Difference between revisions of "Order"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | order (''ordre'') | + | [[order]] ([[Fr]]. ''[[ordre]]'') |
| − | [[ | + | (Although [[Lacan]] uses the terms "real," symbolic" and "imagianry" from early on in his work, it is not until 1953 that he speaks of these as three "orders" or three "registers.") |
| − | + | (From that moment on they come to be the fundamental classification system around which all his theorizing turns.) | |
| − | For example [[Lacan]] argues that much misunderstanding has arisen in [[psychoanalytic theory]] due to a failure to distinguish between the [[ | + | |
| + | [[Jacques Lacan]] first develops the three "[[order]]s" (or "[[register]]s") in 1953. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The [[imaginary]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[real]] thus comprise a basic classification system (around which all [[Lacan]]'s theorising turns) which allows important distinctions to be drawn between concepts which, according to [[Lacan]], had previously been confused in [[psychoanalytic theory]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | For example [[Lacan]] argues that much misunderstanding has arisen in [[psychoanalytic theory]] due to a failure to distinguish between the [[imaginary]] [[father]], the [[symbolic]] [[father]] and the [[real]] [[father]]. | ||
Thus [[Lacan]] claims that his tripartite classification system has shed invaluable light on [[Freud]]'s [[work]]: | Thus [[Lacan]] claims that his tripartite classification system has shed invaluable light on [[Freud]]'s [[work]]: | ||
| Line 11: | Line 16: | ||
<blockquote>"Without these three systems to guide ourselves by, it would be impossible to understand anything of the Freudian technique and experience."<ref>{{S1}} p.73</ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>"Without these three systems to guide ourselves by, it would be impossible to understand anything of the Freudian technique and experience."<ref>{{S1}} p.73</ref></blockquote> | ||
| − | + | -- | |
| − | It is therefore difficult to see what they have in common, and yet, the fact that [[Lacan]] refers to all three as | + | The [[imaginary]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[real]] are profoundly heterogeneous, each referring to quite distinct aspects of [[psychoanalytic]] [[experience]]. |
| + | |||
| + | It is therefore difficult to see what they have in common, and yet, the fact that [[Lacan]] refers to all three as "[[order]]s" implies that they share some common property. | ||
[[Lacan]] explores this question of what the three [[order]]s have in common by means of the [[topology]] of the [[Borromean knot]] in his 1974-5 [[seminar]], [[RSI]]. | [[Lacan]] explores this question of what the three [[order]]s have in common by means of the [[topology]] of the [[Borromean knot]] in his 1974-5 [[seminar]], [[RSI]]. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 28: | ||
However, they are primarily concerned with mental functioning, and together they cover the whole field of [[psychoanalysis]]. | However, they are primarily concerned with mental functioning, and together they cover the whole field of [[psychoanalysis]]. | ||
| − | Although the three orders are profoundly heterogeneous, each order must be defined by reference to the other two. | + | -- |
| + | |||
| + | Although the three [[orders]] are profoundly heterogeneous, each order must be defined by reference to the other two. | ||
| − | The structural interdependence of the three [[order]]s is illustrated by the [[ | + | The [[structural]] interdependence of the three [[order]]s is illustrated by the [[borromean knot]], in which the severing of any one of the three rings causes the other two to become separated also. |
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
Revision as of 21:23, 30 July 2006
(Although Lacan uses the terms "real," symbolic" and "imagianry" from early on in his work, it is not until 1953 that he speaks of these as three "orders" or three "registers.")
(From that moment on they come to be the fundamental classification system around which all his theorizing turns.)
Jacques Lacan first develops the three "orders" (or "registers") in 1953.
The imaginary, the symbolic and the real thus comprise a basic classification system (around which all Lacan's theorising turns) which allows important distinctions to be drawn between concepts which, according to Lacan, had previously been confused in psychoanalytic theory.
For example Lacan argues that much misunderstanding has arisen in psychoanalytic theory due to a failure to distinguish between the imaginary father, the symbolic father and the real father.
Thus Lacan claims that his tripartite classification system has shed invaluable light on Freud's work:
"Without these three systems to guide ourselves by, it would be impossible to understand anything of the Freudian technique and experience."[1]
--
The imaginary, the symbolic and the real are profoundly heterogeneous, each referring to quite distinct aspects of psychoanalytic experience.
It is therefore difficult to see what they have in common, and yet, the fact that Lacan refers to all three as "orders" implies that they share some common property.
Lacan explores this question of what the three orders have in common by means of the topology of the Borromean knot in his 1974-5 seminar, RSI.
They are not mental forces like the three agencies in Freud's structural model.
However, they are primarily concerned with mental functioning, and together they cover the whole field of psychoanalysis.
--
Although the three orders are profoundly heterogeneous, each order must be defined by reference to the other two.
The structural interdependence of the three orders is illustrated by the borromean knot, in which the severing of any one of the three rings causes the other two to become separated also.
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.73
