L'agressivité en psychanalyse
| 1932 · 1933 · 1936 · 1938 · 1945 · 1946 · 1947 · 1948 · 1949 · 1950 · 1951 · 1953 · 1954 · 1955 · 1956 · 1957 · 1958 · 1959 · 1960 · 1961 · 1962 · 1963 · 1964 · 1965 · 1966 · 1967 · 1969 · 1963-69 · 1970 · 1972 · 1973 · 1974 · 1975 · 1976 · 1980 · Unsorted |
| 1953 - 1954 | Les écrits techniques de Freud Freud's Papers on Technique |
http://aejcpp.free.fr/lacan/1948-05-00.htm
1948 (25 pp.)-l'AGRESSIVITE EN PSYCHANAlYSE (AGGRESSIVITY IN PS'/CHOANAl YSIS)
At the Xlth Conference des Psychanalystes de Langue Franc;aise, on the theme of aggressivity, Lacan was responsible for the theoretical report and Nacht for the clinical report. History would prove theory to be correct; these two figures of the S.P.P. would be the warring brothers of the 1953 split. In 1966, Lacan took out of Ecrits the tribute to his "learned colleague."
The objectives of this report were to give psychoanalysis the status of a science, by making aggressivity into a concept and by proving that analytic experience could, in its own way, provide results capable of founding "a posi�tive science." Lacan's conception of therapy is clear here; analytic technique is useful for setting into play the motivating forces of aggressivity, in particu�lar negative transference, the "inaugural knot of the analytic drama." In order to fight against the ego of misconstruction (meconnaissance], "maieutics" must operate through a detour, "to induce a guided paranoia." and from there it is possible to work. These theses and the practice that they subte~d would give rise to many discussions and arguments. However, what remains specific about analytic experience is the fact that it takes place entirely in speech, which makes for some nice pages between Principe de realite (9) and FOllctioll et Champ (24).
The concept of aggressivity is constructed in relation to the mirror stage (8, 18) (in spite of the K\cinian contributions on the maternal image) and the "paranoiac structure of the Ego." Only Oedipal identification with the father is pacifying and allows for social and cultural creativity. A final image mourns the twilight of an idealized "paternalist" society, and, for the first time, the term derelection appears. Would man's destiny be "the assumption of his original splitting," or the necessity of "constituting, at every moment, his world by his suicide"? The only soothing balm would be "discrete frater�nity," the psychoanalyst's vocation. 17
