Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Mathematics

349 bytes added, 19:16, 20 May 2019
The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (<a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles">https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles</a>).
{{Top}}mathématiques{{Bottom}}
==Symbolic==In his attempt to theorize the [[category]] of the [[symbolic]], [[Lacan]] adopts two basic approaches.# The first approach is to describe it in [[terms]] borrowed from [[linguistics]], using a [[Saussure]]an-inspired [[model]] of [[language]] as a [[system]] of [[signifiers]].# The second approach is to describe it in terms borrowed from [[mathematics]] (''. The two approaches are complementary, since both are attempts to describe [[formal]] systems with precise rules, and both demonstrate the [[power]] of the [[mathématiquessignifier]]'').
In his attempt ===History===Although there is a general shift in [[Lacan]]'s [[work]] from the [[linguistic]] approach which predominates in the 1950s to theorize a [[mathematical]] approach which predominates in the category 1970s, there are traces of the [[symbolicmathematical]] approach as early as the 1940s. The branches of [[mathematics]] which [[Lacan]] uses most are [[algebra]] and [[topology]], although there are also incursions into set [[Lacantheory]] and [[number]] adopts two basic approachestheory.<ref>{{E}} pp.316-18</ref>
The first approach is ==Formalization==[[Lacan]]'s use of [[mathematics]] represents an attempt to describe it [[formalize]] [[psychoanalytic theory]], in terms borrowed from keeping with his view that [[psychoanalytic theory]] should aspire to the [[formalization]] proper to [[science]].<blockquote>"Mathematical formalization is our [[linguisticsgoal]], using a our [[ideal]]."<ref>{{S20}} p. 108</ref></blockquote>[[SaussureMathematics]]an-inspired model of serve [[languageLacan]] as a system paradigm of modern [[scientific]] [[signifierdiscourse]]s, which "emerged from the little letters of mathematics."<ref>{{S7}} p.236</ref>
The second approach ==Metalanguage==However, this use of [[mathematics]] is not an attempt to describe it in terms borrowed from produce a [[mathematicsmetalanguage]], since "no metalanguage can be spoken."<ref> {{E}} p.311</ref> <blockquote>"The two approaches are complementaryroot of the difficulty is that you can only introduce [[symbols]], mathematical or otherwise, by using everyday language, since both you have, after all, to explain what you are attempts going to describe formal systems do with precise rules, and both demonstrate the power of the [[signifierthem]]."<ref>{{S1}} p.2</ref></blockquote> Although there is a general shift in Thus [[Lacan]]'s work use of [[mathematics]] is not an attempt to escape from the ambiguity of [[linguisticlanguage]] approach which predominates in the 1950s to a mathematical approach which predominates in the 1970s, there are traces of the mathematical approach as early as the 1940s (such as Lacan's analysis of a logical puzzle in Lacanbut, 1945; see his 1956 chain that "on the laws of intersubjectivity are mathematical" in Eccontrary, 472). The branches to produce a way of [[mathematicsformalization|formalizing]] [[psychoanalysis]] which produces multiple effects of [[Lacansense]] uses most are without [[algebrabeing]] and reducible to a univocal [[topologysignification]], although there are also incursions into set theory and number theory (e.g. E Also, 316-18). -- by using [[Lacanmathematics]]'s use of [[mathematicsLacan]] represents an attempt attempts to formalize prevent all attempts at [[psychoanalytic theoryimaginary]], in keeping with his view that [[psychoanalytic theoryknowledge|intuitive understanding]] should aspire to the formalization proper to of [[sciencepsychoanalysis]].
"Mathematical formalization is our goal, our ideal." (S20, 108)==See Also=={{See}}* [[MathematicsAlgebra]] serves * [[LacanLinguistics]] as a paradigm of modern scientific discourse, which "emerged from the little letters of mathematics." (S7, 236)||* [[Mathemes]]--* [[Science]]||However, this use of * [[mathematicsSymbolic]] is not an attempt to produce a * [[metalanguageTopology]], since "no metalanguage can be spoken."<ref> {{EAlso}} p.311</ref>
==References==<blockquote>div style="font-size:11px" class="The root of the difficulty is that you can only introduce symols, mathematical or otherwise, by using everyday language, since you have, after all, to explain what you are going to do with them.references-small"<ref>{{S1}} p.2<references/ref></blockquotediv>
Thus {{OK}}[[LacanCategory:Science]]'s use of [[mathematics]] is not an attempt to escape from the ambiguity of [[language]], but, on the contrary, to produce a way of formalizing [[psychoanalysis]] which produces multiple effects of sense without being reducible to a univocal signification.
Also, by using mathematics Lacan attempts to prevent all attempts at imaginary intuitive understanding of [[psychoanalysis]].__NOTOC__
Anonymous user
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/Special:MobileDiff/10227...46573"

Navigation menu