Changes

It is the [[analysand]]'s ''supposition'' of a [[subject]] who [[knowledge|knows]] that initiates the [[analytic]] [[process]] rather than the [[knowledge]] actually possessed by the [[analyst]]. The term [[subject supposed to know]] does not designate the [[analyst]], but rather a function which the [[analyst]] may come to embody in the [[treatment]]. It is only when the [[analyst]] is perceived by the [[analysand]] to embody this function that the [[transference]] can be said to be established.<ref>{{S11}} p. 233</ref>

When this occurs, what kind of [[knowledge]] is it that the [[analyst]] is presumed to possess?

In [[other]] [[words]], the [[analyst]] is often [[thought]] to [[knowledge|know]] the [[secret]] [[meaning]] of the [[analysand]]'s [[word]]s, the [[signification]]s of [[speech]] of which even the [[speaker]] is unaware. This supposition alone (the supposition that the [[analyst]] is one who [[knows]]) causes otherwise insignificant details (chance gestures, ambiguous remarks) to acquire [[retroactively]] a special [[meaning]] for the [[patient]] who "supposes".

It may happen that the [[patient]] supposes the [[analyst]] to be a [[subject]] who knows from the very first [[treatment]], or even before, but it often takes some [[time]] for the [[transference]] to become established. In the latter [[case]], "when the subject enters the [[analysis]], he is far from giving the [[analyst]] this [[place]] of the [[subject supposed to know]]."<ref>{{S11}} p. 233</ref> The [[analysand]] may initially [[regard]] the [[analyst]] as a buffoon, or may withhold information from him in [[order]] to maintain his [[ignorance]].<ref>{{S11}} p. 137</ref> However, "even the [[psychoanalyst]] put in question is credited at some point with a certain infallibility."<ref>{{S11}} p.234</ref>

Sooner or later some [[chance]] gesture of the [[analyst]] is taken by the [[analysand]] as a [[sign]] of some secret [[intention]], some hidden [[knowledge]]. At this point the [[analyst]] has come to embody the [[subject supposed to know]]; the [[transference]] is established. The [[end of analysis]] comes when the [[analysand]] de-supposes the [[analyst]] of [[knowledge]], so that the [[analyst]] falls from the [[position]] of the [[subject supposed to know]].

The term "[[subject supposed to know]]" also emphasizes the fact that it is a particular [[relationship]] to [[knowledge]] that constitutes the unique position of the [[analyst]]; the [[analyst]] is aware that there is a [[split]] between him and the [[knowledge]] attributed to him. In other words, the [[analyst]] must realize that he only occupies the position of one who is presumed (by the [[analysand]]) to know, without fooling himself that he really does possess the [[knowledge]] attributed to him. The [[analyst]] must realise realize that, of the [[knowledge]] attributed to him by the [[analysand]], he knows [[nothing]].<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Proposition du 9 octobre 1967 sur le psychanalyste de l'École]]," 1967, ''[[Scilicet]]'', no. 1 ([[1968]]) p. 20</ref>

However, the fact that it is a supposed [[knowledge]] that is the mainstay of the [[treatment|analytic process]], rather than the [[knowledge]] actually possessed by the [[analyst]], does not mean that the [[analyst]] can therefore be [[content]] with [[knowing]] nothing; on the contrary, [[Lacan]] argues that [[analystanalysts]]s should emulate [[Freud]] in becoming experts in [[cultural]], [[literary]] and [[linguistic]] matters.

<references/>