Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Symbolic

4,403 bytes removed, 00:13, 21 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>).
{| align="[[right]]" style=Dictionary=="line-height:2.0em;text-align:right;margin-left: 10px;background-color:#fcfcfc;border:1px solid #aaa" For Jacques Lacan, the symbolic (| [[French]]:''[[symbolique]]''), or the symbolic order, is a universal structure encompassing the entire field of human action and existence. It involves the function of speech and language, and more precisely that of the signifier. It appears as an essentially unconscious, latent apparatus.|}
The idea of the symbolic is contemporaneous with the birth of psychoanalysis since the traces linked to repressed infantile sexual experiences are symbolically reactualized in adulthood as defensive symptoms. The fact that Freud emphasized memory and reminiscence in his earliest theoretical work is enough to indicate the primacy of symbolic traces in psychopathology. The Oedipus complex, the avatars of the primal relationship with the mother, and the function of the dead father all take on their importance because they function on the same axis where the signifier emerges as the mainspring of the symbolic. As Lacan wrote in the "Function and Field" essay, "Freud's discovery was that of the field of effects, in man's nature, of his relations to the symbolic order" (2002, p. 63). Further, Lacan's entire body of work testifies to the fact that he was trying to restore the symbolic to its full status in psychoanalysis.
The impact of the symbolic is felt on several levels: first in limits placed on social alliances and relationships by a certain number of mechanisms, for which the traditional model is the pact. At another level, the symbolic intervenes in the form of discrete elements, namely signifiers, that are overdetermined as the prevalent forms of the imaginary, affective relations, and the choice of sexual objects.
In [[Lacan repeatedly referred to the canonical example of ]]ian [[psychoanalysis]], the "child with the reel[[symbolic]]" from Beyond the Pleasure Principle (Freud, 1920g) in order to emphasize that the mark of the absence of the beloved object is realized by the fort-da game one of phonetic opposition [[three]] [[order]]s that represented the appearance and disappearance of [[structure]] [[human]] [[existence]], the mother. This correlation between [[others]] [[being]] the missing object [[imaginary]] and a symbolic signifying mark inscribed in language removes the object's concrete features and grants it a level of conceptual force[[real]].
==History==The emergence of the signifier term "[[symbolic]]" appears in adjectival [[form]] in the Lacan's earliest [[psychoanalytic]] writings. The adjectival "[[symbolic ]]" is best shown often used by [[Lacan]] in a fairly conventional [[sense]], but in the infant's initiation into 1950s he begins to use the dialectical field of demand [[word]] as a substantive, and desire, for it is in rapidly becomes the experience cornerstone of vital distress and his [[theory]]: the [[subject]]'s [[relationship]] with the appeal to a caretaker that a split occurs. Even if this caretaker satisfies a vital need, there [[symbolic]] is still a gaping lack the heart of being[[psychoanalysis]]. This equivocal division is brought about by the signifier It now becomes one of the first demand. It brings with it consequences beyond three [[orders]] that remain central throughout the frontiers rest of infancy and perpetuates a radical division in subjectivityLacan's [[work]]. It also grants to Of these three orders, the unconscious Other its symbolic place because is the ultimate meaning most crucial one for psychoanalysis; [[psychoanalysts]] are essentially 'practitioners of this signifier is assumed by the subject to reside in this other scenesymbolic function'.<ref>{{E}} p.72</ref>
In ==Structuralism==Lacan incorporates into [[psychoanalysis]] the demand, the inexpressible, originally repressed part [[linguistics]] of [[Saussure]] and the signifier becomes the cause [[anthropology]] of desire by the process [[Lévi-Strauss]]. [[Lacan]]'s [[concept]] of repetition. Later, the Oedipus complex normalizes the structure by assigning a definitive meaning [[symbolic|symbolic order]] owes much to a lack previously put in place—namely that the motheranthropological work of [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]].<ref>[[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss, as primordial OtherClaude]]. 1949a: 203</ref> In [[particular]], is assumed to possess [[Lacan]] takes from [[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss]] the phallus, and the father, by prohibiting incest, reinforces the fact [[idea]] that the phallus [[social]] [[world]] is absent [[structured]] by conferring certain [[law]]s which regulate kinship relations and the [[exchange]] of gifts. In his work on it kinship [[Lévi-Strauss]] argues that any culture can be seen as a set of [[symbolic function. Thus the father']] [[structure]]s prohibition makes such as the phallic signifier cause desire in the very place where repression had left a holerules governing kinship and alliance, [[language]] and [[art]]. From He also demonstrates that point on, this operation links in [[primitive]] societies the lack (symbolic castration) to [[ritual]] exchange of gifts has an important [[role]] in the law creation and perpetuation of language, in order to make it reappear as symbolic debtsocial [[stability]]. The symbolic order is thus constituted as an autonomous system application of [[Saussure]]'s theory of signifiers, a system that is governed from the Other [[sign]] allows these structures and exchanges to which the subject is subjugatedbe [[analyzed]] as exchanges of [[signifier]]s. The primary character emergence of the [[symbolic led Lacan to conceive of it as one ]] [[structure]]s is an essential feature of the dimensions constituting the Borro-mean knot, a formalized structural schema that also includes the imaginary and the realhuman transition from [[nature]] to [[culture]].
==Culture==
Adapting [[Lévi-Strauss]]'s study of how kinship rules and exogamy govern exchanges between human groups to the field of [[psychoanalysis]], [[Lacan]] now describes the [[Oedipus complex]] as a [[process]] which imposes [[symbolic]] [[structure]]s on [[sexuality]] and allows the [[subject]] to emerge. [[Pre-oedipal|Pre-oedipal sexuality]] is likened to a [[state]] of [[nature]] and unbridled sexuality; the role of the [[Name-of-the-Father]] is to disrupt the [[dual relation]]ship in which the [[child]] tries to fuse with the [[mother]] in an incestuous union, and to establish a legitimate line of descent ("son of...", "daughter of..."). [[Culture]] and the [[symbolic]] are thuse imposed upon [[nature]]. The [[subject]] gains access to the [[symbolic]], to a [[name]] and a lineage, but does so at the cost of a [[symbolic|symbolic castration]]. Although the exchange of [[signifier]]s in [[speech]] is an obvious example of [[symbolic|symbolic exchange]], [[Lacan]]'s [[symbolic]] is not simply synonymous with [[language]], and should be [[understood]] as comprising the entire [[domain]] of [[culture]].
==DefinitionLanguage==The term 'symbolic' appears in adjectival Since the most basic form in Lacan's earliest psychoanalytic writings.of exchange is [[communication]] itself (the exchange of [[words]], the [[gift]] of [[speech]]);<ref> (e.g{{S4}} p. Lacan, 1936)189</ref> In these early works and since the term implies references to symbolic logic [[concepts]] of [[law]] and to of [[structure]] are unthinkable without [[language]], the equations used in mathematical physics[[symbolic]] is essentially a [[linguistic]] [[dimension]].<ref> (Ec, 79)<.ref> In 1948 symptoms are said Any aspect of the psychoanalytic [[experience]] which has a [[linguistic]] [[structure]] thus pertains to have a 'the [[symbolic meaning'order]].<ref>(E, 10)</ref> By 1950, the term has acquired anthropological overtones, as when Lacan praises Marcel Mauss for having shown The [[symbolic]] dimension of [[language]] is that 'of the structures [[signifier]]; a dimension in which elements have no positive [[existence]] but which are constituted purely by virtue of society are symbolic'their mutual differences.<ref>(Ec, 132)</ref>
These different nuances are combined into a single category in 1953 when ==Alterity==The [[symbolic]] is also the realm of radical [[alterity]] which [[Lacan begins ]] refers to use as the term 'symbolic' as a noun[[Other]]. It now becomes one of The [[unconscious]] is the three [[ordersdiscourse]] that remain central throughout the rest of Lacan's work. Of these three ordersthis [[Other]], and thus belongs wholly to the [[symbolic order]]. The [[symbolic]] is the most crucial one for psychoanalysis; psychoanalysts are essentially 'practitioners realm of the symbolic function'[[Law]] which regulates [[desire]] in the [[Oedipus complex]].<ref> (E, 72)</ref> In speaking of 'It is the symbolic function', Lacan makes it clear that his concept realm of [[culture]] as opposed to the symbolic [[imaginary]] [[order owes much to the anthropological work ]] of Claude LÈvi-Strauss (from whom [[nature]]. Whereas the phrase 'symbolic function' [[imaginary]] is taken).<ref> see LÈvi-Strausscharacterised by [[dual relation]]s, 1949a: 203</ref> In particular, Lacan takes from LÈvi-Strauss the idea that the social world [[symbolic]] is structured characterised by certain laws which regulate kinship relations and the exchange of gifts.<ref>(see also Mauss[[triad]]ic [[structures]], 1923)</ref> The concept of because the gift, and that of [[intersubjective]] relationship is always "mediated" by a circuit of exchange[[third]] term, are thus fundamental to Lacan's concept of the symbolic[[big Other]]. <ref>(S4, 153-4, 182)</ref>
Since ==Death==The [[symbolic order]] is also the most basic form realm of [[death]], of exchange [[absence]] and of [[lack]]. The [[symbolic]] is communication itself (both the exchange of words, [[pleasure principle]] which regulates the distance from the gift of speech);<ref> S4[[Thing]], 189</ref> and since the concepts of [[lawdeath drive]] and of which goes "[[structurepleasure principle|beyond the pleasure principle]] are unthinkable without " by means of [[languagerepetition]];<ref>{{S2}} p. 210</ref> in fact, "the symbolic [[death drive]] is essentially a linguistic dimension. Any aspect only the mask of the psychoanalytic experience which has a linguistic structure thus pertains to the [[symbolic order]]."<ref>{{S2}} p.326</ref>
However==Autonomy==The [[symbolic order]] is completely [[autonomous]]: it is not a superstructure determined by [[biology]] or [[biology|genetics]]. It is completely [[contingent]] with respect to the [[real]]: "There is no [[biological]] [[reason]], and in particular no genetic one, Lacan does not simply equate to account for exogamy. In the symbolic human order we are dealing with languagethe [[complete]] emergence of a new function, encompassing the [[whole]] order in its entirety."<ref>{{S2}} p.On 29</ref> Thus while the [[symbolic]] may seem to "spring from the contraryreal" as pre-given, this is an [[illusion]], language involves imaginary and "one shouldn't [[think]] that [[symbols]] actually have come from the real dimensions in addition ."<ref>{{S2}} p. 238</ref> The totalising, all-encompassing effect of the [[symbolic order]] leads [[Lacan]] to its [[speak]] of the [[symbolic]] as a [[universe]]: "In the symbolic dimensionorder the [[totality]] is called a universe. The symbolic dimension order from the first takes on its [[universal]] [[character]]. It isn't constituted bit by bit. As soon as the [[symbol]] arrives, there is a universe of language symbols."<ref>{{S2}} p. 29</ref> There is that therefore no question of a gradual continuous transition from the [[signifierimaginary ]]to the [[symbolic]]; a dimension in which elements have no positive existence but which they are constituted purely completely heterogeneous domains. Once the [[symbolic order]] has arisen, it creates the sense that it has always been there, since "we find it absolutely [[impossible]] to speculate on what preceded it other than by virtue symbols."<ref>{{S2}} p. 5</ref> For this reason it is strictly [[speaking]] impossible to conceive the origin of [[language]], let alone what came before, which is why questions of their mutual differences[[development]] lie [[outside]] the field of [[psychoanalysis]].
The symbolic is also ==Psychoanalysis==[[Lacan]] criticises the realm [[psychoanalysis]] of radical alterity which Lacan refers his day for [[forgetting]] the [[symbolic order]] and reducing everything to as the [[Otherimaginary]]. The This is, for [[Lacan]], [[unconsciousnothing]] less than a [[betrayal]] of [[Freud]]'s most basic insights; "Freud's discovery is that of the field of the effects, in the discourse nature of this Otherman, and thus belongs wholly produced by his relation to the symbolic order. The To ignore this symbolic order is to condemn the discovery to oblivion."<ref>{{E}} p. 64</ref> [[Lacan]] argues that it is only by [[working]] in the realm of [[symbolic order]] that the Law which regulates desire [[analyst]] can produce changes in the Oedipus complex. It is the realm [[subjective]] [[position]] of culture as opposed to the [[analysand]]; these changes will also produce [[imaginary order of nature. Whereas ]] effects, since the [[imaginary ]] is characterised [[structure]]d by dual relations, the [[symbolic is characterised by triadic structures, because the intersubjective relationship is always 'mediated' by a third term, the big Other]].
The symbolic order is also the realm of [[death]], of [[absence]] and of [[lack]]. The symbolic is both the [[pleasure principle]] which regulates the distance from the
Thing, and the [[death drive]] which goes 'beyond the pleasure principle' by means of repetition;<ref>S2, 210</ref> in fact, 'the death drive is only the mask of the symbolic order'.<ref> S2, 326</ref>
 
The symbolic order is completely autonomous: it is not a superstructure determined by biology or genetics. It is completely contingent with respect to the real: 'There is no biological reason, and in particular no genetic one, to account for exogamy. In the human order we are dealing with the complete emergence of a new function, encompassing the whole order in its entirety'.<ref> (S2, 29</ref> Thus while the symbolic may seem to 'spring from the real' as pre-given, this is an illusion, and 'one shouldn't think that symbols actually have come from the real'.<ref> (S2, 238</ref>
 
The totalising, all-encompassing effect of the symbolic order leads Lacan to speak of the symbolic as a universe: 'In the symbolic order the totality is called a universe. The symbolic order from the first takes on its universal character. It isn't constituted bit by bit. As soon as the symbol arrives, there is a universe of symbols.'<ref> (S2, 29)</ref> There is therefore no question of a gradual continuous transition from the imaginary to the symbolic; they are completely heterogeneous domains. Once the symbolic order has arisen, it creates the sense that it has always been there, since 'we find it absolutely impossible to speculate on what preceded it other than by symbols'.<ref> (S2, 5)</ref> For this reason it is strictly speaking impossible to conceive the origin of language, let alone what came before, which is why questions of development lie outside the field of psychoanalysis.
 
Lacan criticises the psychoanalysis of his day for forgetting the symbolic order and reducing everything to the imaginary. This is, for Lacan, nothing less than a betrayal of Freud's most basic insights; 'Freud's discovery is that of the field of the effects, in the nature of man, produced by his relation to the symbolic order. To ignore this symbolic order is condemn the discovery to oblivion.'<ref> (E, 64)</ref>
 
Lacan argues that it is only by working in the symbolic order that the analyst can produce changes in the subjective position of the analysand; these changes will also produce imaginary effects, since the imaginary is structured by the [[symbolic]].
 
== def ==
 
The social world of linguistic communication, intersubjective relations, knowledge of ideological conventions, and the acceptance of the law (also called the "big Other"). Once a child enters into language and accepts the rules and dictates of society, it is able to deal with others. The acceptance of language's rules is aligned with the Oedipus complex, according to Lacan. The symbolic is made possible because of your acceptance of the Name-of-the-Father, those laws and restrictions that control both your desire and the rules of communication. Through recognition of the Name-of-the-Father, you are able to enter into a community of others. The symbolic, through language, is "the pact which links... subjects together in one action. The human action par excellence is originally founded on the existence of the world of the symbol, namely on laws and contracts" (Freud's Papers 230). The symbolic order works in tension with the imaginary order and the Real. It is closely bound up with the superego and the phallus. See the Lacan module on the structure of the psyche.
 
== def ==
In Jacques Lacan's theory of psychic structures, '''the Symbolic''' refers to the realm of language into which the child enters under the impetus of [[the Name of the Father]]. The child's world, which has already been transformed by [[the Imaginary]] spatial identifications of the [[Mirror Stage]], now becomes bound up in [[signifying chain]]s linked to a [[master signifier]]. Some leftover of [[the Real]] remains, however, unexpressed in language, and resists integration into the Symbolic.<ref>symbolic 6, 88, 105, 118, 145, 193, 244-279-81 [[Seminar XI]]</ref>
==See Also==
* [[Psychosis]]{{See}}* [[Castration of the subject]]* [[Child analysisCommunication]]* [[Death instinct]]* [[Demand]] [[Ethics]]* [[Formula of Fantasy]] * [[Female sexuality]]* [[Feminism and psychoanalysis]] * [[Foreclosure]]* [[Fort-Da]]* [[Ego ideal]]* [[Ideal ego]]* [[Imaginary identification]]* [[Symbolic identificationdrive]]
* [[Imaginary]]
* [[Imago]] ||* [[KnotLanguage]]* [[L and R schemasLaw]]* [[MathemeLinguistics]]* [[Mirror stage]]||
* [[Name-of-the-Father]]
* [[NeurosisOedipus complex]]* [[ObjectOther]]* [[Object a]]||* [[Optical schemaOrder]]* [[Phallus]]* [[Privation]]* [[Psychoses, chronic and delusional Real]]* [[Real, Imaginary, and Symbolic father]] * [[Formulas of Sexuation]]* [[Signifier]] * [[Structuralism and psychoanalysis]]* [[Subject]] * [[Subject's desire]]||* [[SymbolStructure]] * [[SymbolizationUnconscious]]* [[Symptom]]* [[sinthome]] * [[Thalassa: A Theory of Genitality]]* [[Topology]]* [[Unary trait]]* [[Want of being/lack of being]]{{Also}}
==References==
# [[Freud|Freud, Sigmund]]. (1920g). Beyond the pleasure principle. SE, 18<div style="font-size: 111px" class="references-64.small"><references/># [[Lacan|Lacan, Jacques]]. (2002). The function and field of speech and language in psychoanalysis. In his ''Écrits: A selection'' ([[Bruce Fink]], Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton (Original work published 1953)</div>
{{OK}}
[[Category:Symbolic]]
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]][[Category:Dictionary]][[Category:Terms]][[Category:Concepts]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]__NOTOC__
Anonymous user
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/Special:MobileDiff/17828...44587"

Navigation menu