Changes

"[[psychosis{{Toppp}}psychose]]" (|-|| [[FrGerman]]. : ''[[psychose]]'')Psychose{{Bottom}}

The term However, as Lacan points out, the fact that the psychotic's discourse is just as interpretable as that of the neurotic leaves the two disorders at the same level and fails to account for the major differences between [[psychosisthem]] arose in , thus the [[psychiatrydistinction]] between the two remains to be explained. It is around this issue of the different mechanisms in psychosis and neurosis that Lacan's major contribution to the nineteenth century as a way study of designating mental illness in generalpsychosis revolves.

During Freud claims that in both neurosis and psychosis there is a [[withdrawal]] of investment, or [[object]]-[[Freudcathexis]]'s life, a basic distinction between from [[objects]] in the [[psychosisworld]] and . In the [[neurosiscase]] came to be generally acceptedof neurosis the object-cathexis is retained, according to which but is invested in fantasized objects in the neurotic's [[internal]] world. In the case of psychosisthe withdrawn cathexis is invested in the ego at the expense of all object-[[cathexes]] designated extreme forms of mental illness and , even in [[neurosisfantasy]] denoted less serious disorders.  This basic distinction between turning of [[neurosislibido]] upon the ego accounts for [[symptoms]] and such as [[psychosishypochondria]] was taken up and developed by megalomania. The delusional [[Freudsystem]] himself , the most striking feature of psychosis, arises in several papersa second [[stage]].<ref>Freudcharacterizes the [[construction]] of a delusional system as an attempt at recovery in which the psychotic re-establishes a new, 1924b often very intense, relation with the people and 1924e</ref>things in the world by way of a delusional [[formation]].

[[Lacan]]'s interest in [[psychosis]] predates his nterest 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}} p.1932.</ref> It is often remarked that [[Lacan]]'s debt to this [[patient]] is reminiscent of [[Freud]]'s debt to his first [[neurotic]] [[patient]]'s (who were also [[female]]). In other words, whereas [[Freud]]'s first approach to the [[unconscious]] sis by way of [[neurosis]], [[Lacan]]'s tortured and at times almsot incomprehensible style of writing and speaking to the [[discourse]] of [[psychotic]] [[patient]]s. Whatever one makes of such comparisons, it is clear that [[Lacan]]'s discussions of [[psychosis]] are among the most significant and original aspects of his work.--- [[Lacan]]'s most detailed discussion of [[psychosis]] appears in his [[seminar]] of 1955-6, entitled simply ''[[Seminar III|The Psychoses]]''. It is here that he expounds what come to be the main tents of the [[Lacan]]ian approach to [[madness]].===Clinical Structure===[[Psychosis]] is defined as one of the three [[clinical structure]]s, one of hwihc 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 [[lack|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 function]] is reduced to the [[image]] of the [[father]] (the [[symbolic]] is reduced to the [[imaginary]]).  ------ 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> 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]]. -----------   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> 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> 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>

===The Psychotic Relation to Reality===In 1956, Lacan attributes these language disorders to his articles on [[psychosis]] [[Freud]] noted the [[psychotic]]'s lack altered relation to [[reality]]. The 'imaginary [[external]] world' of a sufficient number psychosis attempts to put itself in [[place]] of points de capitonthe 'external world'. (In Lacanian [[terms]], there are altered relations between [[the Imaginary]] and Real Orders, in parallel with an alteration in [[the Symbolic]] Order).

The lack In studying [[psychosis]] Lacan stated, following [[Freud]], that "the problem lies not in the reality that is lost, but in that which takes its place."<ref>{{E}} p. 188-9</ref> Lacan emphasized the 'rent' or [[gap]] that appears in the relation of sufficient points de capiton means that the psychotic experience is characterized by a constant slippage subject to the world, and the nature of the signified under 'patch' which the signifierpsychotic subject applies over this gap.<!-- ====Psychotic Phenomena==== --><!-- In [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]] it is important to distinguish between [[psychosis]], which is a disaster [[clinical structure]], and [[psychotic]] phenomena such as [[delusions]] and [[hallucinations]]. Two [[conditions]] are required for psychotic phenomena to emerge: the [[significationsubject]]; there is must have a continual [[psychotic]] [[structure]], and the [[Name-of-the-Father]] must be "casscade of reshapings of called into symbolic opposition to the signifier fromw hich subject."<ref>{{E}} p. 217</ref> In the increasing disaster [[absence]] of the imaginary proceedsfirst condition, until no confrontation with the level is reached at which paternal signifier and signified are stablized in the delusional metaphorwill ever lead to psychotic phenomena; a [[neurotic]] can never "become psychotic."<ref>{E{S3}} p.21715</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]]. --><!-- ==[[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. -->

Another way ===Schreber===In his [[seminar]] on [[psychosis]] ([[{{Y}}|1955-6]]) [[Lacan]] tackled [[Freud]]'s case [[history]] of desribing this is as "[[Judge Schreber]], a relationship between the subject and the signifier in its most formal dimension, in its dimension as [[paranoid]] [[schizophrenic]] who wrote a pure signifierfascinating account of his illnesss entitled ''Memoirs of My Nervous [[Illness]]'' (1903). Lacan's essay "<ref>{{S3}} pOn a question preliminary to any possible treatment of psychosis (1957-8)' enlarged on the [[ideas]] of this [[seminar]].250</ref>

This relationship ===Treatment===[[Freud]] was skeptical about the possibility of practising [[psychoanalysis]] with [[psychotic]] [[patients]]. [[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]] in arguing that while [[psychosis]] is of great interest for [[psychoanalytic theory]], it is [[outside]] the field of the subject 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 signifier in its purely formal aspect constitutes "ship is on the nucleus of psychosissand."<ref>{{S3E}} p.250221</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]]. -->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 [[imaginary order]]; "If [[nothing]] is to be expected from the way psychosis is explored at the level of the neurotic inhabits language[[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 inhabitedable to point to the fundamental determining element of [[psychosis]], possessednamely, 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 languagephenomena in psychosis is for us the msot fruitful lesson of all."<ref>{{S3}} p.250144</ref> -->

<!--====Language Disorders==== --><!-- 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 [[{{Y}}|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 "cascade 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 describing 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> -->

Of all the various forms of psychosis, it is [[paranoia]] that most interests Lacan, while schizophrenia and mani== References ==<div style="font-depressive psychosis are rarely discussed.size:11px" class="references-small"><refreferences/>{{S3}} p.3-4</refdiv>

[[Category:Jacques Lacan follows Freud in maintaining a structural distinction between paranoia and schizophrenia.]][[Category:Terms]][[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Concepts]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]{{OK}}[[Category:Practice]][[Category:Subject]]__NOTOC__