Difference between revisions of "Subject"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
(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>).)
(Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit)
 
(15 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
The primary psychic construct produced by the individual’s traumatic accession to the symbolic is the Lacanian subject. Just as the real is the realm of undifferentiated consciousness and the imaginary is the realm of the ego (pre-symbolic identity formation), so the symbolic is coeval with and constitutive of the subject (Evans 195). The ego, produced by the process of differentiation first experienced in the mirror stage, is superseded by the subject as the primary psychic structure by which the individual relates to the surrounding world. In a radical departure from both traditional humanist conceptions of the self and the Freudian construct of the ego as the privileged mode of human existence, Lacan designates the subject as a function of the signifying chain, a linguistic phenomenon produced by the symbolic order which the infant enters in the originary moment of articulating the mother’s absence. As such, and given the hollowness of signifiers in the Lacanian signifying chain, the subject is reduced to the status of being merely a signifier for another signifier. It exists not independently of the perpetual flux of signification, but only as one in an endless series of events in that flux:
+
{{Top}}[[sujet]]{{Bottom}}
  
−
the distinguishing marks of subjectivity are to be found not in the forces, faculties, aptitudes and dispositions that individuals in varying combinations possess, but in the signifying processes of which they are part. [Lacan’s] philosophy of the human subject is self-consciously thin, empty and weightless. He invents a subject without subject-matter. […] ‘The subject’ is no longer a substance endowed with qualities, or a fixed shape possessing dimensions, or a container awaiting the multifarious contents that experience provides: it is a series of events within language, a procession of turns, tropes and inflections. (Bowie 75-76)
+
=====Jacques Lacan=====
 +
The term "[[subject]]" is [[present]] from the very earliest of [[Lacan]]'s [[psychoanalytic]] writings,<ref>{{1932}}</ref> and from 1945 on it occupies a central part in [[Lacan]]'s [[work]].  
  
−
Lacan’s subject is without "subject-matter" because it is a bona fide signifier whose "matter" is the irretrievable loss of a sense of wholeness. "Represented by a signifier for another signifier, […] the subject is an effect of language" (Evans 196) which is unsignifiable: "no signifier can signify the subject" (Evans 187); it can be represented as an effect of the signifying chain, but never tied down to any stable content. As such, the subject is a necessary epistemological category made available to humans by virtue of the sophistication of our thought processes. This sophistication allows us to conceive of presence and absence not only as existential conditions, but also as temporally-bound conditions of a given entity. More importantly, this sophistication of consciousness prompts us to articulate this knowledge through a system of signification whose first principle is the absence of that about which we speak.
+
This is a distinctive feature of [[Lacan]]'s work, since the term does not constitute part of [[Freud]]'s [[theoretical]] [[vocabulary]], but is more associated with [[philosophical]], [[legal]] and [[linguistic]] [[discourse]]s.
  
−
Though I have laid this relationship out as a diachronic process in which conception precedes articulation, fidelity to the Lacanian model of the symbolic order prompts me to point out that such diachrony is impossible. Rather, the conception of presence and absence as variable attributes of the same object is part and parcel of the accession to the symbolic order; the oscillation between presence and absence is inconceivable outside the symbolic order and the symbolic order is inconceivable without the dialectic of presence and absence. The irony of this situation is that the naming of an object is necessarily also a process of negating it, of insisting on its irremediable inadequacy even in the face of its actuality: "the symbol manifests itself first of all as the murder of the thing" (Ecrits 104). In adherence to a strictly Hegelian conception of the dialectic, Lacan maintains that the very act of predication (i.e. any symbolisation whatever) is necessarily an act of negation. The process of saying what something is is simultaneously the process of saying what it is not: "P is Q" deprives P of its essentiality as it becomes something other than P; it is negated in favor of one of its accidents. Further, no accumulation of the accidents of P (say, an infinite number of Q’s) can ever amount to an exhaustive definition (and hence a full representation) of P. In entering the symbolic, then, the human infant unwittingly abandons the immediate world of objects and re-situates himself or herself in a position of always-already mediated epistemology any retreat from which is impossible.
+
=====Human Being=====
 +
In [[Lacan]]'s pre-war papers, the term "[[subject]]" seems to mean no more than "human being."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 75</ref>
  
−
An inevitable result of the status of the subject in the symbolic order is that it is fundamentally split; it is an effect of signification whose truth is the absence signification seeks to mask: "because the subject is essentially a speaking being (parlêtre), he is inescapably divided, castrated, split" (Evans 196). As a speaking being, the subject is not only a parlêtre but an entity par lettre, one created only by the divisiveness endemic to the process of signification. And as a result of the play of signifiers in the signifying chain, the subject is therefore at base and irreducibly an absence, a lack whose place is determined and whose truth is deferred, delayed, and decoyed by the signifier. That is to say, the subject is no more a present reality, a manipulable object or entity in the world, than is any other signifier. Originating in this discovery that the shadow of absence falls across all presence, the subject is the pre-eminent fiction by which the signifying chain covers up the void which both structures the symbolic and which it strives to preclude. As such, the subject is all the more closely aligned with this organising originary absence, not merely as one signifier among many, but as their truth as well.
+
=====Analysand=====
 +
The term is also used to refer to the [[analysand]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 83</ref>
  
−
This truth is perpetually covered over by the flux of signification, however, enforcing the subject’s mobility in the symbolic order, a mobility that thoroughly temporalises the subject and sets the stage for the introduction of the driving force behind its evasive and fleeting existence: "the subject comes into being at the point of intersection between an irrecoverable past and an unattainable future; its structure is that of a ceaseless cross-stitching, in language, between what-is-no-longer-the-case and what-is-not-yet-the-case" (Bowie 184). A version of being in its past and future tenses, the subject is not only always-already elsewhere, but also always-already elsewhen. This temporality is both inextricable from existence in the signifying chain and necessary to its perpetuation; it is what allows the subject to organise his or her experiences in the world in such a way as to retain a sense of order, logic, and meaning. Further, it reveals both how the subject compulsively participates in the signifying chain and how it understands its own need to be forever on the move.
+
=====Three Kinds=====
−
==def==
+
In 1945, [[Lacan]] distinguishes between [[three]] kinds of [[subject]].
−
subject (sujet)               
 
  
−
The term 'subject' is present from the very earliest of Lacan's psychoanalytic writings (see Lacan, 1932), and from 1945 on it occupies a central part in Lacan's work. This is a distinctive feature of Lacan's work, since the term does not constitute part of Freud's theoretical vocabulary, but is more associated with philosophical, legal and linguistic discourses.
+
# Firstly, there is the impersonal [[subject]], independent of the [[other]], the pure [[grammatical]] [[subject]], the noetic [[subject]], the "it" of "it is known that."
  
−
In Lacan's pre-war papers, the term 'subject' seems to mean no more than 'human being' (see Ec, 75); the term is also used to refer to the analysand (Ec, 83).
+
# Secondly, there is the anonymous reciprocal [[subject]] who is completely equal to and substitutable for any other, and who recognises himself in equivalence with the other.
  
−
In 1945, Lacan distinguishes between three kinds of subject. Firstly, there is the impersonal subject, independent of the other, the pure grammatical subject, the noetic subject, the 'it' of 'it is known that.' Secondly, there is the anonymous reciprocal subject who is completely equal to and substitutable for any other, and who recognises himself in equivalence with the other.
+
# Thirdly, there is the personal [[subject]], whose uniqueness is constituted by an act of [[self]]-[[affirmation]].<ref>{{Ec}} p.207-8</ref>
  
−
Thirdly, there is the personal subject, whose uniqueness is constituted by an act of self-affirmation (Ec, 207-8). It is always this third sense of the subject, the subject in his uniqueness, that constitutes the focus of Lacan's work.
+
It is always this [[third]] [[sense]] of the [[subject]], the [[subject]] in his uniqueness, that constitutes the focus of [[Lacan]]'s work.
  
−
In 1953, Lacan establishes a distinction between the subject and the EGO which will remain one of the most fundamental distinctions throughout the rest of his work. Whereas the ego is part of the imaginary order, the subject is part of the symbolic. Thus the subject is not simply equivalent to a conscious sense of agency, which is a mere illusion produced by the ego, but to the unconscious; Lacan's 'subject' is the subject of the unconscious. Lacan argues that this distinction can be traced back to Freud: '[Freud] wrote Das Ich und das Es in order to maintain this fundamental distinction between the true subject of the unconscious and the ego as constituted in its nucleus by a series of alienating identifications' (E, 128). Although psychoanalytic treatment has powerful effects on the ego, it is the subject, and not the ego, on which psychoanalysis primarily operates.
+
=====Subject and Ego=====
 +
In 1953, [[Lacan]] establishes a [[distinction]] between the [[subject]] and the [[ego]] which will remain one of the most fundamental distinctions throughout the rest of his work.  
  
−
Lacan plays on the various meanings of the term 'subject'. In linguistics and logic, the subject of a proposition is that about which something is predicated (see Lacan, 1967: 19), and is also opposed to the 'object'. Lacan plays on the philosophical nuances of the latter term to emphasise that his concept of the subject concerns those aspects of the human being that cannot (or must not) be objectified (reified, reduced to a thing), nor be studied in an 'objective' way.
+
Whereas the [[ego]] is part of the [[imaginary order]], the [[subject]] is part of the [[symbolic]].  
  
−
'What do we call a subject'? Quite precisely, what in the development of objectivation, is outside of the object' (Sl, 194).
+
Thus the [[subject]] is not simply equivalent to a [[conscious]] sense of [[agency]], which is a mere [[illusion]] produced by the [[ego]], but to the [[unconscious]]; [[Lacan]]'s "[[subject]]" is the [[subject]] of the [[unconscious]].  
  
−
References to language come to dominate Lacan's concept of the subject from the mid-1950s on. He distinguishes the subject of the statement from the subject of the ENUNCIATION to show that because the subject is essentially a speaking being (parlÍtre), he is inescapably divided, castrated, SPLIT. In the early 1960s Lacan defines the subject as that which is represented by a signifier for another signifier; in other words, the subject is an effect of language (Ec, 835).
+
=====Sigmund Freud=====
 +
[[Lacan]] argues that this distinction can be traced back to [[Freud]]:
  
−
Besides its place in linguistics and logic, the term 'subject' also has philosophical and legal connotations. In philosophical discourse, it denotes an individual self-consciousness, whereas in legal discourse, it denotes a person who is under the power of another (e.g. a person who is subject to the sovereign). The fact that the term possesses both these meanings means that it perfectly illustrates Lacan's thesis about the determination of consciousness by the symbolic order; 'the subject is a subject only by virtue of his subjection to the field of the Other' (S2, 188, translation modified). The term also functions in legal discourse to designate the support of action; the subject is one who can be held responsible for his AcTs.
+
<blockquote>"[Freud] wrote ''[[Das Ich]] und [[das Es]]'' in [[order]] to maintain this fundamental distinction between the [[true]] [[subject of the unconscious]] and the ego as constituted in its nucleus by a series of [[alienating]] identifications.<ref>{{E}} p.128</ref></blockquote>
  
−
The philosophical connotations of the term are particularly emphasised by Lacan, who links it with Descartes's philosophy of the COGITO: in the term subject . . . I am not designating the living substratum needed by this phenomenon of the subject, nor any sort of substance, nor any being possessing knowledge in his pathos  . . . nor even some incarnated logos, but the Cartesian subject, who appears at the moment when doubt is recognised as certainty. (S11, 126)
+
Although [[psychoanalytic treatment]] has powerful effects on the [[ego]], it is the [[subject]], and not the [[ego]], on which [[psychoanalysis]] primarily operates.
  
−
The fact that the symbol of the subject, S, is a homophone of the Freud's term Es (see ID) illustrates that for Lacan, the true subject is the subject of the unconscious. In 1957 Lacan strikes through this symbol to produce the symbol S, the 'barred subject', thus illustrating the fact that the subject is essentially divided.
+
=====Alternative Meanings=====
 +
[[Lacan]] plays on the various [[meanings]] of the term "[[subject]]."
  
−
== def ==
+
In [[linguistics]] and [[logic]], the [[subject]] of a proposition is that [[about]] which something is predicated, and is also opposed to the "[[object]]."<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Proposition du 9 octobre 1967 sur le psychanalyste de l'École]]," 1967, ''[[Scilicet]]'', no. 1 ([[1968]]) p. 19</ref>
−
The term ‘subject’ is present from the very earliest of Lacan’s psychoanalytic writings, and from 1945 on it occupies a central part in Lacan’s work.
 
−
This is a distinctive feature of Lacan’s work, since the term does not constitue part of Freud’s thoeretical vocabulary, but is more associated with philosopical, legal and linguistic discourses.
 
  
 +
[[Lacan]] plays on the [[philosophical]] nuances of the latter term to emphasise that his [[concept]] of the [[subject]] concerns those aspects of the [[human]] [[being]] that cannot (or must not) be objectified (reified, reduced to a [[thing]]), nor be studied in an '[[objective]]' way.
  
 +
<blockquote>"What do we call a subject? Quite precisely, what in the [[development]] of objectivation, is [[outside]] of the object."<ref>{{S1}} p. 194</ref></blockquote>
  
 +
=====Language=====
 +
References to [[language]] come to dominate [[Lacan]]'s concept of the [[subject]] from the mid-1950s on.
  
−
== References ==
+
He distinguishes the [[subject]] of the [[statement]] from the [[subject]] of the [[enunciation]] to show that because the [[subject]] is essentially a [[speaking]] [[being]] (''[[parlêtre]]''), he is inescapably [[divided]], [[castrated]], [[split]].
 +
 
 +
In the early 1960s [[Lacan]] defines the [[subject]] as that which is represented by a [[signifier]] for [[another]] [[signifier]]; in other [[words]], the [[subject]] is an effect of [[language]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 835</ref>.
 +
 
 +
=====Philosophy and Law=====
 +
Besides its [[place]] in [[linguistics]] and [[logic]], the term "[[subject]]" also has [[philosophical]] and [[legal]] connotations.
 +
 
 +
In [[philosophical]] [[discourse]], it denotes an [[individual]] [[consciousness|self-consciousness]], whereas in [[legal]] [[discourse]], it denotes a person who is under the [[power]] of another (e.g. a person who is subject to the sovereign).
 +
 
 +
The fact that the term possesses both these meanings means that it perfectly illustrates [[Lacan]]'s [[thesis]] about the determination of [[consciousness]] by the [[symbolic order]].
 +
 
 +
<blockquote>"The subject is a subject only by virtue of his subjection to the field of the Other."<ref>{{S2}} p. 188</ref></blockquote>
 +
 
 +
The term also functions in [[legal]] [[discourse]] to designate the support of [[action]]; the [[subject]] is one who can be held [[responsibility|responsible]] for his [[act]]s.
 +
 
 +
=====Descartes's ''Cogito''=====
 +
The [[philosophical]] connotations of the term are particularly emphasised by [[Lacan]], who [[links]] it with [[Descartes]]'s [[philosophy]] of the ''[[cogito]]'':
 +
 
 +
<blockquote>in the term ''subject'' . . . I am not designating the [[living]] substratum needed by this phenomenon of the subject, nor any sort of substance, nor any being possessing [[knowledge]] in his pathos  .  . . nor even some incarnated [[logos]], but the [[Cartesian]] subject, who appears at the [[moment]] when [[doubt]] is recognised as [[certainty]].<ref>{{S11}} p. 126</ref></blockquote>
 +
 
 +
=====Subject of the Unconscious=====
 +
The fact that the [[symbol]] of the [[subject]], '''S''', is a homophone of the [[Freud]]'s term ''[[Es]]'' ('[[Id]]') illustrates that for [[Lacan]], the true [[subject]] is the [[subject]] of the [[unconscious]].
 +
 
 +
In 1957 [[Lacan]] strikes through this [[symbol]] to produce the [[symbol]] '''$''', the "[[subject|barred subject]]," thus illustrating the fact that the [[subject]] is essentially [[divided]].
 +
 
 +
=====See Also=====
 +
{{See}}
 +
* [[Analysand]]
 +
* ''[[Cogito]]''
 +
||
 +
* [[Enunciation]]
 +
* [[Ego]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Language]]
 +
* [[Law]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Linguistics]]
 +
* [[Philosophy]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Split]]
 +
* [[Statement]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Symbol]]
 +
* [[Unconscious]]
 +
{{Also}}
 +
 
 +
=====References=====
 +
<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
 
<references/>
 
<references/>
 +
</div>
  
−
[[Category:Lacan]]
+
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
 +
[[Category:Subject]]
 
[[Category:Terms]]
 
[[Category:Terms]]
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 +
[[Category:Dictionary]]
 
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
 
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
 +
 +
__NOTOC__

Latest revision as of 23:58, 20 May 2019

French: [[sujet]]
Jacques Lacan

The term "subject" is present from the very earliest of Lacan's psychoanalytic writings,[1] and from 1945 on it occupies a central part in Lacan's work.

This is a distinctive feature of Lacan's work, since the term does not constitute part of Freud's theoretical vocabulary, but is more associated with philosophical, legal and linguistic discourses.

Human Being

In Lacan's pre-war papers, the term "subject" seems to mean no more than "human being."[2]

Analysand

The term is also used to refer to the analysand.[3]

Three Kinds

In 1945, Lacan distinguishes between three kinds of subject.

  1. Firstly, there is the impersonal subject, independent of the other, the pure grammatical subject, the noetic subject, the "it" of "it is known that."
  1. Secondly, there is the anonymous reciprocal subject who is completely equal to and substitutable for any other, and who recognises himself in equivalence with the other.
  1. Thirdly, there is the personal subject, whose uniqueness is constituted by an act of self-affirmation.[4]

It is always this third sense of the subject, the subject in his uniqueness, that constitutes the focus of Lacan's work.

Subject and Ego

In 1953, Lacan establishes a distinction between the subject and the ego which will remain one of the most fundamental distinctions throughout the rest of his work.

Whereas the ego is part of the imaginary order, the subject is part of the symbolic.

Thus the subject is not simply equivalent to a conscious sense of agency, which is a mere illusion produced by the ego, but to the unconscious; Lacan's "subject" is the subject of the unconscious.

Sigmund Freud

Lacan argues that this distinction can be traced back to Freud:

"[Freud] wrote Das Ich und das Es in order to maintain this fundamental distinction between the true subject of the unconscious and the ego as constituted in its nucleus by a series of alienating identifications.[5]

Although psychoanalytic treatment has powerful effects on the ego, it is the subject, and not the ego, on which psychoanalysis primarily operates.

Alternative Meanings

Lacan plays on the various meanings of the term "subject."

In linguistics and logic, the subject of a proposition is that about which something is predicated, and is also opposed to the "object."[6]

Lacan plays on the philosophical nuances of the latter term to emphasise that his concept of the subject concerns those aspects of the human being that cannot (or must not) be objectified (reified, reduced to a thing), nor be studied in an 'objective' way.

"What do we call a subject? Quite precisely, what in the development of objectivation, is outside of the object."[7]

Language

References to language come to dominate Lacan's concept of the subject from the mid-1950s on.

He distinguishes the subject of the statement from the subject of the enunciation to show that because the subject is essentially a speaking being (parlêtre), he is inescapably divided, castrated, split.

In the early 1960s Lacan defines the subject as that which is represented by a signifier for another signifier; in other words, the subject is an effect of language.[8].

Philosophy and Law

Besides its place in linguistics and logic, the term "subject" also has philosophical and legal connotations.

In philosophical discourse, it denotes an individual self-consciousness, whereas in legal discourse, it denotes a person who is under the power of another (e.g. a person who is subject to the sovereign).

The fact that the term possesses both these meanings means that it perfectly illustrates Lacan's thesis about the determination of consciousness by the symbolic order.

"The subject is a subject only by virtue of his subjection to the field of the Other."[9]

The term also functions in legal discourse to designate the support of action; the subject is one who can be held responsible for his acts.

Descartes's Cogito

The philosophical connotations of the term are particularly emphasised by Lacan, who links it with Descartes's philosophy of the cogito:

in the term subject . . . I am not designating the living substratum needed by this phenomenon of the subject, nor any sort of substance, nor any being possessing knowledge in his pathos . . . nor even some incarnated logos, but the Cartesian subject, who appears at the moment when doubt is recognised as certainty.[10]

Subject of the Unconscious

The fact that the symbol of the subject, S, is a homophone of the Freud's term Es ('Id') illustrates that for Lacan, the true subject is the subject of the unconscious.

In 1957 Lacan strikes through this symbol to produce the symbol $, the "barred subject," thus illustrating the fact that the subject is essentially divided.

See Also
References
  1. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. De la psychose paranoiaque dans ses rapports avec la personalité, Paris: Navarin, 1975. [1932].
  2. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 75
  3. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 83
  4. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p.207-8
  5. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.128
  6. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. "Proposition du 9 octobre 1967 sur le psychanalyste de l'École," 1967, Scilicet, no. 1 (1968) p. 19
  7. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p. 194
  8. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 835
  9. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p. 188
  10. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p. 126


Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/index.php?title=Subject&oldid=44570"