StartseiteGruppenForumMehrZeitgeist
Web-Site durchsuchen
Diese Seite verwendet Cookies für unsere Dienste, zur Verbesserung unserer Leistungen, für Analytik und (falls Sie nicht eingeloggt sind) für Werbung. Indem Sie LibraryThing nutzen, erklären Sie dass Sie unsere Nutzungsbedingungen und Datenschutzrichtlinie gelesen und verstanden haben. Die Nutzung unserer Webseite und Dienste unterliegt diesen Richtlinien und Geschäftsbedingungen.

Ergebnisse von Google Books

Auf ein Miniaturbild klicken, um zu Google Books zu gelangen.

Lädt ...

O Seminário. Livro 19. ...Ou Pior. Coleção Campo Freudiano no Brasil (Em Portuguese do Brasil)

von Jacques Lacan

MitgliederRezensionenBeliebtheitDurchschnittliche BewertungDiskussionen
291809,248 (3)Keine
'A chance meeting of a sewing machine and an umbrella. The impossible face-off between a whale and a polar bear. One was devised by Lautréamont; the other punctuated by Freud. Both are memorable. Why so? They certainly tickle something in us. Lacan says what it is. It's about man and woman. There is neither accord nor harmony between man and woman. There's no programme, nothing has been predetermined: every move is a shot in the dark, which in modal logic is called contingency. There's no way out of it. Why is it so inexorable, that is, so necessary? It really has to be reckoned that this stems from an impossibility. Hence the theorem: "There is no sexual relation." The formula has become famous. In the place of what thereby punctures a hole in the real, there is a plethora of luring and enchanting images, and there are discourses that prescribe what this relation must be. These discourses are mere semblance, the artifice of which psychoanalysis has made apparent to all. In the twenty-first century, this is beyond dispute. Who still believes that marriage has a natural foundation? Since it's a fact of culture, one devotes oneself to inventing. One cobbles together different constructions from whatever one can. It may be better ... or worse. "There is Oneness." At the heart of the present Seminar, this aphorism, which hitherto went unnoticed, complements the "there is no" of sexual relation, stating what there is. It should be heard as One-all-alone. Alone in jouissance (which is fundamentally auto-erotic) and alone in significance (outside any semantics). Here begins Lacan's late teaching. Everything he has already taught you is here, and yet everything is new, overhauled, topsy-turvy. Lacan had taught the primacy of the Other in the order of truth and the order of desire. Here he teaches the primacy of the One in its real dimension. He rejects the Two of sexual relation and that of signifying articulation. He rejects the Big Other, the fulcrum of the dialectic of the subject, disputing its existence, which he consigns to fiction. He depreciates desire and promotes jouissance. He rejects Being, which is mere semblance. Henology, the doctrine of the One, here outclasses ontology, the theory of Being. What about the symbolic order? Nothing more than the reiteration of the One in the real. Hence the abandoning of graphs and topological surfaces in favour of knots made of rings of string, each of which is an unlinked One. Recall that Seminar XVIII sighed for a discourse that would not be semblance. Well, with Seminar XIX, we have an attempt at a discourse that would take its point of departure in the real. The radical thought of modern Uni-dividualism.' Jacques-Alain Miller… (mehr)
Kürzlich hinzugefügt vonJose_Morales, JAGOLP, joewh, Luke-F, link_rae, ishag_bureau, Crooper, bethelpcUSA
NachlassbibliothekenIris Murdoch
Keine
Lädt ...

Melde dich bei LibraryThing an um herauszufinden, ob du dieses Buch mögen würdest.

Keine aktuelle Diskussion zu diesem Buch.

Jacques Lacan's 19th Seminar is titled "...or Worse," a name that he seems to think is very witty and funny, but that makes no sense to me. It doesn't seem to connect in any meaningful way to the themes he explores here. It is also worth noting that in this year, Lacan ran his usual seminar at the Sorbonne in conjunction with a series of talks on the topic "The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge" at the Sainte-Anne Hospital, the original location of his seminar. Jacques-Alain Miller includes those pertinent to "...or Worse" in this book, while the three other Sainte-Anne talks are collected in Talking to Brick Walls.

In his earlier years Lacan spent a lot of time talking about the interaction between subject and Other. One of the most crucial revisions he undertook of this idea occurred in Seminar XI, where he develops the concept of the "subject who is supposed to know." This concept allows him to show how the subject's desire is directed at an illusion. The analyst, for instance, is constructed as an imaginary master, a subject who is supposed to know, but this mastery is merely a product of the analysand's fantasy.

The ideas we get in Seminar XIX are essentially a very complicated reworking of this idea through two channels.

The first channel is that of Plato's Parmenides. Here, Plato considers the nature of the One and formulates some important caveats. Foremost among these is that the requirement that the Form/Idea be seen as something formal and absent. Think of it in the terms of Borges's story "On Exactitude in Science," which describes an empire where exact map-making is taken to such an extreme that they make a one-to-one scale map. The impracticality of such a move is what Plato seeks to avoid: if the One were in the world, it would fill it up completely, a redundant replica, like Borges's map. For that reason, the One can only be imagined - and thus, from Lacan's perspective, the One is a zero (it only exists formally) that is perceived as a one (because it is mistaken for something, despite its inexistence).

The second channel is the mathematical one, which is primarily drawn from Frege and set theory. Lacan harps on about how it is Frege who discovers the importance of the number zero to the sequence of integers. The number zero, and the empty set, both again show something that exists formally but that, at the same time, has no existence. The "one" is thus, in a sense, zero, so that there is "no relationship" between two terms as such: zero (formal one) plus one (actual one) always equals one.

If we put all this back into analytic relationship, then we see that it consists of a subject who mistakes the "formal one" of the analyst for reality - the analyst is actually a zero, a nothingness, that seems only to exist in a formal sense. This is becomes true in Lacanian theory for all subjective interactions, whereby the subject tries to connect with an Other that *appears* to be "one" but is actually zero. In fact, every "one" is in this situation: all ones are actually empty sets, entities that appear to exist only because they are formal markers of inexistence. That is why his formula "Y a de l'un" ("There is only one") has a double meaning: insofar as there is only the (formal) one, there are only zeroes.

While all of this theorizing and interplay between different fields is very clever in a formal sense, I don't really see the point of any of it. Lacan is not really doing anything amazingly new: the genuine revolution happened in Seminar XI, so that what he presents us with here is a highly formalized (and not very useful) restatement of those concepts. Still, it could have been worse... ( )
1 abstimmen vernaye | May 23, 2020 |
keine Rezensionen | Rezension hinzufügen
Du musst dich einloggen, um "Wissenswertes" zu bearbeiten.
Weitere Hilfe gibt es auf der "Wissenswertes"-Hilfe-Seite.
Gebräuchlichster Titel
Originaltitel
Alternative Titel
Ursprüngliches Erscheinungsdatum
Figuren/Charaktere
Wichtige Schauplätze
Wichtige Ereignisse
Zugehörige Filme
Epigraph (Motto/Zitat)
Widmung
Erste Worte
Zitate
Letzte Worte
Hinweis zur Identitätsklärung
Verlagslektoren
Werbezitate von
Originalsprache
Anerkannter DDC/MDS
Anerkannter LCC

Literaturhinweise zu diesem Werk aus externen Quellen.

Wikipedia auf Englisch

Keine

'A chance meeting of a sewing machine and an umbrella. The impossible face-off between a whale and a polar bear. One was devised by Lautréamont; the other punctuated by Freud. Both are memorable. Why so? They certainly tickle something in us. Lacan says what it is. It's about man and woman. There is neither accord nor harmony between man and woman. There's no programme, nothing has been predetermined: every move is a shot in the dark, which in modal logic is called contingency. There's no way out of it. Why is it so inexorable, that is, so necessary? It really has to be reckoned that this stems from an impossibility. Hence the theorem: "There is no sexual relation." The formula has become famous. In the place of what thereby punctures a hole in the real, there is a plethora of luring and enchanting images, and there are discourses that prescribe what this relation must be. These discourses are mere semblance, the artifice of which psychoanalysis has made apparent to all. In the twenty-first century, this is beyond dispute. Who still believes that marriage has a natural foundation? Since it's a fact of culture, one devotes oneself to inventing. One cobbles together different constructions from whatever one can. It may be better ... or worse. "There is Oneness." At the heart of the present Seminar, this aphorism, which hitherto went unnoticed, complements the "there is no" of sexual relation, stating what there is. It should be heard as One-all-alone. Alone in jouissance (which is fundamentally auto-erotic) and alone in significance (outside any semantics). Here begins Lacan's late teaching. Everything he has already taught you is here, and yet everything is new, overhauled, topsy-turvy. Lacan had taught the primacy of the Other in the order of truth and the order of desire. Here he teaches the primacy of the One in its real dimension. He rejects the Two of sexual relation and that of signifying articulation. He rejects the Big Other, the fulcrum of the dialectic of the subject, disputing its existence, which he consigns to fiction. He depreciates desire and promotes jouissance. He rejects Being, which is mere semblance. Henology, the doctrine of the One, here outclasses ontology, the theory of Being. What about the symbolic order? Nothing more than the reiteration of the One in the real. Hence the abandoning of graphs and topological surfaces in favour of knots made of rings of string, each of which is an unlinked One. Recall that Seminar XVIII sighed for a discourse that would not be semblance. Well, with Seminar XIX, we have an attempt at a discourse that would take its point of departure in the real. The radical thought of modern Uni-dividualism.' Jacques-Alain Miller

Keine Bibliotheksbeschreibungen gefunden.

Buchbeschreibung
Zusammenfassung in Haiku-Form

Aktuelle Diskussionen

Keine

Beliebte Umschlagbilder

Gespeicherte Links

Bewertung

Durchschnitt: (3)
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3 1
3.5
4
4.5
5

Bist das du?

Werde ein LibraryThing-Autor.

 

Über uns | Kontakt/Impressum | LibraryThing.com | Datenschutz/Nutzungsbedingungen | Hilfe/FAQs | Blog | LT-Shop | APIs | TinyCat | Nachlassbibliotheken | Vorab-Rezensenten | Wissenswertes | 203,232,480 Bücher! | Menüleiste: Immer sichtbar