Jump to: navigation, search

Seminar I

32 bytes added, 07:33, 2 March 2021
Fixed some translation/grammar errors and hyperlink errors
<span style="line-height:2.0em;font-size:1.1em">The first [[seminar]], open to the [[public]], takes [[place]] at [[Sainte-Anne Hospital]] just after the creation of the [[S.F.P]] ([[Société Française de Psychanalyse]](S.F.P.). [[Lacan]] cuts intervenes in the study of [[Freud]] by dint deploying his concepts of his [[theory]] on the three 'registers' of subjective experience: the [[imaginary]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[real]]. The focal point of the [[discussion]] is the direction of the [[cure]]. Participants are allowed to make presentations, comments and objections. Through the [[case]] histories of [[Freud]], [[Klein]], [[Kris]] and [[Balint]], the debate elucidates on the convergence of [[psychoanalysis]], [[philosophy]], [[theology]], [[linguistics]] and [[game theory]]. In keeping with this heterogeneous approach, [[Lacan]] will further appeal to the [[science]] of [[optics]] to systematize his [[analyses]] of the [[specular relation]]. After his [[schema]] of the [[inverted bouquet]] the [[mirror stage]] becomes part of the [[topography]] of the [[Imaginary]]. As to the ''[[méconnaissance]]'' that characterizes the [[ego]], it is associated with ''[[Negation|Verneinung]]'' (''[[dénégation]]''): "...everyday [[speech]] runs against failure of [[recognition]], ''[[méconnaissance]]'', which is the source of ''[[Verneinung]]''." He closes the [[seminar]] pondering on the [[role]] of the [[analyst]]: ''"...if [[The Subject|the subject]] commits himself to searching after [[truth]] as such, it is because he places himself in the [[dimension]] of [[ignorance]], what [[analyst]]s call readiness to the [[transference]]. The [[analyst]]'s ignorance is also worth worthy of consideration. He doesn't have to [[guide]] the [[subject]] to [[knowledge]], but on to onto the paths by which access to this [[knowledge]] is gained. [[Psychoanalysis]] is a [[dialectic]]s, an [[art]] of conversation."''</span>
<span style="line-height:2.0em;font-size:1.1em">In a spoken [[intervention]] (Appendix), [[Jean Hyppolite]] comments on [[Freud]]'s ''[[Negation|Verneinung]]'' and suggests its [[translation]] as ''[[dénégation]]'' instead of ''[[négation]]''. The question here deals with how the [[return]] of the [[repressrepressed]]ed operates. According to [[Freud]] , the [[repress]]ed is intellectually accepted by the [[subject]], since it is named, and at the same [[time]] is negated because the [[subject]] refuses to recognize it as his, refuses to recognize him himself in it. ''[[Dénégation]]'' includes an assertion whose status is difficult to define. The frontier between [[neurosis]] and [[psychosis]] is drawn here, between [[repression]], ''[[Verdrägung]]'', and [[repudiation]], ''[[Verwerfung]]'', a term that [[Lacan]] will replace by [[with 'withdrawal]]', and finally by with "[[foreclosure]]" (''[[forclusion]]''), the former [[being]] related to [[neurosis]], the latter to [[psychosis]].</span>
<span style="line-height:2.0em;font-size:1.1em">When answering Hyppolite in La [[Psychanalyse]] that same year, [[Lacan]] establishes two poles of [[analytic experience]]: the [[imaginary]] [[ego]] and the [[symbolic]] [[speech]]. [[Lacan]] gives precedence to the [[Symbolic]] over the [[Imaginary]]. The [[subject]] who must come to be is "the [[subject of the unconscious]]," and where here it is to be understood that "the [[unconscious is the discourse of the Other]]." In [[analysis]], he says, "[[The Subject|the subject]] first talks [[about]] himself without talking to you, then he talks to you without talking about himself. When he is able to talk to you about himself, the analysis is over."</span>
<span style="line-height:2.0em;font-size:1.1em">To this reshaping of the [[Imaginary]] by the [[Symbolic]], he opposes the intersection of the [[Symbolic]] and the [[Real]] without mediation of the [[Imaginary]], which would be the characteristic of [[psychosis]].</span>

Navigation menu