Changes

Since In [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]], the most basic form of exchange "[[symbolic]]" is communication itself (the exchange of words, the gift of speech);<ref> S4, 189</ref> and since the concepts one of [[lawthree]] [[order]] and of s that [[structure]] are unthinkable without [[languagehuman]] [[existence]], the symbolic is essentially a linguistic dimension. Any aspect of [[others]] [[being]] the psychoanalytic experience which has a linguistic structure thus pertains to [[imaginary]] and the symbolic order[[real]].

However==History==The term "[[symbolic]]" appears in adjectival [[form]] in Lacan's earliest [[psychoanalytic]] writings. The adjectival "[[symbolic]]" is often used by [[Lacan]] in a fairly conventional [[sense]], Lacan does not simply equate but in the symbolic order with language.On 1950s he begins to use the contrary[[word]] as a substantive, language involves imaginary and real dimensions in addition to its it rapidly becomes the cornerstone of his [[theory]]: the [[subject]]'s [[relationship]] with the [[symbolic dimension]] is the heart of [[psychoanalysis]]. The symbolic dimension It now becomes one of language is the three [[orders]] that remain central throughout the rest of Lacan's [[work]]. Of these three orders, the symbolic is the most crucial one for psychoanalysis; [[signifierpsychoanalysts]]; a dimension in which elements have no positive existence but which are constituted purely by virtue essentially 'practitioners of their mutual differencesthe symbolic function'.<ref>{{E}} p.72</ref>

The symbolic is also ==Structuralism==Lacan incorporates into [[psychoanalysis]] the [[linguistics]] of [[Saussure]] and the realm [[anthropology]] of radical alterity which [[Lévi-Strauss]]. [[Lacan refers ]]'s [[concept]] of the [[symbolic|symbolic order]] owes much to as the anthropological work of [[OtherClaude Lévi-Strauss]].<ref>[[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss, Claude]]. The 1949a: 203</ref> In [[particular]], [[Lacan]] takes from [[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss]] the [[idea]] that the [[social]] [[unconsciousworld]] is [[structured]] by certain [[law]]s which regulate kinship relations and the discourse [[exchange]] of gifts. In his work on kinship [[Lévi-Strauss]] argues that any culture can be seen as a set of this Other[[symbolic]] [[structure]]s such as the rules governing kinship and alliance, [[language]] and thus belongs wholly to the symbolic order[[art]]. The symbolic is He also demonstrates that in [[primitive]] societies the realm [[ritual]] exchange of the Law which regulates desire gifts has an important [[role]] in the Oedipus complexcreation and perpetuation of social [[stability]]. It is The application of [[Saussure]]'s theory of the realm of culture [[sign]] allows these structures and exchanges to be [[analyzed]] as opposed to the imaginary order exchanges of nature[[signifier]]s. Whereas the imaginary is characterised by dual relations, the The emergence of [[symbolic ]] [[structure]]s is characterised by triadic structures, because an essential feature of the intersubjective relationship is always 'mediated' by a third term, the big Otherhuman transition from [[nature]] to [[culture]].

The symbolic order is also ==Culture==Adapting [[Lévi-Strauss]]'s study of how kinship rules and exogamy govern exchanges between human groups to the realm field of [[deathpsychoanalysis]], [[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 [[absencenature]] and unbridled sexuality; the role of the [[lackName-of-the-Father]]. The symbolic is both to disrupt the [[pleasure principledual relation]] ship in which regulates the distance from [[child]] tries to fuse with theThing[[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 [[death drivesymbolic|symbolic castration]] which goes 'beyond . Although the pleasure principle' by means exchange of repetition;<ref>S2, 210</ref> [[signifier]]s in fact[[speech]] is an obvious example of [[symbolic|symbolic exchange]], [[Lacan]]'the death drive s [[symbolic]] is only not simply synonymous with [[language]], and should be [[understood]] as comprising the mask entire [[domain]] of the symbolic order'[[culture]].<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 ==Language==Since the real: 'There most basic form of exchange is no biological reason, and in particular no genetic one, to account for exogamy. In [[communication]] itself (the human order we are dealing with the complete emergence exchange of a new function[[words]], encompassing the whole order in its entirety'.[[gift]] of [[speech]]);<ref> (S2, 29{{S4}} p. 189</ref> Thus while and since the [[concepts]] of [[law]] and of [[structure]] are unthinkable without [[language]], the [[symbolic may seem ]] is essentially a [[linguistic]] [[dimension]]. Any aspect of the psychoanalytic [[experience]] which has a [[linguistic]] [[structure]] thus pertains to 'spring from the real' as pre-given, this [[symbolic order]]. The [[symbolic]] dimension of [[language]] is an illusion, and 'one shouldn't think that symbols actually of the [[signifier]]; a dimension in which elements have come from the real'no positive [[existence]] but which are constituted purely by virtue of their mutual differences.<ref> (S2, 238</ref>

==Alterity==The totalising, all-encompassing effect [[symbolic]] is also the realm of the symbolic order leads radical [[alterity]] which [[Lacan ]] refers to speak as the [[Other]]. The [[unconscious]] is the [[discourse]] of this [[Other]], and thus belongs wholly to the symbolic as a universe: 'In the [[symbolic order the totality is called a universe]]. The [[symbolic order from ]] is the realm of the [[Law]] which regulates [[desire]] in the first takes on its universal character[[Oedipus complex]]. It isn't constituted bit by bit. As soon is the realm of [[culture]] as opposed to the symbol arrives, there is a universe [[imaginary]] [[order]] of symbols[[nature]].'<ref> (S2, 29)</ref> There is therefore no question of a gradual continuous transition from Whereas the [[imaginary to ]] is characterised by [[dual relation]]s, the [[symbolic; they are completely heterogeneous domains. Once the symbolic order has arisen]] is characterised by [[triad]]ic [[structures]], it creates because the sense that it has [[intersubjective]] relationship is always been there, since 'we find it absolutely impossible to speculate on what preceded it other than "mediated" by symbols'.<ref> (S2a [[third]] term, 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[[big Other]].

==Death==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 "[[pleasure principle|beyond the pleasure principle]]" by means of [[repetition]];<ref>{{S2}} p. 210</ref> in fact, "the [[death drive]] is only the mask of the [[symbolic order]]."<ref>{{S2}} p. 326</ref> ==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, 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}} p. 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}} p. 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}} p. 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}} 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 [[development]] lie [[outside]] the field of [[psychoanalysis]]. ==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 to condemn the discovery to oblivion.'"<ref> ({{E, }} p. 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 [[structure]]d by the [[symbolic]].

* [[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]]

* [[Imago]] ||* [[KnotLanguage]]* [[L and R schemasLaw]]* [[MathemeLinguistics]]* [[Mirror stage]]||

* [[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}}

# [[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>