Difference between revisions of "Nature"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==Nature and Language== | ||
| + | [[Jacques Lacan]] posits a distinction between [[human]]s and other [[animal]]s, the basis of which is [[language]].<ref>{{S1}} p.223</ref> | ||
| − | [[ | + | [[Human]]s have [[language]], whereas [[animal]]s merely have [[code]]s. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
As a result, [[animal]] [[psychology]] is entirely dominated by the [[imaginary]], whereas [[human]] [[psychology]] is complicated by the additional dimension of the [[symbolic]]. | As a result, [[animal]] [[psychology]] is entirely dominated by the [[imaginary]], whereas [[human]] [[psychology]] is complicated by the additional dimension of the [[symbolic]]. | ||
| − | [[Lacan]] adopts the traditional [[anthropology|anthropological]] opposition between [[ | + | ==Nature and Culture== |
| + | [[Lacan]] adopts the traditional [[anthropology|anthropological]] opposition between [[nauture]] and [[culture]] ([[culture]] being, in [[Lacan]]ian terms, the [[symbolic]] [[order]]). | ||
| + | ==Incest Prohibition== | ||
Like [[Claude Levi-Strauss]] and other [[anthropology|anthropologists]], [[Lacan]] points to the [[prohibition]] of [[incest]] as the kernel of the [[law|legal]] [[structure]]] which differentiates [[culture]] from [[nature]]. | Like [[Claude Levi-Strauss]] and other [[anthropology|anthropologists]], [[Lacan]] points to the [[prohibition]] of [[incest]] as the kernel of the [[law|legal]] [[structure]]] which differentiates [[culture]] from [[nature]]. | ||
| − | <blockquote>"The primordial Law is therefore that which in regulating marriage superimposes the kingdom of culture on that of a nature abandoned to the law of mating."<ref>E | + | <blockquote>"The primordial Law is therefore that which in regulating marriage superimposes the kingdom of culture on that of a nature abandoned to the law of mating."<ref>{{E}} p.66</ref></blockquote> |
| − | + | The regulation of [[kinship]] by the [[incest]] [[taboo]] points to the fact that the [[paternal function]] is at the heart of the rift between [[human]]s and [[animal]]s. | |
| + | By insribing a line of descent from [[male]] to [[male]] and thus ordering a series of generations, the [[Father]] marks the difference between the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]]. | ||
| − | + | In other words, what is unique about [[human]] beings is not that in human beings the [[imaginary]] [[order]] is distorted by the added dimension of the [[symbolic]]. | |
| − | + | ==Nature== | |
| − | + | There is not even a pure natural state at the beginning in which the [[human]] [[subject]] might [[exist]] before being caught up in the [[symbolic]] [[order]]. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | [[Lacan]] uses the term '[[nature]]' to denote the idea that there is a 'natural order' in [[human]] [[existence]]. | |
| − | + | This great [[fantasy]] of [[nature]] underlies [[modern]] [[psychology]], which attempts to explain [[human]] [[behavior]] by reference to [[ethological]] categories such as [[instinct]] and [[adaptation]]. | |
[[Lacan]] is highly critical of all such attempts to explain the phenomena in terms of [[nature]]. | [[Lacan]] is highly critical of all such attempts to explain the phenomena in terms of [[nature]]. | ||
| − | He argues that they are based on a failure to recognize the importance of the [[symbolic order]], which radically [[alienation|alienates]] human beings from natural | + | He argues that they are based on a failure to recognize the importance of the [[symbolic order]], which radically [[alienation|alienates]] human beings from the [[natural]] [[order]]. |
| − | In the human world, even "those | + | <blockquote>In the [[human]] world, even "those [[signification]]s that are closest to [[need]], [[signification]]s that are relative to the most purely [[biological]] insertion into a nutrittive and captivating environment, primordial [[signification]]s, are, in their sequence and in their very foundation, subject to the [[law]]s of the [[signifier]].<ref>{{S3}} p.198</ref></blockquote> |
| + | [[Lacan]] argued that "the [[Freudian]] discovery teaches us that all natural harmony in man is profoundly disconcerted."<ref>{{S3}} p.83</ref> | ||
| − | - | + | Such a '[[mythical]]' pre-[[linguistic]] [[need]] can only be hypothesized after it has been articulated in [[demand]]. |
| − | [[ | + | ==Human Sexuality== |
| − | + | The [[absence]] of a [[natural]] [[order]] in [[human]] [[existence]] can be seen most clearly in human [[sexuality]]. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | [[Freud]] and [[Lacan]] both argue that [[human]] [[sexuality]] is entirely caught up in the [[cultural]] [[order]]. | ||
| − | + | There is no such thing, for the [[human]] being, as a natural [[sexual relationship]]. | |
| − | + | [[Perversion]] cannot be defined by reference to a supposed [[natural]] or [[biological]] [[norm]] governing [[sexuality]]. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Whereas [[animal]] [[instincts]] are relatively invariable, [[human]] [[sexuality]] is governed by [[drive]]s which are extremely variable and do not aim at a [[biology|biological]] function. | Whereas [[animal]] [[instincts]] are relatively invariable, [[human]] [[sexuality]] is governed by [[drive]]s which are extremely variable and do not aim at a [[biology|biological]] function. | ||
| Line 69: | Line 58: | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:Culture]] | [[Category:Culture]] | ||
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]] | [[Category:Jacques Lacan]] | ||
Revision as of 14:16, 4 August 2006
Contents
Nature and Language
Jacques Lacan posits a distinction between humans and other animals, the basis of which is language.[1]
Humans have language, whereas animals merely have codes.
As a result, animal psychology is entirely dominated by the imaginary, whereas human psychology is complicated by the additional dimension of the symbolic.
Nature and Culture
Lacan adopts the traditional anthropological opposition between nauture and culture (culture being, in Lacanian terms, the symbolic order).
Incest Prohibition
Like Claude Levi-Strauss and other anthropologists, Lacan points to the prohibition of incest as the kernel of the legal structure] which differentiates culture from nature.
"The primordial Law is therefore that which in regulating marriage superimposes the kingdom of culture on that of a nature abandoned to the law of mating."[2]
The regulation of kinship by the incest taboo points to the fact that the paternal function is at the heart of the rift between humans and animals.
By insribing a line of descent from male to male and thus ordering a series of generations, the Father marks the difference between the symbolic and the imaginary.
In other words, what is unique about human beings is not that in human beings the imaginary order is distorted by the added dimension of the symbolic.
Nature
There is not even a pure natural state at the beginning in which the human subject might exist before being caught up in the symbolic order.
Lacan uses the term 'nature' to denote the idea that there is a 'natural order' in human existence.
This great fantasy of nature underlies modern psychology, which attempts to explain human behavior by reference to ethological categories such as instinct and adaptation.
Lacan is highly critical of all such attempts to explain the phenomena in terms of nature.
He argues that they are based on a failure to recognize the importance of the symbolic order, which radically alienates human beings from the natural order.
In the human world, even "those significations that are closest to need, significations that are relative to the most purely biological insertion into a nutrittive and captivating environment, primordial significations, are, in their sequence and in their very foundation, subject to the laws of the signifier.[3]
Lacan argued that "the Freudian discovery teaches us that all natural harmony in man is profoundly disconcerted."[4]
Such a 'mythical' pre-linguistic need can only be hypothesized after it has been articulated in demand.
Human Sexuality
The absence of a natural order in human existence can be seen most clearly in human sexuality.
Freud and Lacan both argue that human sexuality is entirely caught up in the cultural order.
There is no such thing, for the human being, as a natural sexual relationship.
Perversion cannot be defined by reference to a supposed natural or biological norm governing sexuality.
Whereas animal instincts are relatively invariable, human sexuality is governed by drives which are extremely variable and do not aim at a biological function.
See Also
References
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p.223
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.66
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.198
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.83
