Structure (Structure) When Lacan uses the term '{{Top}}structures|structure' in his early{{Bottom}}
==Jacques Lacan=======Early Work==========Social Structure=====In his [[Jacques Lacan:Bibliography|early work of ]], [[Lacan]] uses the 1930s, it is term "[[structure]]" to refer to '"[[structure|social structures', ]]" by which he means aspecific set of [[affect]]ive relations between [[family]] members.
specific set of affective relations between family members. =====Family Complexes=====The [[child ]] perceivesthese relations much more profoundly than the [[adult]], and [[introjection|internalizes]] [[them]] in the [[complex]].<ref>{{Ec}} p.89</ref>.
these relations much more profoundly than =====Nature of the adultPsyche=====The term serves as a peg upon which [[Lacan]] can hang his own views of the "[[structure|relational]]" [[nature]] of the [[psyche]], and internalises them inopposition to the atomistic theories then current in [[psychology]].<ref>{{1936}}</ref>
=====Inter- and Intra- subjectivity=====From this point on, the COMPLEX (Ecterm "[[structure]]" retains this [[sense]] of something both '''[[intersubjectivity|intersubjective]]''' and '''[[intersubjectivity|intrasubjective]]''', 89)the '''[[internal]] [[representation]] of [[intersubjectivity|interpersonal relations]]'''. The term serves as a peg upon which Lacan can hang his
own views of the This remains a key point throughout [[Lacan]]'relational' nature of the psyches [[Jacques Lacan:Bibliography|work]], in opposition which the emphasis on [[structure]] is a constant reminder that what determines the [[subject]] is not some supposed "[[essence]]" but simply his [[position]] with respect to theother [[subject]]s and other [[signifier]]s.
atomistic theories then current Already in psychology (1938, we find [[Lacan, 1936)]] arguing that "the most notable defect of [[analytic]] [[doctrine]]" at that [[time]] was that it tended "to ignore structure in favour of a [[dynamic]] approach."<ref>{{1938}} p. From this point58</ref>
This anticipates his later emphasis on the [[symbolic order]] as the realm of [[structure]] which [[analyst]]s have ignored in favour of the [[imaginary]]; "[[social]] structures are [[symbolic]]."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 132</ref>
=====Structural Linguistics=====
In the mid-1950s, when [[Lacan]] begins to reformulate his [[ideas]] in [[terms]] borrowed from [[Saussure]]an [[Saussure|structural linguistics]], the term "[[structure]]" comes to be increasingly associated with [[Saussure]]'s [[model]] of [[language]].
[[Saussure]] [[analyzed]] [[language]] (''[[language|la langue]]'') as a [[system]] in which there are no positive terms, only differences.<ref>[[Ferdinand de Saussure|Saussure, Ferdinand de]]. 1916: 120</ref>
It is this [[concept]] of a system in which each unit is constituted purely by virtue of its differences from the other units which comes to constitute the core [[meaning]] of the term "[[structure]]" in [[Lacan]]'s [[{{LB}}|work]] from this point on.
on, [[Language]] is the term 'paradigmatic [[structure]], and [[Lacan]]' retains this sense of something both intersubjective s famous dictum, "the unconscious is structured like a language", is therefore tautologous, since "to be structured" and"to be like a language" mean the same [[thing]].
intrasubjective=====Claude Lévi-Strauss==========Structuralist Movement==========Structuralist Approach=====[[Saussure]]'s structural approach to [[linguistic]]s was developed further by [[Roman Jakobson]], who developed [[phoneme]] [[theory]]; [[Jakobson]]'s [[work]] was then taken up by the internal representation of interpersonal [[French]] anthropologist, [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]], who used the [[structure|structural phonemic model]] to analyze non-linguistic [[cultural]] data such as [[anthropology|kinship relations]] and [[myth]]. This
remains a key point throughout Lacan's work, in which This application of [[structure|structural analysis]] to [[anthropology]] launched the emphasis on[[structure|structuralist movement]] by showing how the [[Saussure]]an concept of [[structure]] could be applied to an [[object]] of enquiry other than [[language]].
[[Lacan]] was heavily influenced by all three of these thinkers, and in this sense he can be seen as part of the [[structure is a constant reminder that what determines the subject is not some|structuralist movement]].
supposed 'essence' but simply However, [[Lacan]] prefers to dissociate himself from this movement, arguing that his position with respect to other subjects andapproach differs in important ways from the [[structure|structuralist approach]].<ref>{{S20}} p.93</ref>
other signifiers. Already in 1938=====Mathematics=====Alongside the references to [[language]], we find [[Lacan arguing that ']] also refers the most notableconcept of [[structure]] to [[mathematics]], principally to [[mathematics|set theory]] and [[topology]].
defect of analytic doctrine' at In 1956, for example, he states that time was that it tended 'to ignore "a structureis in the first [[place]] a group of elements forming a covariant set."<ref>{{S3}} p. 183</ref>
in favour =====Topology=====Two years later he again [[links]] the concept of [[structure]] with [[mathematics|mathematical set theory]], and adds a dynamic approach' (Lacan, 1938: 58reference to [[topology]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 648-9</ref>). This anticipates his later
emphasis on By the symbolic order 1970s, [[topology]] has replaced [[language]] as the realm principal paradigm of [[structure which analysts have]] for [[Lacan]].
ignored in favour of the imaginaryHe now argues that [[topology]] is not a mere [[metaphor]] for [[structure]]; 'social structures are symbolic' (Ec, 132)it is that [[structure]] itself.<ref>{{L}} 1973b</ref>
In =====Surface and Depth=====The concept of [[structure]] is often taken to imply an opposition between surface and depth, between directly observable phenomena and "deep structures" which are not the mid-1950s, when Lacan begins to reformulate his ideas in termsobject of immediate [[experience]].
borrowed from Saussurean structural linguistics, Such would seem to be the term 'opposition implied in the [[distinction]] [[Lacan]] draws between [[symptoms]] (surface) and [[structure' comes]]s (depth).
to be increasingly associated with Saussure's model However, [[Lacan]] does not in fact agree that such an opposition is implicit in the concept of LANGUAGE[[structure]]. Saussure<ref>{{Ec}} p. 649</ref>
analysed language (la langue) as a system in which there are no positive termsOn the one hand,he rejects the concept of "directly observable phenomena", arguing that observation is always already [[theoretical]].
only differences (SaussureOn the other hand, 1916: 120). It he also rejects the [[idea]] that [[structure]]s are somehow "deep" or distant from experience, arguing that they are [[present]] in the field of experience itself; the [[unconscious]] is this concept of a system on the surface, and [[looking]] for it in which"the depths" is to miss it.
each unit As with many other binary oppositions, the model [[Lacan]] prefers is constituted purely by virtue that of its differences from the other units[[moebius strip]]; just as the two sides of the [[strip]] are in fact continuous, so [[structure]] is continuous with phenomena.
which comes to constitute the core meaning =====Structural Position=====The most important feature of the term '[[structure|structural analysis]] is not, then, any supposed distinction between [[structure|surface]] and [[structure' |depth]], but, as [[Lévi-Strauss]] shows in Lacan'shis [[structure|structural analysis]] of [[myth]], the discovery of fixed relations between loci which are themselves empty.<ref>[[Lévi-Strauss]] 1955</ref>
work from this point on. Language is In other [[words]], whatever elements may be placed in the paradigmatic positions specified by a given [[structure]], and Lacan'sthe relations between the positions themselves remain the same.
famous dictumThus the elements interact not on the basis of any inherent or intrinsic properties they possess, 'but simply on the unconscious is structured like a language', is thereforebasis of the positions which they occupy in the [[structure]].
tautologous====="Clinical Structures"=====In line with many other [[psychoanalyst]]s, since 'to be structured' [[Lacan]] distinguishes three principal nosographic [[categories]]; [[neurosis]], [[psychosis]] and 'to be like a language' mean the same[[perversion]].
thingHis originality lies in the fact that he regards these categories as [[structure]]s rather than simply as collections of [[symptom]]s.<ref>(N.B. [[Lacan]] prefers to [[speak]] in terms of "[[structure|Freudian structures]]" rather than "[[structure|clinical structures]]", but the latter term is the one which predominates in the writings of [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalyst]]s today.)</ref>
Saussure's structural approach to linguistics was developed further by=====[[Lacan]]ian Nosography=====[[Lacan]]ian nosography is a categorical classification system based on a discrete series, rather than a dimensional system based on a continuum.
Roman JakobsonThe three major [[structure|clinical structures]] are therefore mutually exclusive; a [[subject]] cannot be both [[neurotic]] and [[psychotic]], who developed phoneme theory; Jakobson's work wasfor example.
then taken up by The three major [[structure|clinical structures]] together constitute all the French anthropologistthree possible positions of the [[subject]] in relation to the [[Other]]; every [[subject]] encountered in [[psychoanalytic treatment]] can therefore be diagnosed as either [[neurotic]], Claude LÈvi-Straussor [[psychotic]], who usedor [[perverse]].
Each [[structure]] is distinguished by a different operation: [[neurosis]] by the structural phonemic model to analyse non-linguistic cultural data such asoperation of [[repression]], [[perversion]] by the operation of [[disavowal]], and [[psychosis]] by the operation of [[foreclosure]].
kinship relations [[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]] in arguing that the classical method of [[psychoanalytic treatment]] (involving [[free association]] and myththe use of the couch) is only appropriate for [[neurotic]] [[subject]]s and [[perverse]] [[subject]]s, and not for [[psychotic]]s. This application of structural analysis to anthro-
pology launched the structuralist movement by showing how the SaussureanThus when [[Lacanian]] [[analyst]]s work with psychotic [[patients]], they use a substantially modified method of [[treatment]].
concept =====Critical Period Hypothesis=====One of the most fundamental axioms of [[psychoanalysis]] is that the [[subject]]'s [[structure|clinical structure could be applied to an object ]] is determined by his experiences in the first years of enquiry other than[[life]].
language. Lacan was heavily influenced by all three In this sense, [[psychoanalysis]] is based on a "critical period hypothesis"; the first years of these thinkers, and life are the critical period inwhich the [[subject]]'s [[structure]] is determined.
Although it is not clear how long this sense he can critical period lasts, it is held that after this critical period the [[clinical]] structure is fixed for ever and cannot be seen as part of the structuralist movementchanged. However,
Lacan prefers to dissociate himself from this movementNeither [[psychoanalytic treatment]] nor anything else can, arguing that hisfor example, turn a [[psychotic]] into a [[neurotic]].
approach differs in important ways from Within each of the structuralist approach (S20, 93)three major [[clinical structure]]s [[Lacan]] distinguishes various subdivisions.
Alongside For example within the references to language[[clinical structure]] of [[neurosis]], he distinguishes two kinds of [[neurosis]] ([[obsessional neurosis]] and [[hysteria]]), Lacan also refers and within the concept [[clinical structure]] of[[psychosis]] he distinguishes between [[paranoia]], [[schizophrenia]] and [[manic-depressive]] [[psychosis]].
structure tO MATHEMATICS, principally to set theory and TOPOLOGY. In 1956,==See Also=={{See}}* [[Complex]]* [[Intersubjectivity]]||* [[Language]]* [[Linguistics]]||* [[Mathematics]]* [[Neurosis]]||* [[Psychoanalysis]]* [[Psychosis]]||* [[Subject]]* [[Symptom]]||* [[Topology]]* [[Treatment]]{{Also}}
for example, he states that 'a structure is in the first place a group of elements==References== forming a covariant set' (S3, 183). Two years later he again links the concept of structure with mathematical set theory, and adds a reference to topology (Ec, 648<div style="font-9). By the 1970s, topology has replaced language as the principal paradigm of structure for Lacan. He now argues that topology is not a mere metaphor for structure; it is that structure itself (Lacan, 1973b). The concept of structure is often taken to imply an opposition between surface and depth, between directly observable phenomena and 'deep strucsize:11px" class="references-small"><references/>tures' which are not the object of immediate experience. Such would seem to be the opposition implied in the distinction Lacan draws between SYMPTOMS (surface) and structures (depth). However, Lacan does not in fact agree that such an opposition is implicit in the concept of structure (Ec, 649). On the one hand, he rejects the concept of 'directly observable phenomena', arguing that observation is always already theoretical. On the other hand, he also rejects the idea that structures are somehow 'deep' or distant from experience, arguing that they are present in the field of experience itself; the unconscious is on the surface, and looking for it in 'the depths' is to miss it. As with many other binary oppositions, the model Lacan prefers is that of the moebius strip; just as</div>
the two sides of the strip are in fact continuous, so structure is continuous with phenomena. The most important feature of structural analysis is not, then, any supposed distinction between surface and depth, but, as LÈvi-Strauss shows in his structural analysis of myth, the discovery of fixed relations between loci which are themselves empty (LÈvi-Strauss, 1955). In other words, whatever elements may be placed in the positions specified by a given structure, the relations between the positions themselves remain the same. Thus the ele- ments interact not on the basis of any inherent or intrinsic properties they possess, but simply on the basis of the positions which they occupy in the structure. In line with many other psychoanalysts, Lacan distinguishes three principal nosographic categories; NEUROSIS, PSYCHOSIs and PERVERSION. His originality lies in the fact that he regards these categories as structures rather than simply as collections of symptoms. (N.B. Lacan prefers to speak in terms of 'Freudian structures' rather than 'clinical structures', but the latter term is the one which predominates in the writings of Lacanian psychoanalysts today.) Lacanian nosography is a categorical classification system based on a discrete series, rather than a dimensional system based on a continuum. The three major clinical structures are therefore mutually exclusive; a subject cannot be both neurotic and psychotic, for example. The three major clinical structures together constitute all the three possible positions of the subject in relation to the Other; every subject encountered in psychoanalytic treatment can therefore be diagnosed as either neurotic, or psychotic, or perverse. Each structure is distinguished by a different operation[[Category: neurosis by the operation of repression, perversion by the operation of disavowal, and psychosis by the operation of foreclosure. Lacan follows Freud in arguing that the classical method of psychoanalytic treatment (involving free association and the use of the couch) is only appropriate for neurotic subjects and perverse subjects, and not for psychotics. Thus when Lacanian analysts work with psychotic patients, they use a substantially modified method of treatment. One of the most fundamental axioms of psychoanalysis is that the subject's clinical structure is determined by his experiences in the nrst years of life. In this sense, psychoanalysis is based on a 'critical period hypothesis'; the first years of life are the critical period in which the subject's structure is deter- mined. Although it is not clear how long this critical period lasts, it is held that after this critical period the clinical structure is fixed for ever and cannot be changed. Neither psychoanalytic treatment nor anything else can, for example, turn a psychotic into a neurotic.Within each of the three major clinical structures Lacan distinguishes various subdivisions. For example within the clinical structure of neurosis, he distinguishes two kinds of neurosis (obses- sional neurosis and hysteria), and within the clinical structure of psychosis he distinguishes between paranoia, schizophrenia and manic-depressive psycho- SlS. Symbolic]]== References =={{OK}}<references/>{{T}}
[[Category:Lacan]][[Category:Terms]][[Category:Concepts]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]__NOTOC__
