Difference between revisions of "Psychosis"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
==Sigmund Freud==
 
==Sigmund Freud==
The term "[[psychosis]]" is used in [[psychoanalysis]] to describe a ''severe mental disorder'', more serious than [[neurosis]], characterized by disorganized thought processes, disorientation in time and space, hallucinations, and delusions.  
+
The term "[[psychosis]]" is used in [[psychoanalysis]] to describe a ''severe mental disorder'', more serious than [[neurosis]], characterized by disorganized thought processes, disorientation in time and space, hallucinations, and delusions. Paranoia, manic depression, megalomania, and schizophrenia are all psychoses.  
 
 
Paranoia, manic depression, megalomania, and schizophrenia are all psychoses.  
 
  
 
==Jacques Lacan==
 
==Jacques Lacan==
[[Lacan]]'s interest in [[psychosis]] predates his interest in [[psychoanalysis]]. Indeed it was his doctoral research, which concerned a psychotic woman whom [[Lacan]] calls [[Aimée]] that first led [[Lacan]] to [[psychoanalytic theory]].<ref>{{L}} 1932.</ref>
+
[[Lacan]]'s interest in [[psychosis]] predates his interest in [[psychoanalysis]]. Indeed it was his doctoral research, which concerned a psychotic woman whom [[Lacan]] calls [[Aimée]] that first led [[Lacan]] to [[psychoanalytic theory]].<ref>{{1932}}</ref> [[Lacan]]'s most detailed discussion of [[psychosis]] appears in his [[seminar]] of 1955-6, entitled simply ''[[Seminar III|The Psychoses]]''.
 
 
[[Lacan]]'s most detailed discussion of [[psychosis]] appears in his [[seminar]] of 1955-6, entitled simply ''[[Seminar III|The Psychoses]]''.
 
 
 
[[Psychosis]] is defined as one of the three [[clinical structure]]s, one of hwihc is defined by the operation of [[foreclosure]].
 
 
 
In this operation, the [[Name-of-the-Father]] is not integrated in the [[symbolic order|symbolic universe]] of the [[psychotic]] (it is "[[foreclosed]]"), with the result that a hole is left in the [[symbolic order]].
 
 
 
To speak of a hole in the [[symbolic order]] is not to say that the [[psychotic]] does not have an [[unconscious]]; on the contrary, in [[psychosis]] "the unconscious is present but not functioning."<ref>{{S3}} p.208</ref>
 
  
The [[psychotic]] [[structure]] thus results from a certain malfunction of the [[Oedipus complex]], a [[lack]] in the paternal function; more specifically, in [[psychosis]] the paternal funciton is reduced to the [[image]] of the [[father]] (the [[symbolic]] is reduced to the [[imaginary]]).
+
[[Psychosis]] is defined as one of the three [[clinical structure]]s, one of which is defined by the operation of [[foreclosure]].  In this operation, the [[Name-of-the-Father]] is not integrated in the [[symbolic order|symbolic universe]] of the [[psychotic]] (it is "[[foreclosed]]"), with the result that a hole is left in the [[symbolic order]].  To speak of a hole in the [[symbolic order]] is not to say that the [[psychotic]] does not have an [[unconscious]]; on the contrary, in [[psychosis]] "the unconscious is present but not functioning."<ref>{{S3}} p. 208</ref>  The [[psychotic]] [[structure]] thus results from a certain malfunction of the [[Oedipus complex]], a [[lack]] in the [[paternal function]]; more specifically, in [[psychosis]] the [[paternal function]] is reduced to the [[image]] of the [[father]] (the [[symbolic]] is reduced to the [[imaginary]]).
  
 
-----
 
-----
  
In [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]] it is important to distinguish between [[psychosis]], which is a [[clinical structure]], and [[psychotic]] phenomena such as [[delusions]] and [[hallucinations]].
+
In [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]] it is important to distinguish between [[psychosis]], which is a [[clinical structure]], and [[psychotic]] phenomena such as [[delusions]] and [[hallucinations]]. Two conditions are required for psychotic phenomena to emerge: the [[subject]] must have a [[psychotic]] [[structure]], and the [[Name-of-the-Father]] must be "called into symbolic opposition to the subject."<ref>{{E}} p. 217</ref> In the [[absence]] of the first condition, no confrontation with the paternal signifier will ever lead to psychotic phenomena; a [[neurotic]] can never "become psychotic."<ref>{{S3}} p. 15</ref> In the [[absence]] of the second condition, the [[psychotic]] [[structure]] will remain latent. It is thus conceivable that a [[subject]] may have a [[psychotic]] [[structure]] and yet never develop [[delusions]] or experience [[hallucination]]s. When both conditions are fulfilled, the [[psychosis]] is "triggered off," the latent [[psychosis]] becomes manifest in [[hallucination]]s and/or [[delusions]].
 
 
Two conditions are required for psychotic phenomena to emerge: the [[subject]] must have a [[psychotic]] [[structure]], and the [[Name-of-the-Father]] must be "called into symbolic opposition to the subject."<ref>{{E}} p.217</ref>
 
 
 
In the [[absence]] of the first condition, no confrontation with the paternal signifier will ever lead to psychotic phenomena; a [[neurotic]] can never "become psychotic."<ref>{{S3}} p.15</ref>
 
 
 
In the [[absence]] of the second condition, the [[psychotic]] [[structure]] will remain latent.
 
 
 
It is thus conceivable that a [[subject]] may have a [[psychotic]] [[structure]] and yet never develop [[delusions]] or experience [[hallucination]]s.
 
 
 
When both conditions are fulfilled, the [[psychosis]] is "triggered off," the latent [[psychosis]] becomes manifest in [[hallucination]]s and/or [[delusions]].
 
------
 
 
 
In the 1970s [[Lacan]] reformulates his approach to [[psychosis]] around the notion of the [[borromean knot]].
 
 
 
The three rings in the knot represent the three [[orders]]: the [[real]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]].
 
 
 
While in [[neurosis]] these three rings are linked together in a particular way, in [[psychosis]] they become disentangled.
 
 
 
This [[psychotic]] disassociation may sometimes however be avoided by a [[sinthome|symptomaatic formation]] which acts as a fourth ring holding the other three together.
 
 
 
--------
 
  
[[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]] in arguing that while [[psychosis]] is of great interest for [[psychoanalytic theory]], it is outside the field of the classical method of [[psychoanalytic treatment]], which is only appropriate for [[neurosis]]; "to use the technique that [[Freud]] established outside the experience to which it was applied (i.e. neurosis) is as stupid as to toil at the oars when the ship is on the sand."<ref>{{E}} p.221</ref>
+
==Borromean Knot==
 +
In the 1970s [[Lacan]] reformulates his approach to [[psychosis]] around the notion of the [[borromean knot]]. The three rings in the knot represent the three [[orders]]: the [[real]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]]. While in [[neurosis]] these three rings are linked together in a particular way, in [[psychosis]] they become disentangled. This [[psychotic]] disassociation may sometimes however be avoided by a [[sinthome|symptomaatic formation]] which acts as a fourth ring holding the other three together.
  
Not only is the classical method of [[psychoanalytic treatment]] inappropriate for [[psychotic]] [[subject]]s, but it is even contraindicated.
+
==Treatment==
 +
[[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]] in arguing that while [[psychosis]] is of great interest for [[psychoanalytic theory]], it is outside the field of the classical method of [[psychoanalytic treatment]], which is only appropriate for [[neurosis]]; "to use the technique that [[Freud]] established outside the experience to which it was applied (i.e. neurosis) is as stupid as to toil at the oars when the ship is on the sand."<ref>{{E}} p. 221</ref> Not only is the classical method of [[psychoanalytic treatment]] inappropriate for [[psychotic]] [[subject]]s, but it is even contraindicated. For example [[Lacan]] points out that the technique of [[psychoanalysis]], which involves the use of the couch and [[free association]], can easily trigger off a latent [[psychosis]].<ref>{{S3}} p. 15</ref> This is the reason why [[Lacan]]ian [[analyst]]s usually follow [[Freud]]'s recommendation to begin the [[treatment]] of a new [[patient]] with a series of face-to-face interviews.<ref>{{F}} p.1913c. [[SE]] XII. 123-4</ref>  Only when the [[analyst]] is reasonably sure that the [[patient]] is not [[psychotic]] will the [[patient]] be asked to lie down on the couch and [[free association|free associate]].
  
For example [[Lacan]] points out that the technique of [[psychoanalysis]], which involves the use of the couch and [[free association]], can easily trigger off a latent [[psychosis]].<ref>{{S3}} p.15</ref>
+
This does not mean that Lacanian analysts do not work with [[psychotic]] [[patient]]s. On the contrary, much work has been done by [[Lacanian]] [[analyst]]s in the [[treatment]] of [[psychosis]]. However, the method of [[treatment]] differs substantially from that used with [[neurotic]] and [[perverse]] [[patient]]s. [[Lacan]] himself works with [[psychotic]] [[patient]]s but left very few comments on the technique he employed; rather than setting out a technical procedure for working with [[psychosis]], he limited himself to discussing the questions preliminary to any such work.<ref>{{L}} p. 1957-8b</ref>
 
 
This is the reason why [[Lacan]]ian [[analyst]]s usually follow [[Freud]]'s recommendation to begin the [[treatment]] of a new [[patient]] with a series of face-to-face interviews.<ref>{{F}} p.1913c. [[SE]] XII. 123-4</ref>
 
 
 
Only when the [[analyst]] is reasonably sure that the [[patient]] is not [[psychotic]] will the [[patient]] be asked to lie down on the couch and [[free association|free associate]].
 
 
 
-----------
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This does not mean that Lacanian analysts do not work with [[psychotic]] [[patient]]s.
 
 
 
On the contrary, much work has been done by [[Lacanian]] [[analyst]]s in the [[treatment]] of [[psychosis]].
 
 
 
However, the method of [[treatment]] differs substantially from that used with [[neurotic]] and [[perverse]] [[patient]]s.
 
 
 
[[Lacan]] himself works with [[psychotic]] [[patient]]s but left very few comments on the technique he employed; rather than setting out a technical procedure for working with [[psychosis]], he limited himself to discussing the questions preliminary to any such work.<ref>{{L}} p.1957-8b</ref>
 
  
  
 
-------
 
-------
  
Lacan rejects the approach of those who limit their analysis of psychosis to the imagianry order; "nothing is to be expected from the way psychosis is explored at the level of the imaginary, since the imaginary mechanism is what gives psychotic alienation its form, but not its dynamics."<ref>{{S3}} p.146</ref>
+
[[Lacan]] rejects the approach of those who limit their analysis of [[psychosis]] to the [[imaginary order]]; "nothing is to be expected from the way psychosis is explored at the level of the [[imaginary]], since the imaginary mechanism is what gives psychotic alienation its form, but not its dynamics."<ref>{{S3}} p. 146</ref> It is only by focusing on the [[symbolic order]] that [[Lacan]] is able to point to the fundamental determining element of [[psychosis]], namely, the hole in the [[symbolic]] [[order]] caused by [[foreclosure]] and the consequent "imprisonment" of the psychotic subject in the imaginary. It is also this emphasis on the [[symbolic order]] which leads [[Lacan]] to value above all the linguistic phenomena in [[psychosis]]: "the importance given to language phenomena in psychosis is for us the msot fruitful lesson of all."<ref>{{S3}} p. 144</ref>
 
 
It is only by focusing on the symbolic order that Lacan is able to point to the fundamental determining element of psychosis, namely ,the hole in the symbolic order caused by foreclosure and the consequent "imprisonment" of the psychotic subject in the imaginary.
 
 
 
It is also this emphasis on the symbolic order which leads Lacan to value above all the linguistic phenomena in [[psychosis]]: "the importance given to language phenomena in psychosis is for us the msot fruitful lesson of all."<ref>{{S3}} p.144</ref>
 
  
 
---
 
---
  
The [[language]] phenomena most notable in [[psychosis]] are ''disorders'' of [[language]], and [[Lacan]] argues that the [[presence]] of such disorders is a necessary condition for a diagnosis of [[psychosis]].<ref>{{S3}} p.92</ref>
+
The [[language]] phenomena most notable in [[psychosis]] are ''disorders'' of [[language]], and [[Lacan]] argues that the [[presence]] of such disorders is a necessary condition for a diagnosis of [[psychosis]].<ref>{{S3}} p. 92</ref> Among the psychotic language disorders which Lacan draws attention to are holophrases and the extensive use of neologisms (which may be completely new words coined by the psychotic, or already existing words which the psychotic redefines).<ref>{{Ec}} p. 167</ref> In 1956, [[Lacan]] attributes these [[language]] disorders to the [[psychotic]]'s [[lack]] of a sufficient number of [[points de capiton]].
 
 
Among the psychotic language disorders which Lacan draws attention to are holophrases and the extensive use of neologisms (which may be completely new words coined by the psychotic, or already existing words which the psychotic redefines).<ref>{{Ec}} p.167</ref>
 
 
 
In 1956, Lacan attributes these language disorders to the psychotic's lack of a sufficient number of points de capiton.
 
 
 
The lack of sufficient points de capiton means that the psychotic experience is characterized by a constant slippage of the signified under the signifier, which is a disaster for [[signification]]; there is a continual "casscade of reshapings of the signifier fromw hich the increasing disaster of the imaginary proceeds, until the level is reached at which signifier and signified are stablized in the delusional metaphor."<ref>{E}} p.217</ref>
 
 
 
Another way of desribing this is as "a relationship between the subject and the signifier in its most formal dimension, in its dimension as a pure signifier."<ref>{{S3}} p.250</ref>
 
 
 
This relationship of the subject to the signifier in its purely formal aspect constitutes "the nucleus of psychosis."<ref>{{S3}} p.250</ref>
 
  
"If the neurotic inhabits language, the psychotic is inhabited, possessed, by language."<ref>{{S3}} p.250</ref>
+
The lack of sufficient [[points de capiton]] means that the psychotic experience is characterized by a constant slippage of the signified under the signifier, which is a disaster for [[signification]]; there is a continual "casscade of reshapings of the signifier fromw hich the increasing disaster of the imaginary proceeds, until the level is reached at which signifier and signified are stablized in the delusional metaphor."<ref>{E}} p.217</ref> Another way of desribing this is as "a relationship between the subject and the signifier in its most formal dimension, in its dimension as a pure signifier."<ref>{{S3}} p.250</ref> This relationship of the subject to the signifier in its purely formal aspect constitutes "the nucleus of psychosis."<ref>{{S3}} p.250</ref> "If the neurotic inhabits language, the psychotic is inhabited, possessed, by language."<ref>{{S3}} p.250</ref>
  
  

Revision as of 07:52, 27 October 2006

French: psychose


Sigmund Freud

The term "psychosis" is used in psychoanalysis to describe a severe mental disorder, more serious than neurosis, characterized by disorganized thought processes, disorientation in time and space, hallucinations, and delusions. Paranoia, manic depression, megalomania, and schizophrenia are all psychoses.

Jacques Lacan

Lacan's interest in psychosis predates his interest in psychoanalysis. Indeed it was his doctoral research, which concerned a psychotic woman whom Lacan calls Aimée that first led Lacan to psychoanalytic theory.[1] Lacan's most detailed discussion of psychosis appears in his seminar of 1955-6, entitled simply The Psychoses.

Psychosis is defined as one of the three clinical structures, one of which is defined by the operation of foreclosure. In this operation, the Name-of-the-Father is not integrated in the symbolic universe of the psychotic (it is "foreclosed"), with the result that a hole is left in the symbolic order. To speak of a hole in the symbolic order is not to say that the psychotic does not have an unconscious; on the contrary, in psychosis "the unconscious is present but not functioning."[2] The psychotic structure thus results from a certain malfunction of the Oedipus complex, a lack in the paternal function; more specifically, in psychosis the paternal function is reduced to the image of the father (the symbolic is reduced to the imaginary).


In Lacanian psychoanalysis it is important to distinguish between psychosis, which is a clinical structure, and psychotic phenomena such as delusions and hallucinations. Two conditions are required for psychotic phenomena to emerge: the subject must have a psychotic structure, and the Name-of-the-Father must be "called into symbolic opposition to the subject."[3] In the absence of the first condition, no confrontation with the paternal signifier will ever lead to psychotic phenomena; a neurotic can never "become psychotic."[4] In the absence of the second condition, the psychotic structure will remain latent. It is thus conceivable that a subject may have a psychotic structure and yet never develop delusions or experience hallucinations. When both conditions are fulfilled, the psychosis is "triggered off," the latent psychosis becomes manifest in hallucinations and/or delusions.

Borromean Knot

In the 1970s Lacan reformulates his approach to psychosis around the notion of the borromean knot. The three rings in the knot represent the three orders: the real, the symbolic and the imaginary. While in neurosis these three rings are linked together in a particular way, in psychosis they become disentangled. This psychotic disassociation may sometimes however be avoided by a symptomaatic formation which acts as a fourth ring holding the other three together.

Treatment

Lacan follows Freud in arguing that while psychosis is of great interest for psychoanalytic theory, it is outside the field of the classical method of psychoanalytic treatment, which is only appropriate for neurosis; "to use the technique that Freud established outside the experience to which it was applied (i.e. neurosis) is as stupid as to toil at the oars when the ship is on the sand."[5] Not only is the classical method of psychoanalytic treatment inappropriate for psychotic subjects, but it is even contraindicated. For example Lacan points out that the technique of psychoanalysis, which involves the use of the couch and free association, can easily trigger off a latent psychosis.[6] This is the reason why Lacanian analysts usually follow Freud's recommendation to begin the treatment of a new patient with a series of face-to-face interviews.[7] Only when the analyst is reasonably sure that the patient is not psychotic will the patient be asked to lie down on the couch and free associate.

This does not mean that Lacanian analysts do not work with psychotic patients. On the contrary, much work has been done by Lacanian analysts in the treatment of psychosis. However, the method of treatment differs substantially from that used with neurotic and perverse patients. Lacan himself works with psychotic patients but left very few comments on the technique he employed; rather than setting out a technical procedure for working with psychosis, he limited himself to discussing the questions preliminary to any such work.[8]



Lacan rejects the approach of those who limit their analysis of psychosis to the imaginary order; "nothing is to be expected from the way psychosis is explored at the level of the imaginary, since the imaginary mechanism is what gives psychotic alienation its form, but not its dynamics."[9] It is only by focusing on the symbolic order that Lacan is able to point to the fundamental determining element of psychosis, namely, the hole in the symbolic order caused by foreclosure and the consequent "imprisonment" of the psychotic subject in the imaginary. It is also this emphasis on the symbolic order which leads Lacan to value above all the linguistic phenomena in psychosis: "the importance given to language phenomena in psychosis is for us the msot fruitful lesson of all."[10]

---

The language phenomena most notable in psychosis are disorders of language, and Lacan argues that the presence of such disorders is a necessary condition for a diagnosis of psychosis.[11] Among the psychotic language disorders which Lacan draws attention to are holophrases and the extensive use of neologisms (which may be completely new words coined by the psychotic, or already existing words which the psychotic redefines).[12] In 1956, Lacan attributes these language disorders to the psychotic's lack of a sufficient number of points de capiton.

The lack of sufficient points de capiton means that the psychotic experience is characterized by a constant slippage of the signified under the signifier, which is a disaster for signification; there is a continual "casscade of reshapings of the signifier fromw hich the increasing disaster of the imaginary proceeds, until the level is reached at which signifier and signified are stablized in the delusional metaphor."[13] Another way of desribing this is as "a relationship between the subject and the signifier in its most formal dimension, in its dimension as a pure signifier."[14] This relationship of the subject to the signifier in its purely formal aspect constitutes "the nucleus of psychosis."[15] "If the neurotic inhabits language, the psychotic is inhabited, possessed, by language."[16]



Of all the various forms of psychosis, it is paranoia that most interests Lacan, while schizophrenia and mani-depressive psychosis are rarely discussed.[17]

Lacan follows Freud in maintaining a structural distinction between paranoia and schizophrenia.

psychosis (psychose)

The term psychosis arose in psychiatry in the nineteenth century as a way of designating mental illness in general.

During Freud's life, a basic distinction between psychosis and neurosis came to be generally accepted, according to which psychosis designated extreme forms of mental illness and neurosis denoted less serious disorders.

This basic distinction between neurosis and psychosis was taken up and developed by Freud himself in several papers.[18]

Lacan's interest in psychosis predates his interest in psychoanalysis.

Indeed it was his doctoral research, which concerned a psychotic woman whom Lacan calls 'AimÈe', that first led Lacan to psychoanalytic theory.[19]

It has often been remarked that Lacan's debt to this patient is reminiscent of Freud's debt to his first neurotic patients (who were also female).

In other words, whereas Freud's first approach to the unconscious is by way of neurosis, Lacan's first approach is via psychosis.

It has also been common to compare Lacan's tortured and at times almost incomprehensible style of writing and speaking to the discourse of psychotic patients.

"Whatever one are stabilized in the delusional metaphor."[20]

Another way of describing this is as "a relationship between the subject and the signifier in its most formal dimension, in its dimension as a pure signifier."[21]

This relationship of the subject to the signifier in its purely formal aspect constitutes "the nucleus of psychosis."[22]

"If the neurotic inhabits language, the psychotic is inhabited, possessed, by language."[23]

Of all the various forms of psychosis, it is paranoia that most interests Lacan, while schizophrenia and manic-depressive psychosis are rarely discussed.[24]

Lacan follows Freud in maintaining a structural distinction between paranoia and schizophrenia.

Defined in clincal psychiatry as a serious mental illness affecting the whole of the personality.

Unlike a patient suffering from neurosis, the psychotic cannot be treated on a consensual basis and may therefore have to be committed to a psychiatric institution.


The word Psychose has been current since the 1840s, but was originally used to refer to any form of mental illness.[25]

The distinction between psychosis and neurosis was introduced and gradually refined in the course of the nineteenth century, and is basic to psychoanalysis.

In psychoanalysis, 'psychosis' is used to describe conditions such as hallucinatory confusion, paranoia and schizophrenia.

Freud's theory of psychoanalysis was developed primarily with reference to neurosis.

Lacan, in contrast, began his career by working with psychotics in psychiatric hospitals before he became a psychoanalyst (1932) and therefore elaborates a more specific theory of the origins of psychosis.


Contrasting neurosis snad psychosis, Freud argues that, whilst both conditions originate in a conflict between the ego and other agencies of the psyche, psychosis results from a disturbance in the ego's relationship with the external world, neurosis from a conflict between the ego and the id.

In psychosis the ego withdraws from some part or aspect of the rela world, either fialing to perceive it or being unaffected by its perceptiuon of it..

Lacan draws on Freud's comment and remarks on the case of Daniel Paul Schrebe, an appeal court judge who wrote an autobiographicla account of his paranoid delusions, to elaborate the thesis that psychosis is trigged by the specific mechanism of foreclosure.[26]

A key signifier or the name of the father is expelled or foreclosed fromt he subject's symbolic world and a hole or rent is left in its ploace.

The foreclosed signifier is not integrated into the unconscious thanks to an act of repression,a nd therefore cannot return on the form of a neurotic signifier.

It returns, rather, in the real, usually in the form of persecutory hallucinations and delusions.

A mental condition whereby the patient completely loses touch with reality.

Psychosis versus Neurosis

The term 'psychosis' denotes an severe form of mental illness, while 'neurosis' denotes less severe forms.

Sigmund Freud elaborated a distinction between psychosis and neurosis.[27]

"[In] neurosis the ego suppresses part of the id out of allegiance to reality, whereas in psychosis it lets itself be carried away by the id and detached from a part of reality."[28]

Psychosis and Lacan

Jacques Lacan studied psychosis for his doctoral research about a woman he calls "Aimee."[29]

It is common to compare Lacan's style of writing and speaking to the discourse of psychotic patients.

Psychosis has many different forms: paranoia, schizophrenia, and manic-depression.[30]

References

  1. Lacan, Jacques. De la psychose paranoiaque dans ses rapports avec la personalité, Paris: Navarin, 1975. [1932].
  2. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 208
  3. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 217
  4. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 15
  5. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 221
  6. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 15
  7. Freud, Sigmund. p.1913c. SE XII. 123-4
  8. Lacan, Jacques. p. 1957-8b
  9. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 146
  10. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 144
  11. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 92
  12. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 167
  13. {E}} p.217
  14. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.250
  15. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.250
  16. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.250
  17. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.3-4
  18. Freud, 1924b and 1924e
  19. Lacan, 1932
  20. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.217
  21. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.250
  22. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 250
  23. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.250
  24. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.3-4
  25. Laplanche and Pontalis 1967
  26. Lacan 1957-8, 1981
  27. Freud, 1924b and 1924e
  28. 5.202
  29. Lacan, Jacques. De la psychose paranoiaque dans ses rapports avec la personalité, Paris: Navarin, 1975. [1932].
  30. S3, 3-4














See Also
References



Index