Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Sinthome

1,794 bytes added, 23:14, 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}}symptôme|sinthome {{Bottom}}
=====Definition=====The term [[sinthome ]] is, as [[Lacan ]] points out, an archaic way of writing what has more recently been spelt symptÙme. Lacan introduces the term in 1975, as the title for the 1975-6 seminar, which is both a continuing elaboration of his topology, extending the previous seminar's focus on the BORROMEAN KNOT, and an exploration of the writings of James Joyce. Through this coincidentia oppositorum - bringing together mathematical theory and the intricate weave of the Joycean text - Lacan redefines the psychoanalytic symptom in terms of his final topology of the subject[[symptôme]].
1. Before the appearance of sinthome, divergent currents in =====Jacques Lacan==========1975-6 Seminar=====[[Lacan's thinking lead to different inflections of the concept of the SYMPTOM. As early as 1957, ]] introduces the symptom is said to be 'inscribed term in a writing process' (Ec, 445)1975, which already implies a different view to that which regards the symptom as a ciphered message. In 1963 Lacan goes on to state that the symptom, unlike acting out, does not call title for interpretation; in itself, it is not a call to the Other but a pure jouissance addressed to no one (Lacan, 19621975-3: 6 [[seminar of 23 January 1963; see Miller]], 1987: 11). Such comments anticipate the radical transformation which is both a continuing elaboration of Lacan's thought implicit in his shift from the linguistic definition of the symptom - as a signifier - to his statement[[topology]], in extending the 1974-5 previous [[seminar, that ]]'s focus on the symptom can only be defined as the way in which each subject enjoys [jouit[borromean knot]] the unconscious, in so far as and an exploration of the unconscious determines him' (Lacan, 1974-5: seminar writings of 18 February 1975)[[James Joyce]].
This move from conceiving of the symptom as a message which can be deciphered by reference to the unconscious Through this ''structured like a languagecoincidentia oppositorum', to seeing it as the trace of the particular modality of the subject's jouissance, culminates in -- bringing together [[mathematics|mathematical theory]] and the introduction intricate weave of the term sinthome. The sinthome thus designates a signifying formulation beyond analysis, a kernel of enjoyment immune to [[James Joyce|Joycean]] [[text]] -- [[Lacan]] redefines the efficacy of the symbolic. Far from calling for some analytic 'dissolution', the sinthome is what 'allows one to live' by providing a unique organisation of jouissance. The task of analysis thus becomes, [[psychoanalytic]] [[symptom]] in one [[terms]] of Lacan's last definitions his final [[topology]] of the end of analysis, to identify with the sinthome[[subject]].
2. The theoretical shift from linguistics to topology which marks =====Development of the final period Concept of Lacan's work constitutes the true status "Symptom"=====Before the [[appearance]] of the [[sinthome as unanalysable]], and amounts to an exegetical problem beyond the familiar one of divergent currents in [[Lacan]]'s dense rhetoric. The 1975-6 seminar extends the theory of the Borromean knot, which in the previous seminar had been proposed as the essential structure of the subject, by adding the sinthome as a fourth ring [[thinking]] lead to the triad different inflections of the real, the symbolic and the imaginary, tying together a knot which constantly threatens to come undone. This knot is not offered as a model but as a rigorously non-metaphorical description of a topology 'before which the imagination fails' (Lacan, 1975-6: seminar [[concept]] of 9 December 1975). Since meaning (sens) is already figured within the knot, at the intersection of the symbolic and the imaginary (see Figure 1), it follows that the function of the sinthome - intervening to knot together real, symbolic and imaginary - is inevitably beyond meaning[[symptom]].
3. Lacan had been an enthusiastic reader of Joyce since his youth (see the references to Joyce =====Symptom Inscribed in Ec, 25 and S20Writing Process=====As early as 1957, 37). In the 1975-6 seminar, Joyce's writing [[symptom]] is read as an extended sinthome, a fourth term whose addition to the Borromean knot of RSI allows the subject said to cohere. Faced be "inscribed in his childhood by the radical non-function/absence (carence) of the Name-of-the-Fathera writing [[process]], Joyce managed to avoid psychosis by deploying his art as supplÈance, as a supplementary cord in the subjective knot"<ref>{{Ec}} p. Lacan focuses on Joyce's youthful 'epiphanies' (experiences of an almost hallucinatory intensity 445</ref> which were then recorded in enigmatic, fragmentary texts) as instances of 'radical foreclosure', in already implies a different view to that which 'regards the real forecloses meaning' (seminar of 16 March 1976)symptom as a ciphered [[message]].
The Joycean text - from =====Symptom as pure ''Jouissance''=====In 1963 [[Lacan]] goes on to [[state]] that the epiphany to Finnegans Wake - entailed [[symptom]], unlike [[acting out]], does not call for [[interpretation]]; in itself, it is not a special relation call to language; the [[Other]] but a pure 'destructive' refashioning of it as sinthome, the invasion of the symbolic order by the subject[[jouissance]]'' addressed to no one.<ref>{{L}} 1962-3. ''s private jouissance[[Seminar X|Le Séminaire. Livre X. One of LacanL'angoisse]]''s puns, synth1962-homme3, implies this kind of 'artificial' self-creationunpublished.</ref>
=====The Way in Which the Subject Enjoys the Unconscious=====Such comments anticipate the radical transformation of Lacan's engagement with Joyce's writing does not[[thought]] implicit in his shift from the [[linguistic]] definition of the [[symptom]] - as a [[signifier]] - to his [[statement]], he insistsin the 1974-5 [[seminar]], entail that "the symptom can only be defined as the way in which each subject [[enjoys]] ['applied psychoanalysis'. Topological theory is not conceived of as merely another kind of representational accountjouit''] the unconscious, but in so far as a form of writing, a praxis aiming to figure that which escapes the imaginaryunconscious determines him. To that extent"<ref>{{L}} 1974-5. ''[[Seminar XXII|Le Séminaire. Livre XXII. RSI]]'', 1974-5, rather than a theoretical object or published in ''[[Ornicar?]]'case', Joyce becomes an exemplary saint homme whonos. 2-5, by refusing any imaginary solution, was able to invent a new way of using language to organise enjoyment1975.</ref>
==def===Symptom as the Particular Modality of the Subject's ''Jouissance''=====A This move from conceiving of the [[symptom]] as a [[message]] which can be deciphered by reference to the [[unconscious]] "[[structured]] like a language," to [[sinthomeseeing]] it as the trace of the [[particular]] is modality of the [[Reuleaux trianglesubject]] figure found 's ''[[jouissance]]'', culminates in the center introduction of a the term ''[[Borromean knotsinthome]]''.{{fact}}
In =====Kernel of Enjoyment Beyond the Symbolic=====The ''[[Jacques Lacan|Jacques Lacansinthome]]''sthus designates a signifying formulation beyond [[analysis]] theory , a kernel of [[psychologyenjoyment]], each immune to the efficacy of the rings composing a Borromean knot represent the real, the imaginary, and the [[symbolic. The core of a person's psyche can be found when these three rings overlap in the sinthome]].
=====Organization of ''Jouissance''=====Far from calling for some [[analytic]] "[[Category:Lacandissolution]]," the ''[[sinthome]]'' is what "allows one to live" by providing a unique organisation of ''[[Category:Psychologyjouissance]]''.
=====Identification with the ''Sinthome''=====
The task of ''[[analysis]]'' thus becomes, in one of [[Lacan]]'s last definitions of the [[end of analysis]], to [[identify]] with the ''[[sinthome]]''.
=====Shift from Linguistics to Topology=====The [[theoretical]] shift from [[linguistics]] to [[topology]] which marks the final period of Lacan's [[work]] constitutes the [[true]] status of the [[sinthome]] as unanalysable, and amounts to an exegetical problem beyond the familiar one of [[Lacan]]'s dense [[rhetoric]].  =====''Sinthome'' as Fourth Ring in Borromean Knot=====The 1975-6 [[seminar]] extends the [[theory]] of the [[borromean knot]], which in the previous seminar had been proposed as the essential [[structure]] of the [[subject]], by adding the ''[[sinthome]]'' as a fourth ring to the [[triad]] of the [[real]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]], tying together a [[knot]] which constantly threatens to come undone.  This [[knot]] is not offered as a [[model]] but as a rigorously non-[[metaphorical]] description of a [[topology]] "before which the [[imagination]] fails."<ref>{{L}} 195-6. ''[[Seminar XXIII|Le Séminaire. Livre XXIII. Le sinthome, 1975-76]]'', published in ''[[Ornicar]]?'', nos 6-11, 1976-7. 9 December 1975.</ref> Since [[meaning]] (''sens'') is already figured within the [[knot]], at the intersection of the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]], it follows that the function of the ''[[sinthome]]'' -- intervening to [[knot]] together [[real]], [[symbolic]] and [[imaginary]] - is inevitably beyond [[meaning]]. =====Writings of James Joyce=====[[Lacan]] had been an enthusiastic reader of [[Joyce]] since his youth.<ref>{{Ec}} p.25; {{S20}} p.37</ref>  In the 1975-6 [[seminar]], [[Joyce]]'s [[writing]] is read as an extended ''[[sinthome]]'', a fourth term whose addition to the [[borromean knot]] of ''RSI'' allows the [[subject]] to cohere.  Faced in his [[childhood]] by the radical non-function / [[absence]] (''carence'') of the [[Name-of-the-Father]], [[Joyce]] managed to avoid [[psychosis]] by deploying his [[art]] as ''suppléance'', as a supplementary cord in the [[subject]]ive [[knot]].  [[Lacan]] focuses on [[Joyce]]'s youthful "epiphanies" (experiences of an almost [[hallucinatory]] intensity which were then recorded in enigmatic, fragmentary [[texts]]) as instances of "radical [[foreclosure]]," in which "the real forecloses meaning."<ref>[[Seminar]] of 16 March 1976</ref> ====="Destructive" Refashioning of Language=====The [[Joycean]] text -- from the epiphany to ''[[James Joyce|Finnegans Wake]]'' -- entailed a special relation to [[language]]; a "destructive" refashioning of it as ''[[sinthome]]'', the invasion of the [[symbolic order]] by the [[subject]]'s private ''[[jouissance]]''.  One of [[Lacan]]'s puns, ''[[sinthome|synth-homme]]'', implies this kind of "artificial" [[self]]-creation. =====Lacan's Engagement with Joyce's Writing=====[[Lacan]]'s engagement with [[Joyce]]'s writing does not, he insists, entail "applied [[psychoanalysis]]."  =====Topological Theory=====[[Topology|Topological theory]] is not conceived of as merely [[another]] kind of representational account, but as a [[form]] of writing, a praxis aiming to [[figure]] that which escapes the [[imaginary]].  =====''Saint Homme''==========New Way of Using Language to Organize Enjoyment=====To that extent, rather than a theoretical [[object]] or "[[case]]," [[Joyce]] becomes an exemplary ''[[sinthome|saint homme]]'' who, by refusing any [[imaginary]] solution, was able to invent a new way of using [[language]] to organise [[enjoyment]]. ==See Also=={{See}}* [[Borromean knot]]* [[Interpretation]]* ''[[Jouissance]]''||* [[Message]]* [[Psychosis]]* [[Signifier]]||* [[Subject]]* [[Symptom]]* [[Topology]]{{Also}} == References ==<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
<references/>
</div>
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]][[Category:Jacques Lacan]][[Category:Dictionary]][[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Practice]][[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Terms]]
[[Category:ConceptsReal]][[Category:PsychoanalysisOK]] __NOTOC__
Anonymous user

Navigation menu