Difference between revisions of "Discourse"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
 
 
(59 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
discourse (discours)                  Whenever Lacan uses the term 'discourse' (rather
+
{{Top}}[[discours]]{{Bottom}}
  
−
than, say, 'speech') it is in order to stress the transindividual nature of
 
  
−
language, the fact that speech always implies another subject, an interlocu-
+
=====Discourse of the Other=====
 +
The term "[[discourse]]" is used by [[Lacan]] to emphasize the ''[[intersubjectivity|transindividual]]'' [[nature]] of '''[[language]]''', the fact that '''[[speech]]''' always implies [[another]] [[subject]], an interlocutor.
  
−
  tor. Thus the famous Lacanian formula, 'the unconscious is the discourse of
+
The '''[[unconscious]]''' is the "[[discourse|discourse of the Other]]", the effect on the [[subject]] of [[speech]] that is addressed to that [[subject]] from elsewhere, by another [[subject]] (who has been [[memory|forgotten]]), by an [[scene|other scene]] or [[scene|psychic locality]].
  
−
  the other' (which first appears in 1953, and later becomes 'the unconscious is
+
=====Social Bond=====
 +
In 1969, [[Lacan]] begins to use the term "[[discourse]]" to denote a "[[discourse|social bond]], founded in [[language]]."
  
−
  the discourse of the Other') designates the unconscious as the effects on the
+
He [[identifies]] ''four'' types of [[discourse|social bonds]], four articulations of the [[symbolic order|symbolic network]] which regulates [[intersubjectivity|intersubjective relations]].
  
−
subject of speech that is addressed to him from elsewhere; by another subject
+
=====Four Discourses=====
 +
These "[[discourse|four discourses]]" are
  
−
    who has been forgotten, by another psychic locality (the other scene).
+
* the [[discourse]] of the '''[[master]]''',
 +
* the [[discourse]] of the '''[[university]]''',
 +
* the [[discourse]] of the '''[[hysteric]]''', and
 +
* the [[discourse]] of the '''[[analyst]]'''.
  
−
      In 1969, Lacan begins to use the term 'discourse' in a slightly different way,
+
=====Four Algorithms=====
 +
[[Image:Letdis.jpg|thumb|250px|right|[[Algebra]]ic [[symbol]]s from the [[Four Discourses]]]]
  
−
though one that still carries with it the stress on INTERSUBJECTIVITY. From this
+
Each of the [[discourse|four discourses]] is represented by an [[matheme|algorithm]] which contains ''four'' [[algebraic]] [[symbol]]s.
  
−
point on the term designates 'a social bond, founded in language' (S20, 21).
+
The names of these ''four'' [[symbol]]s are shown to the [[right]].
  
−
  Lacan identifies four possible types of social bond, four possible articulations
+
The ''four'' [[symbol]]s correspond to ''four'' different [[discourse|positions]] in each [[matheme|algorithm]] of the [[discourse|four discourses]].
  
−
  of the symbolic network which regulates intersubjective relations. These 'four
+
Each [[matheme|algorithm]] of the [[discourse|four discourses]] has ''four'' different [[discourse|positions]] with which the ''four'' [[symbol]]s correspond.
  
−
  discourses' are the discourse of the master, the discourse of the university, the
+
[[Image:Discourse-Structure.jpg|thumb|250px|right|The structure of the four discourses]]
  
−
  discourse of the hysteric, and the discourse of the analyst. Lacan represents
+
The [[discourse|position]] of the ''four'' [[symbol]]s in each [[matheme|algorithm]] is what distinguishes the [[discourse|four discourses]] from one another.
  
−
  each of the four discourses by         an algorithm: each algorithm contains the
+
The [[discourse|four discourses]] are distinguished from one another by the [[discourse|positions]] of these ''four'' [[symbol]]s in each [[matheme|algorithm]].
  
−
following four algebraic symbols:
+
Each of the [[discourse|four discourses]] is defined by the [[discourse|position]] of the ''four'' [[symbol]]s in its [[matheme|algorithm]].
  
−
      Si    = the master signifier
+
The names of the ''four'' [[discourse|positions]] are shown to the right.<ref>{{S20}} p. 21</ref>
  
−
      S2    = knowledge (le savoir)
+
=====Discourse of the Master=====
 +
[[Image:Madis.jpg|thumb|right|[[Discourse]] of the [[Master]]]]
 +
The [[discourse]] of the [[master]] is the basic [[discourse]] from which the other [[three]] [[discourse]]s are derived.
  
−
      S      = the subject
+
The '''dominant [[position]]''' is occupied by the [[master signifier]] ([[Image:SS1.gif]]), which represents the [[subject]] ('''S''') for another [[signifier]] or, more precisely, for all other [[signifiers]] ([[Image:SS2.gif]]); however, in this [[signification|signifying operation]] there is always a [[surplus]], namely, ''[[objet petit a]]''.
  
−
      a      = surplus enjoyment
+
The point is that all attempts at totalization are doomed to failure.
  
 +
The [[discourse]] of the [[master]] "masks the [[division]] of the [[subject]]."<ref>{{S17}} p. 118</ref>
  
 +
The [[discourse]] also illustrates clearly the [[structure]] of the [[dialectic]] of the [[master]] and the [[master|slave]].
  
−
  What distinguishes the four discourses from one another is the positions of
+
The [[master]] ([[Image:SS1.gif]]) is the [[discourse|agent]] who puts the [[slave]] ([[Image:SS2.gif]]) to [[work]]; the result of this work is a [[surplus]] (''[[objet (petit) a|a]]'') that the [[master]] attempts to appropriate.
  
−
  these four symbols. There    are four positions in the algorithms of the four
+
On the gif the right-side S barré is a typo. It must be changed to [[objet]] [[petit a]] (as rightly described.
  
−
discourses, each of which is designated by a different name. The names of the
+
=====Discourse of the University=====
 +
[[Image:Unidis.jpg|thumb|right|[[Discourse]] of the [[University]]]]
 +
The [[discourse]] of the [[university]] is produced by a quarter turn of the [[discourse]] of the [[master]] (anticlockwise).
  
−
  four positions are shown in Figure 2; Lacan gives different names to these
+
The dominant position is occupied by [[knowledge]] (''[[savoir]]'').
  
 +
This illustrates the fact that behind all attempts to impart an apparently "neutral" [[knowledge]] to the [[other]] can always be located an attempt at [[master]]y ([[master]]y of [[knowledge]], and domination of the [[other]] to whom this [[knowledge]] is imparted).
  
 +
The [[discourse]] of the [[university]] represents the [[hegemony]] of [[knowledge]], particularly [[visible]] in [[modernity]] in the [[form]] of the hegemony of [[science]].
  
 +
=====Discourse of the Hysteric=====
 +
[[Image:Hysdis.jpg|thumb|right|[[Discourse]] of the [[Hysteria|Hysteric]]]]
 +
The [[discourse]] of the [[hysteric]] is also produced by a quarter turn of the [[discourse]] of the [[master]], but in a clockwise direction.
  
 +
It is not simply "that which is uttered by a hysteric", but a certain kind of [[discourse|social bond]] in which any [[subject]] may be inscribed.
  
−
                              the agent                            the other
+
The dominant position is occupied by the [[split|divided]] [[subject]], the [[symptom]].
  
−
                                  truth                              production
+
This [[discourse]] is that which points the way towards [[knowledge]].<ref>{{S17}} p. 23</ref>
  
 +
[[Psychoanalytic treatment]] involves "the [[structural]] introduction of the [[discourse]] of the '''[[hysteric]]''' by means of artificial [[conditions]]"; in other [[words]], the [[analyst]] "[[hysteria|hystericises]]" the [[patient]]'s [[discourse]].<ref>{{S17}} p. 35</ref>
  
 +
=====Discourse of the Analyst=====
 +
[[Image:Anadis.jpg|thumb|right|[[Discourse]] of the [[Analyst]]]]
 +
The [[discourse]] of the [[analyst]] is produced by a quarter turn of the [[discourse]] of the [[hysteric]] (in the same way as [[Freud]] developed [[psychoanalysis]] by giving an [[interpretation|interpretative]] turn to the [[discourse]] of his [[hysterical]] [[patient]]s).
  
 +
The position of the [[discourse|agent]], which is the position occupied by the [[analyst]] in the [[treatment]], is occupied by ''[[objet (petit) a|objet petit a]]''; this illustrates the fact that the [[analyst]] must, in the course of the [[treatment]], become the [[cause]] of the [[analysand]]'s [[desire]].<ref>{{S17}} p. 41</ref>
  
 +
The fact that this [[discourse]] is the [[inverse]] of the [[discourse]] of the [[master]] emphasises that, for [[Lacan]], [[psychoanalysis]] is an essentially subversive [[practice]] which undermines all attempts at domination and [[master]]y.
  
−
Figure 2      The structure of the four discourses
+
=====Discourse of the Capitalist=====
 +
In a few parts of his teaching (notably in his discourse in Milano), Lacan talked [[about]] a new kind of discourse which caracterizes our post-modern [[society]]: the discourse of the [[capitalist]]. The position of the [[agent]], is occupied by the [[subject]] ('''S'''), who does not address the other, but the [[truth]] (this position is now occupied by the [[master signifier]] ([[Image:SS1.gif]]), the [[Market]]). Through the Market, the [[subject]] ('''S''') can ask the [[knowledge]] (''[[savoir]]''), ([[Image:SS2.gif]]), Science and [[Technology]] to produce [[objects]] to be consumed (''[[objet petit a]]''). This objects are made to never feed completely the [[subject's desire]].
 +
This discourse is not part of the [[social]] bond [[theory]]. We notice that, in this discourse (contrary to the [[four discourses]]), an arrow hits the position of the truth. With the Discourse of the Capitalist, Lacan tried to account for a new kind of social bonds in which [[The Subject|the subject]] become more and more individualistic, egoistic. The Market is here the new Truth which cannot be contradicted.
  
−
Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XX. Encore, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller, Paris: Seuil,
+
==See Also==
 +
{{See}}
 +
* [[Algebra]]
 +
* [[Analyst]]
 +
* [[Communication]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Hysteria]]
 +
* [[Intersubjectivity]]
 +
* [[Knowledge]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Language]]
 +
* [[Master]]
 +
* [[Matheme]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Science]]
 +
* [[Speech]]
 +
* [[Subject]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Symbol]]
 +
* [[Symptom]]
 +
* [[Unconscious]]
 +
{{Also}}
  
−
1975.
+
==References==
 +
<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
 +
<references />
 +
</div>
  
−
 
+
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
−
 
+
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
−
 
+
[[Category:Language]]
−
 
+
[[Category:Symbolic]]
−
positions at different points in his work, and this figure is taken from the
+
[[Category:Linguistics]]
−
 
+
[[Category:Dictionary]]
−
1972-3 seminar (S20, 21).
+
[[Category:Concepts]]
−
 
+
[[Category:Terms]]
−
      Each discourse is defined by writing the four algebraic symbols in a different
+
{{OK}}
−
 
 
−
position. The symbols always remain in the same order, so each discourse is
 
−
 
 
−
simply the result of rotating the symbols a quarter turn. The top-left position
 
−
 
 
−
('the agent') is the dominant position which defines the discourse. In addition
 
−
 
 
−
to the four symbols, each algorithm also contains an arrow going from the
 
−
 
 
−
agent to the other. The four discourses are shown in Figure 3 (taken from Sl7,
 
−
 
 
−
31).
 
−
 
 
−
      In 1971, Lacan proposes that the position of the agent is also the position of
 
−
 
 
−
the SEMBLANCE. In 1972, Lacan inscribes two arrows in the formulas instead of
 
−
 
 
−
one; one arrow (which Lacan labels 'impossibility') goes from the agent to the
 
−
 
 
−
other, and the other      arrow (which is labelled 'powerlessness') goes from
 
−
 
 
−
production to truth (S20, 21).
 
−
 
 
−
      The discourse of the MASTER iS the basic discourse from which the other three
 
−
 
 
−
discourses      are derived. The dominant position is occupied by the master
 
−
 
 
−
signifier (Si), which represents the subject (S) for another signifier or, more
 
−
 
 
−
precisely, for all other signifiers (S2); however, in this signifying operation
 
−
 
 
−
there is always a surplus, namely, objet petit a. The point is that all attempts at
 
−
 
 
−
totalisation are doomed to failure. The discourse of the master 'masks the
 
−
 
 
−
division of the subject' (Sl7, 118). The discourse also illustrates clearly the
 
−
 
 
−
structure of the dialectic of the master and the slave. The master (S,) is the
 
−
 
 
−
agent who puts the slave (S2) (O WOrk; the result of this work is a surplus (a)
 
−
 
 
−
that the master attempts to appropriate.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
          Discourse of the master                                Discourse of the university
 
−
 
 
−
              SiaS2                                                            S24a
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
          Discourse of the hysteric                              Discourse of the analyst
 
−
 
 
−
              SMS,                                                              a->S
 
−
 
 
−
              a      S2                                                          S2    Si
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Figure 3      The four discourses
 
−
 
 
−
  Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XVIL L'envers de la psychanalyse, ed. Jacques-Alain
 
−
 
 
−
  Miller, Paris: Seuil, 1975.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
                              the agent                            the other
 
−
 
 
−
                                  truth                              production
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Figure 2      The structure of the four discourses
 
−
 
 
−
Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XX. Encore, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller, Paris: Seuil,
 
−
 
 
−
1975.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
positions at different points in his work, and this figure is taken from the
 
−
 
 
−
1972-3 seminar (S20, 21).
 
−
 
 
−
      Each discourse is defined by writing the four algebraic symbols in a different
 
−
 
 
−
position. The symbols always remain in the same order, so each discourse is
 
−
 
 
−
simply the result of rotating the symbols a quarter turn. The top-left position
 
−
 
 
−
('the agent') is the dominant position which defines the discourse. In addition
 
−
 
 
−
to the four symbols, each algorithm also contains an arrow going from the
 
−
 
 
−
agent to the other. The four discourses are shown in Figure 3 (taken from Sl7,
 
−
 
 
−
31).
 
−
 
 
−
      In 1971, Lacan proposes that the position of the agent is also the position of
 
−
 
 
−
the SEMBLANCE. In 1972, Lacan inscribes two arrows in the formulas instead of
 
−
 
 
−
one; one arrow (which Lacan labels 'impossibility') goes from the agent to the
 
−
 
 
−
other, and the other      arrow (which is labelled 'powerlessness') goes from
 
−
 
 
−
production to truth (S20, 21).
 
−
 
 
−
      The discourse of the MASTER iS the basic discourse from which the other three
 
−
 
 
−
discourses      are derived. The dominant position is occupied by the master
 
−
 
 
−
signifier (Si), which represents the subject (S) for another signifier or, more
 
−
 
 
−
precisely, for all other signifiers (S2); however, in this signifying operation
 
−
 
 
−
there is always a surplus, namely, objet petit a. The point is that all attempts at
 
−
 
 
−
totalisation are doomed to failure. The discourse of the master 'masks the
 
−
 
 
−
division of the subject' (Sl7, 118). The discourse also illustrates clearly the
 
−
 
 
−
structure of the dialectic of the master and the slave. The master (S,) is the
 
−
 
 
−
agent who puts the slave (S2) (O WOrk; the result of this work is a surplus (a)
 
−
 
 
−
that the master attempts to appropriate.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
          Discourse of the master                                Discourse of the university
 
−
 
 
−
              SiaS2                                                            S24a
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
          Discourse of the hysteric                              Discourse of the analyst
 
−
 
 
−
              SMS,                                                              a->S
 
−
 
 
−
              a      S2                                                          S2    Si
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Figure 3      The four discourses
 
−
 
 
−
  Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XVIL L'envers de la psychanalyse, ed. Jacques-Alain
 
−
 
 
−
  Miller, Paris: Seuil, 1975.
 
−
 
 
−
The discourse of the university is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse
 
−
 
 
−
of the master (anticlockwise). The dominant position is occupied by knowl-
 
−
 
 
−
edge (savoir). This illustrates the fact that behind all attempts to impart an
 
−
 
 
−
apparently 'neutral' knowledge to the other can always be located an attempt
 
−
 
 
−
  at mastery (mastery of knowledge, and domination of the other to whom this
 
−
 
 
−
knowledge is imparted). The discourse of the university represents the hege-
 
−
 
 
−
mony of knowledge, particularly visible in modernity in the form of the
 
−
 
 
−
hegemony of science.
 
−
 
 
−
      The discourse of the hysteric is also produced by a quarter turn of the
 
−
 
 
−
discourse of the master, but in a clockwise direction. It is not simply 'that
 
−
 
 
−
which is uttered by a hysteric', but a certain kind of social bond in which any
 
−
 
 
−
subject may be inscribed. The dominant position is occupied by the divided
 
−
 
 
−
subject, the symptom. This discourse is that which points the way towards
 
−
 
 
−
knowledge ($17, 23). Psychoanalytic treatment involves 'the structural intro-
 
−
 
 
−
duction of the discourse of the hysteric by means of artificial conditions'; in
 
−
 
 
−
other words, the analyst 'hystericises' the patient's discourse (Sl7, 35).
 
−
 
 
−
      The discourse of the analyst is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of
 
−
 
 
−
the hysteric (in the same way as Freud developed psychoanalysis by giving an
 
−
 
 
−
interpretative turn to the discourse of his hysterical patients). The position of
 
−
 
 
−
the agent, which is the position occupied by the analyst in the treatment, is
 
−
 
 
−
occupied by objet petit a; this illustrates the fact that the analyst must, in the
 
−
 
 
−
  course of the treatment, become the cause of the analysand's desire (Sl7, 41).
 
−
 
 
−
The fact that this discourse is the inverse of the discourse of the master
 
−
 
 
−
emphasises that, for Lacan, psychoanalysis is an essentially subversive prac-
 
−
 
 
−
tice which undermines all attempts at domination and mastery. (For further
 
−
 
 
−
information on the four discourses, see Bracher et al., 1994.)
 

Latest revision as of 22:14, 10 April 2022

French: [[discours]]


Discourse of the Other

The term "discourse" is used by Lacan to emphasize the transindividual nature of language, the fact that speech always implies another subject, an interlocutor.

The unconscious is the "discourse of the Other", the effect on the subject of speech that is addressed to that subject from elsewhere, by another subject (who has been forgotten), by an other scene or psychic locality.

Social Bond

In 1969, Lacan begins to use the term "discourse" to denote a "social bond, founded in language."

He identifies four types of social bonds, four articulations of the symbolic network which regulates intersubjective relations.

Four Discourses

These "four discourses" are

Four Algorithms
Algebraic symbols from the Four Discourses

Each of the four discourses is represented by an algorithm which contains four algebraic symbols.

The names of these four symbols are shown to the right.

The four symbols correspond to four different positions in each algorithm of the four discourses.

Each algorithm of the four discourses has four different positions with which the four symbols correspond.

The structure of the four discourses

The position of the four symbols in each algorithm is what distinguishes the four discourses from one another.

The four discourses are distinguished from one another by the positions of these four symbols in each algorithm.

Each of the four discourses is defined by the position of the four symbols in its algorithm.

The names of the four positions are shown to the right.[1]

Discourse of the Master
Discourse of the Master

The discourse of the master is the basic discourse from which the other three discourses are derived.

The dominant position is occupied by the master signifier (SS1.gif), which represents the subject (S) for another signifier or, more precisely, for all other signifiers (SS2.gif); however, in this signifying operation there is always a surplus, namely, objet petit a.

The point is that all attempts at totalization are doomed to failure.

The discourse of the master "masks the division of the subject."[2]

The discourse also illustrates clearly the structure of the dialectic of the master and the slave.

The master (SS1.gif) is the agent who puts the slave (SS2.gif) to work; the result of this work is a surplus (a) that the master attempts to appropriate.

On the gif the right-side S barré is a typo. It must be changed to objet petit a (as rightly described.

Discourse of the University
Discourse of the University

The discourse of the university is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the master (anticlockwise).

The dominant position is occupied by knowledge (savoir).

This illustrates the fact that behind all attempts to impart an apparently "neutral" knowledge to the other can always be located an attempt at mastery (mastery of knowledge, and domination of the other to whom this knowledge is imparted).

The discourse of the university represents the hegemony of knowledge, particularly visible in modernity in the form of the hegemony of science.

Discourse of the Hysteric
Discourse of the Hysteric

The discourse of the hysteric is also produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the master, but in a clockwise direction.

It is not simply "that which is uttered by a hysteric", but a certain kind of social bond in which any subject may be inscribed.

The dominant position is occupied by the divided subject, the symptom.

This discourse is that which points the way towards knowledge.[3]

Psychoanalytic treatment involves "the structural introduction of the discourse of the hysteric by means of artificial conditions"; in other words, the analyst "hystericises" the patient's discourse.[4]

Discourse of the Analyst
Discourse of the Analyst

The discourse of the analyst is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the hysteric (in the same way as Freud developed psychoanalysis by giving an interpretative turn to the discourse of his hysterical patients).

The position of the agent, which is the position occupied by the analyst in the treatment, is occupied by objet petit a; this illustrates the fact that the analyst must, in the course of the treatment, become the cause of the analysand's desire.[5]

The fact that this discourse is the inverse of the discourse of the master emphasises that, for Lacan, psychoanalysis is an essentially subversive practice which undermines all attempts at domination and mastery.

Discourse of the Capitalist

In a few parts of his teaching (notably in his discourse in Milano), Lacan talked about a new kind of discourse which caracterizes our post-modern society: the discourse of the capitalist. The position of the agent, is occupied by the subject (S), who does not address the other, but the truth (this position is now occupied by the master signifier (SS1.gif), the Market). Through the Market, the subject (S) can ask the knowledge (savoir), (SS2.gif), Science and Technology to produce objects to be consumed (objet petit a). This objects are made to never feed completely the subject's desire. This discourse is not part of the social bond theory. We notice that, in this discourse (contrary to the four discourses), an arrow hits the position of the truth. With the Discourse of the Capitalist, Lacan tried to account for a new kind of social bonds in which the subject become more and more individualistic, egoistic. The Market is here the new Truth which cannot be contradicted.

See Also

References

  1. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XX. Encore, 1972-73. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1975. p. 21
  2. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XVII. L'envers de la psychanalyse, 19669-70. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 118
  3. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XVII. L'envers de la psychanalyse, 19669-70. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 23
  4. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XVII. L'envers de la psychanalyse, 19669-70. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 35
  5. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XVII. L'envers de la psychanalyse, 19669-70. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 41
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/index.php?title=Discourse&oldid=53120"