar XI
