Jacques Lacan

This article or section requires a revision. Details are indicated on the discussion side. Please to improve it and removes afterwards this marking helps.

Jacques Marie Émile Lacan, well-known under the name Jacques Lacan (* 13. April 1901 in Paris; † 9. September 1981 ebenda) was a French Psychoanalytiker, which interpreted and radicalized the writings victory mouth Freuds new. To read this contained the goal „Freud against Freud “of developing thus it further where it behindits own acceptance stayed.

One of its important theses is the fact that the unconscious a symbolic structure (see. Poststrukturalismus) has - those the language. Generally its theories circle around the attempt, which absent ones in the present one (see. To along-think Freud speaker) andto think dialectically. It develops thereby on the work of the linguist Ferdinand de Saussure and Roman Ossipowitsch Jakobson . Further it uses both philosophical authors (Kojève to Hegel), and mathematician (René Thom, Nicolas Bourbaki, and topological theories of the knots, see. Borromäi rings).


Table of contents

[to work on]

lives

Lacan buildup in a family with firm catholic tradition. Its brothers and sisters are Magdeleine Marie and the younger brother Mark Marie, the late Benediktiner in thatAbbey from Hautecombe became. It visited the Collège Stanislas, a Jesuitenschule. After its Baccalauréat it studies first medicine, late psychiatry. He worked as a physician for neurology and psychiatry and worked as a writer. 1964 it justified those École Freudienne in Paris, solved it however 1980.

It was interested in the following philosophers: Spinoza, Hegel, late Husserl and Heidegger. In addition it was friendly with Dali , Giacometti , Michel Leiris and Georges Bataille. LacanAcéphale, as it were the unofficial part of the Collège de Sociologie, was present also with the activities of the 1936 of Bataille in the life called secret company (see. Moebius 2006).

[Work on]

Psychosemiologie

Lacans work consider some illegible. It hasinitially its teachings only in its seminars developed and common, to it its writings I - III in book form published. Afterwards by Alain Miller also the Mitschriften of its seminars was published, whereby up to now not yet all are published. Characteristicallyit is that Lacan did not give anywhere definitions in the conventional sense of its conceptualness - probably he tried to illustrate so the dynamics of the unconscious one of humans: for example “the thing “appears, depending upon context, rather an object or also trauma tables the coreto stand the subject close. In principle the terms are certain their principles (set of the identity, sentence of impossible third, sentence of the contradiction) by the dialectic discourse completely or absolutely, however not in the sense of the traditional or formal logic, according toconceptual ambiguities and contradictions to be impossible from the logical one are. The Lacan logic of the significant one is a dialectic logic, a logic, which is to be understood from the language (Bruno of dear jerk according to applies this to the Hegel logic). AlreadyHegels dialectic interpretation of the tradierten or formal logic put the contradiction out as the category absolutely, when the term of the term, to that the movement judgement-end themselves to unit of the absolute Negativität, the law of the Seins and the nature is. LacansSignificant logic corresponds to the principle of the Dialektizität, the konstitutiven contradiction, which konstitutiert all logical regulations and Signifikaten in their meaning. After the law of the dialectic sharing are for example the terms of the symbolic one, imaginary one and material one, those the registers of the Borromäi knot,the linguistic-logical Dit Mensionen or saying measurements of the significant one constitutes not to differentiate in abstract way from each other to to thus determine in clear way against each other how the formal logic expects this. Everyone of these terms or significant ones is both kind, and kind thatin each case different, by which others differentiate to judge or, although it is equally their inclusion or organization. The symbolic to and for itself has an imaginary slope and a material Un-reason. The significant settles as Signifikat, althoughit this strikes down, even an irreducible break, a splitting necessarily which can be presupposed, a konstitutiven lack/surplus into the reality introduces. The-correspond be based also the imaginary on the Symbolischne, which articulates from Lacn, in Kant's transzendetnal philosophical terminology, as the condition to the possibility of everythinggegenständlichen presenting and Anschauuens, when the law of the analytic experience, which is an experience of speaking in the period language, expliziert. Finally the term of the material one of Lacan becomes einersetis in päjorativer way, as only imaginary or vulgär positivistische conception thatReality, which, on the other hand in the sense of the Freud death impulse than the Urverdärngte it understood their symbolsiche basis forgotten, which results thus from a language oblivion that neither in the imaginary one of the conscious conception, still in symbolic unconscious speaking of the language can be waived.Speaking the Srpache is to be determined thus auschliesslich as promises, the abolition of the symbolic alienation as alienation. The material input clutch-arrests thus in the blank character, the Lacan as the eccentric center of the dialectic movement, the unconscious correspondence of language andtrans subjective reality presupposes. Lacan calls this symbolic determination of the term of the material one the respectable material, whereby he the significant ones “respectablly” on the Serialität, thus on diachronsich the movement of the synchronichen language system, to which ireduzible Zeitiung of the significant one attributes. In the sensethe dialectic sharing, which be based on the partful unit of the significant system (that is a n-dimesionale concatenation, a fabric or Gewirk from potentially unabschliessbaren significant chains), from whose in or judging follows, are extremely precisely certain the terms. By the mutual, dialecticSharing of the categories through penetrate themselves this straight due to the absolute difference or the konstitutiven contradiction, which separates, differentiates between it and thus concretely certainly. The dialectic movement of the argument of the Signifiaknten accordingly, all significant ones or terms are a oneLanguage system over-determined, the determining and certain movement of thinking results from the necessary meaning shift, which constitutes the execution or the experience of speaking. The dialektsiche definition is not a “accurate definition” in the sense of the rationalistisch mathematical or axiomatic clarity ideal. From the perspectivethe formal logic regarded, whose abstract definitions have their contents only outwardly, thus from the sinnlichen opinion to take up, may dialektsiche determining of the term is to appear as inexact and free from each definition. The Dialektiker however, that the self resaying thatformal-logic principles as their actual natures recognized has, appears this logic by far logical, when still on the nominalistic ideology of the medieval Scholastik based variables, which easily clearly can be, because they abstract from each contents, thus onlya dead rack realize, which is not able, the human environment, the tendencies, motivations, to articulate unbwusste desiring and its relationship to the ethical law. Lacan has the psycho ontische difference between the authentic feelings by its dialekische logic of the significant one and the hard, objective Realtität torn, which dekonstruiert myhtiische Unterschiedung between emotional one and logical ones torn, a universal T (r) opo logic developed, which becomes fair the reality of humans and its unconscious desiring, corresponds. Its goal was the scientific reason of the psychoanalysis, thoseCreation of a new type of discourse, which unites that the abendländischen science/logic and that the poetry, the unconscious one and the myth in itself. That succeeded to it also in impressing way.

The Psychosemiologie Lacans is essentially based on two basic assumptions:

  • The subject is a language nature, i.e. determines by language; the Psychismus assembles like (trivalent) a linguistic indication as imaginary, material and symbolic. Victory mouth Freuds „it speaks “is called with Lacan: „The language speaks “ [1].The unconscious is structured like a language.
  • The subject is a desiring subject. Since the object of desiring is always already lost, it is a fundamental lack, which keeps a desiring of humans upright. Lacans „desiring “corresponds to Freuds„Desire “. Lacan lent itself from Alexandre Kojève the following Aphorismus: „Desiring of humans is is quoting a desiring of the other one “and a desiring in the view of the other one in the mirror stage, illusionary misjudging , Arthur Rimbaud held Lacan: Iis another.
[Work on]

the subject is a language nature

the Psychogenese (the psychological development is called up to the Psychismus completely developed) of the subject experiences in the mirror stage (approximately in 18. Life month of the infant) a first crisis. Inthis phase begins the infant, if one holds it before a mirror, to develop an intuition of the other one („small the A “). In this situation to the absolute duality between ego and older ego the infant reacts at the same time with the largest joyand attention and a deep aversion and aggression to this different one, which drives out and as a rival is thus noticed it to a certain extent from its Paradies.

This initialistic mirror stage, which gives a first notion of itself to the subject (it experienceshere for the first time „the other one “and to that extent), meant that the subject experiences itself first of all than alienated, Lacan it says itself, which ex-arrests subject.

[Work on]

the mirror stage

the binaryistic situation in the mirror stage ( the range of the imaginary one)only by reaching the symbolic range one overcomes, i.e. begins to speak in the instant, into the subject. Lacan reformuliert hereby in the reason of Freuds theory of the Ödipuskomplexes, by assuming beside the rivalistischen „smallother one “a third instance, which large other in addition-stepped must, between the two rivals mediated, rules introduces, distance creates - which introduces law. The language authority meant thereby in the broadest sense the ability, not directly on „small the different “react toomust to be able i.e. observe to act but within „the range of the symbolic one “and to commentate be able.

Lacan describes the universe of the subject thus consisting of the ranges of the imaginary one and symbolic - to be supplemented these ranges still by thatRange of the material one. The material is not to be confounded with the reality, but forms the reason of its completely inaccessible for the subject ex-sistenz.

[Work on]

„the desiring subject “

direct thereby together hangs the fundamental desiring of the subject. Thereit first in the mirror stage as alienated subject experiences itself, experiences themselves it in the condition of the lack. The object of its desiring must be „small the different one “(in the mirror), there the subject in this stage directly nothing differently „has “than this „smallother one “. However this is „small different one “now evenly „away “- „outside “, in the mirror.

The object of desiring is called small therefore with Lacan object A. By this object „always a “object already lose-gone is understood. It can never reached, gets backbecome, since its only „its way consists “evenly of it, to be lost.

Around this theory of the lack and desiring Lacan establishes the part of its psychoanalytischen theory, those the classical psychonalaytischen personality structures, for instance to neuro tables or psychotischen personality structures, as specific ways,with the lack and desiring to go around, reconstructs.

Enjoying (jouissance) is what opposes desiring: while desiring huscht weasel-speedily by the significant ones, enjoying sticks like a tough Schleim at them, it not inRiver of desiring freely to give wants [2]. Before this Schleim disgust is felt, but this disgust can also change to a well-being feeling of the warmth and the inertia of the Schleims: Enjoying and disgust stand in an unstable relationship to each other andcan turn into into one another.

[Work on]

significant vs. Indication

of Ferdinand de Saussure takes over Lacan its terminology: Significantly, Signifikat, indications, opposition and difference are the key terms. The expression significant chain comes from Louis Hjelmslev.

From Saussure takes overLacan also the pattern of the painted tree, which is drawn over a boundary, under what the word stands „arbre “written. Saussure uses this picture for the elucidation of its distinction of the language character into a mental image, the Signifikat („the designated “- the presented tree)and - under the hyphen - the sound picture, the significant („the designation “- the written word) - the whole is an indication.

This pattern serves Lacan for the representation of the subject, which takes the place under the boundary in its theory,thus in the place of the Signifikats designated by the significant one. The subject is represented to the significant one (- process) in this way with Lacan as subjected. Lacan writes:

„A significant is, which represents a subject for another significant one. “(Jacques Lacan (1987): The fourFundamental ideas of the psychoanalysis. The seminar, book XI. S.: 208)

Lacans Saussure “adaptation” is exactly no such: Here all only the reference would be necessary that Lacan Saussures representation of the indication does not take over evenly , but </br> a) turns around and the significant one over the Signifikat places. </br> b) both indication sides the surrounding circle is void just like the two arrows at the sides of the chart. </br> c) the line between significant and Signifikat becomes of Lacan material, thus as barrier (“barre“) interprets.

That means:Signifiant and signifié - and that is crucial - form no more unit

  1. with Lacan and maintain
  2. no relationship to each other. The Cours determines the significant one reciprocally and associatively, as part one/perspective on a Zeichenganzen/s. Itthus only ex post office is actu at all assignable.

This reciprocity eliminates Lacan. The significant is separate and thus autonomous by the barrier from the Signifikat. Thus also the term of the indication is at all eliminated. S/s is not an indication, and/or. one“under erasure” (Nancy/Lacoue Labarthe 1973). That significantly Lacans represented not, reported and does not present nothing. While an indication becomes with Saussure at all only the indication, because it can be presupposed that it has a meaning, one “linguistic fact “is, S/s does not have a meaning. Therefore Lacan speaks of the pattern as an algorithm. A cook prescription is also an algorithm, and/or. a chain of algorithms, but the court, that if necessary. develops, if all algorithms will go through, no association is itsGuidance, but its effect. The algorithmic chain does not mark anything as the difference between its constituents, thus a purely differential spatiotemporal order.

[Work on]

the material, the imaginary and the symbolic

Lacan describe the material, the probably most puzzlingUnderstood his theory, when what is not symbolizable, when the proverbial „clay brick, which falls from the roof on the own head “, thus for instance a dream, from which one suffers and which (still) into a history transformable, liquefyable is not. ThatMaterial one is here always something incomprehensible, inexpressible, not controllable, a kind of horror or trauma. The material is also in the spheres of the Sexualität to see death and the force.

It makes also at all no sense, calculated thatMaterial ones explain to want (by definitionem is unexplainable), if without the explanation of the order of the symbolic one and the imaginary one one does. The material actual if at all - only as part of register register imaginary/symbolic/material assignable.

A transmission LacanPsychosemiologie into the philosophical observation in particular the popular culture (cinema, Science Fiction etc.) carries Slavoj out Žižek.

[Work on]

criticism

Julia Kristeva, a pupil of Lacan, criticizes it, since language appears with it as something over-historical. Furtherdo not occur the subject in the Poststrukturalismus; also is not for heterogeneity, it calls also the femaleness, a place: even a gap, a blank character affects only structure-forming another field. It extends the theory also with aspects of the historical materialism.

Anti- Ödipus (volume I) ( Deleuze, Félix Guattari) understands itself as criticism of the psychoanalysis about Jacques Lacan.

[Work on]

see also

Alan Sokal, Alain Badiou, Félix Guattari, Homi K. Bhabha, Frantz Fanon Lesbian Phallus, symptom, Sinthom, Strukturalismus, distortion (psychoanalysis), the thing, Jacques Alain Miller, Phallus, Phantasma, Slavoj Zizek, symbolic interactionism

[work on]

of works

  • expenditure for work
    • writings Ausgew. and hrsg. of Norbert Haas. 3Volumes. Oiled, Freiburg in mash gau: Walter 1973-1980; Expenditure for paperback with Suhrkamp 1975 (only Bd. 1); Weinheim, Berlin: Quadriga 1991 FF.ISBN 3-88679-903-4
    • the seminar.(Bde.: I, II, III, IV, VII, XI, XX) oiled: Walter 1978 FF. ; Weinheim, Berlin: Quadriga 1986 FF. ;Vienna: Turia and Kant 2000 FF.
  • J. - B. Pontalis: Recapitulatory ones showed the seminars IV - VI of Jacques Lacan. Vienna: Turia and Kant 1999 ISBN 3-85132-200-2
  • over the paranoische Psychose and their relations with the personality and early writings over the Paranoia.Over. by Hans Dieter Gondek. Hrsg. by Peter Engelmann.Vienna: Passages 2002 ISBN 3-85165-406-4
  • religion. Hrsg. by Ernst Ammann. Vienna: Turia and Kant 2002 ISBN 3-85132-328-9
[work on]

literature

  • tungsten Bergande: Lacans psychoanalysis and the Dekonstruktion, Vienna: Passages publishing house 2002. ISBN 3-85165-520-6
  • Tim Caspar Boehme: Ethics andEnjoy: Kant and Lacan. Vienna: Turia & Kant 2005 ISBN 3-85132-416-1
  • Claudia Blümle, Anne of the heaths (Hg.): Blickzähmung and eye deception. To Jacques Lacans picture theory, Zurich/Berlin, diaphanes 2005, ISBN 3-935300-80-8
  • Hermann long: The language and the unconscious: Jacques LacansFoundation of the psychoanalysis. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp 1986 (= Heidelberg, Univ., Diss., 1972) ISBN 3-518-28226-3
  • Nicolas Langlitz: The time of the psychoanalysis: Lacan and the problem of the meeting duration. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp 2005 ISBN 3-518-29357-5 on-line resources of the original work
  • Nina place: Object constitution as indication process: Jacques Lacans Psychosemiologie and system theory. Wiesbaden: DUV 1998 ISBN 3-8244-4276-0
  • Gerda Pagel: Jacques Lacan for introduction, Hamburg: Junius, 2002, 4. Edition, ISBN 3885063646
  • Elizabeth Roudinesco: Jacques Lacan: Report on a life, history of a system of thought.Cologne: Kiepenheuerand Witsch 1996 ISBN 3-462-02574-0 (Tb.: ISBN 3-596-13843-4)
  • Peter Widmer: Subversion of desiring: Jacques Lacan or the 2. Revolution of the psychoanalysis. Frankfurt/Main: Fischer paperback publishing house 1990 ISBN 3-596-24188-X
  • Samuel weber: Return to Freud. Jacques Lacans distortion of the psychoanalysis,Vienna: Passages publishing house 2000.ISBN 3-85165-424-2
[work on]

Web on the left of

  • {{#if: 
| | * Literature of and over Jacques Lacan in the catalog of the DDB

}}


person data
NAME Lacan, Jacques
ALTERNATIVE NAME
SHORT DESCRIPTION of French Psychoanalytiker
DATE OF BIRTH 13. April 1901
PLACE OF BIRTH Paris, France
DYING DATE 9. September 1981
DYING PLACE Paris, France
 

  > German to English > de.wikipedia.org (Machine translated into English)