Changes

In the [[seminars|seminar]] of [[chronology|1970-1]] [[Jacques Lacan]] attempts to [[formalize]] his [[sexual difference|theory of sexual difference]] by means of [[mathemes|formulae]] derived from [[symbolic]] [[logic]].  The [[formulae of sexuation|diagram ]] is divided into two sides: on the left, [[formulae of sexuation|the male side]], and on the right, [[formulae of sexuation|the female side]].  The [[formulae of sexuation]] appear at the top of the [[formulae of sexuation|diagram]].    ==Symbolic Logic==  "E" stands for the existential quantifier. Existential quantifiers are used in logic to denote finite collections and can be read as "there exists." By contrast, "V" denotes (stands for) universal quanitifiers. "Phi" stands for the [[phallic funciton]].   

Thus ===Upper Level===On the male side of the [[formulae of sexuation|diagram]] we have the following. The [[formulae ]] on the male side are [[Image:form1.jpg]] (= . [[Image:form1.jpg]] can be read as "there is a form of ''jouissance'' that is not subject to castration." [[Image:form1.jpg]] can be read as "there is at least one x which is not submitted to the phallic function) ]]." --- In [[Freud]]'s myth of the primal [[father]] in ''[[Totem and Taboo]]'', the primal [[father]] exemplifies this proposition as he has no limits on his sexual [[enjoyment]]. That is, not only can the primal [[father]] enjoy ''all'' the women of the trible, he can enjoy his own mother and daughters as well. There are no limitations on his enjoyment.  ===Lower Level=== Next we have: [[Image:form3.jpg]] . [[Image:form3.jpg]] can be read as "all of a man's ''jouissance'' is phallic ''jouissance''. Every single one of his satisfactions may come up short.<ref>Fink, Bruce. p.160</ref>   --- The idea here is that all ''jouissance'' is mediated in the [[symbolic]] such that it is experienced as coming up short or lacking in some way. Every time I get a bit of recognition, I experience this satisfaction as less than expected or as coming up short. The ''jouissance'' I actually obtain is less than the ''jouissance'' I actually expected. <blockquote>As Fink writes, "There is a barrier between my desire for something as formulated or articulated in signifiers (S) and what can satisfy me. Thus, the satisfaction I take in realizing my desire is always disappointing. This satisfaction, subject to the bar between the signifier and the signified, fails to fulfill me-- it always leaves something more to be desired. That is phallic jouissance. Just as one cannot take the lack out of Lacan, one cannot take the failure out of the phallus."<ref>Fink, Bruce. p.160</ref></blockquote> The abstractness of the signifier-- if that's a good way of putting it --is always in conflict with the concreteness of jouissance, such that each concrete jouissance we obtain is experienced as not being it.  More fundamentally, I experience myself as limited or lacking, as constitutively incomplete. --- Now here's the key point: The upper level and lower level of the masculine graph of sexuation must be read together to signify a particular deadlock within the masculine form of relating to ''[[jouissance]]''.  ==== for Masculine Fantasy==== Let the upper portion of the graph be a specifically [[masculine]] [[fantasy]] of complete or total ''[[jouissance]]''.  It is because a man believes either that  a) total jouissance is possible through some action or object, or  b) that some other person or being has total jouissance, that he comes to find all xthe jouissance that is available in his day to day life insufficient. -- As one can sense palpably in the clinic, those subjects that occupy the "masculine" position with respect to ''[[jouissance]]'', are tormented by the phallic funciton unconscious belief that somewhere, somehow, an uncastrated or complete form of ''[[jouissance]]'' is possible.  As a result, all ''[[jouissance]]'' that is actually available to these subjects turns to shit or loses its ability to satisfy.  The result is validthat masculine sexuated subjects will often concoct [[fantasies]] of how to acheive this ''[[jouissance]]'' and then do everything in their power to prevent actually acting on their [[fantasies]] (as they would then be disappointed once again). ====Courtly Love====As [[Lacan]] puts it in the context of [[courtly love]], "It is a highly refined way of making up for the absence of the sexual relationship, by feigning that we are the ones who erect an obstacle thereto."<ref>69</ref>  In [[courtly love]] the [[man]] admires the [[woman]] from afar, while the woman pretends to ignore the [[man]].  Generally the [[woman]] is married or perhaps a nun, so the two are prevented from ever consummating their [[love]].  Perhaps they send pages and pages of beautiful correspondance to one another, bemoaning their inability to consummate their passion, but the whole point is to avoid passing to the act so as to sustain the belief that complete ''[[jouissance]]'' exists and discovering, once again, the disappointment of [[phallic]] ''[[jouissance]]''.  --