Logic of Phantasy 81 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 81
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 18
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 18: Wednesday, April 26, 1967

Namely, the locus of the Other, first of all, in so far as, as such, it introduces the dualication of the field of the One, namely, even though we have here nothing other, properly speaking than the imaging of what I articulated as the original repetition, as that which means that the first One – this One so dear to the philosophers, and which, nevertheless, opposes some difficulty to their manipulations – that this One only emerges in a sort of retroactive way starting from the moment at which there is introduced a repetition as signifier.

换句话说，这个大它者的轨迹，首先它介绍这个「一」的领域的双重性。也就是说，即使适当地说，我们所拥有的，就仅是我所表达作为原初的重复的意象，没有别的。这意味着，这第一个「一」，哲学家爱不措手的这个「一」，当他们在处理时，会遭遇到不少困难。这个「一」只会以一种反弹的方式出现，从它被介绍为意符的重复的时刻開始。

This unary stroke – I remember the desperate cries of one of my most subtle listeners, then I simply picked out in a text by Freud, the einziger Zug, where it had passed unnoticed by this charming interlocutor who would have loved to have made the discovery himself. Do not believe, for all that, that it only exists there. Freud did not discover the unary stroke. And if you wish, simply among others – of course, (8) naturally, I am going to speak later about the Greeks – but simply to remain with current affairs, open the last number of this excellent journal, Arts Asiatiques. You will see in is the translation of a very pretty treatise on painting by a painter – happily I had the good luck to have little…, in any case, these are called kakemonos, by him – who is called Sheu Tao, and who makes a god, faith, of this unary stroke. He talks about nothing of that, yes, he talks about nothing but that for a few pages which are excellent.

这个「单一特征」，我记得有一位心思细腻的听众，绝望地喊叫，然后我仅仅挑选一篇梻洛伊德的文本，「单一特征」，被这位迷人的询问者视而不见，本来会很喜欢亲自去发现。儘管这样，你们不要相信，它只存在那里。佛洛伊德並没有发现这个「单一特征」。当然，假如在座的你们愿意听，我等一下将会为你们谈到希腊人，为了赶上时潮，让我们打开最近一期优秀的杂志「亚洲古代艺术」。你们将会看到一篇绝妙论文的翻译，论一位画家的图画。很荣幸地我拥有一幅被称之为道俗所绘的「浮世绘」画卷。他把这个「单一特征」成为一种神，一种信仰。是的，他並没有谈论他的画卷，除了优秀的几页。

This is called in Chinese – and not simply for painters, because the philosophers speak a lot about it – yi, which means One and hua, which means stroke. It is the unary stroke. It functioned a good deal, I assure you, before I dinned it into your ears here.

在中文里也是这样称呼，不仅是对於画家而言，因为哲学家时常谈论到它。「一」这个字形，意味着「一」跟「劃」，意思是「一劃」。这就是「单一特征」。我告诉你们，它的功用很多，我要跟你们喋喋不休。

But the important thing, then, also, is to recognise … (I know, I know it is written as if … it is very badly done my Chinese character, but I do not have here, I do not have my … yes, good, yes, ok) … to recognise here in this essential function which requires in opposition, as if in a mirror, the field of the Other to this field of the enigmatic One, properly speaking, that is imaged for a long time in my graph by the connotation, signifier of capital O barred, S(O/). Which also allows in this article that I entitled “Remarks…”, and which gives the formula for what is called, in psychoanalysis and in the Freudian text, on of the forms of identification, identification to the ego ideal, whose stroke I put precisely in the Other, as indicating at the level of the Other this mirror reference, from which there starts precisely for the subject the vein of everything that is identification.

但是重要的是要体认出、、、（我知道，我知道它被写下来，好像是我的中文书法不好看，但是我没有机会练书法）。重要的是要体认出，这个基本的功用，，要求大它者的领域，跟这个谜团一般的「一」，互相对立，好像镜中影像。适当地说，长久以来，我用欲望的构图表达它的内涵，那就是大写字母O被劃一槓，代表括弧内的大它者被禁制的生命主体的意符。在这篇文章里，我能够给予一个标题：「论述认同的形式」。它提供这个公式，在精神分析学及佛洛伊德的文本里，所谓的对於自我理想的认同。它的重点，我将它放在大它者身上，从大它者的层次，指示这个镜像的指标。对於生命主体而言，一切跟认同有关的脉络都从那里開始。

Namely, what is especially – in the field that we are speaking about today, that of the dyad – to be distinguished (Here Lacan goes to the board), to be distinguished as being situated, and being situated as distinct from two other functions which are respectively that of repetition (we will put identification in the middle) and finally the relation … I told you the last time what should be thought about anything whatsoever which may authorise itself from is – of the sexual dyad. I called it ridiculous, this relation that people speak about as something which would have the slightest consistency when it is sex that is at stake.

换句话说，特别在我们今天谈论到的领域，二元对立的领域，这里要区别出来，作为跟其它两个功用区分，一个是重复的功用（我们将认同摆放在中间），另一个是性的二元对立的关系，（上一次网告诉过你们，什麽东西可以自己授权）。我认为这个关系很荒谬，人们谈论到这个关系，当着是几乎没有什麽一致性，因为岌岌可危的是性。

I would simply, here, make one remark to you. At the very time – just after that of the Sophist – Aristotle
intervenes, when he founds in a fashion which it is correct to say that – whatever may be the dissolution that we have been able, subsequently, to operate on the operations of logic – of which it is correct to say that its Categories preserve an unshakeable character. I have already strongly urged you to take up this little treatise. It is purely admirable for everything that concerns this exercise which may allow you to give a sense to the term subject. The enumeration of categories … I am not going to go over it for you, that of place, of time, of quantity, of why, of how, etc. Is it not striking that after an enumeration which remains so exhaustive, he notices that, precisely, Aristotle did not introduce into the categories this sort of relation that one could write – try it a little, you will tell me all about it – the sexual relation?

在此，我仅想再说一句。就在此时，就在辩护士之後，亞里斯多德介入，他发现，不管我们使用什麽方法，我们随后能够在逻辑的运作上演算，我们可以正确地说，它的范畴保存一种无可动摇的特性。我已经强烈要求你们，去阅读那篇论文。那是很令人赞赏的文章，因为跟这个练习有关的一切，都会让你们感受到「生命主体」这个术语的意义。范畴的列举，我跟你们温习一下，有空间、时间、数量、原因、及方式等等。这难道不是耐人寻味的吗？在无穷尽列举之後，他注意到，的确，亞里斯多德並没有介绍这种关系进入范畴，我们能够写得出来的关系，那就是性的关系。

(9) All logicians have the habit of exemplifying the different types of relations that they distinguish as transitive, intransitive, reflexive, etc., illustrating them, for example, from the terms of kinship;if someone, if A is the father of B, B is the son of A and so on. It is rather curious, at least as curious as the absente in the Aristotelian categories of the sexual relation, that no one has ever dared to say that if A is the husband of B, then B is the wife of A.

（第九）所用的逻辑专家都有这个习惯，举例说明各种关系，他们区别为及物、不及物、反身等等，举例说明它们，例如，用亲属关系的术语：假如某个人，假如甲是乙的父亲，乙是甲的儿子，等等。令人好奇的是，至少就像亞里斯多德的范畴缺少性的关系，那样令人好奇。没有人胆敢说，假如甲是乙的丈夫，那麽乙就是甲的妻子。

This relationship, nevertheless, of course, forms part of our question concerning what is at stake, namely, this question of the status, which may be founded by these terms which are properly speaking those that I have put forward under the form of man and woman.

可是，这个关系会形成我们置疑是岌岌可危的一部分，换句话说，地位的问题。这些术语所建立的基础，适当地说，我曾经提出来，以男人跟女人的形式。

In order to do it, it is quite pointless to project – to use a term that the psychoanalyst uses at in all kinds of ways – to project the one which comes to mark the field of the Other, into what I am now going to call x, in order to mark clearly that this One was nothing other, up to the present than a denomination. That it is necessary to denominate from the One of the unary stroke what it is here between the small o and the big Other, is something that it is only an error to consider as unifying this field x, what is more making it unitive.

为了要这样做，这是完全没有意义，以各种方式，使用一个心理学家使用的术语，将大它者领域标示的这个「一」，投射到我所说的未知点上，为了清楚地标示，这个「一」迄今道道地地就是一个「命名」。我们需要根据这个具有单一特征的「一」，命名小客体跟这个大它者之间的关系。我们若是将它认为是统一这个未知的领域，那就错误了，因为它只是使它更加是统一而已。

Naturally, it is not only yesterday that this sliding took place, and it is not the privilege of psychoanalysts.

当然，这种滑溜不仅昨天才发生，也不是精神分析师才会发现的特权。

The confusion of a Being – that Being – the Supreme, with the One as such, is something that is incarnated in an eminent fashion, for example, in the writings of Plotinus. Everyone knows that.

「生命实存」的混肴，这个「崇高的实存」跟这个「一」的本身的混肴，生动地具体表现在普罗提拿斯的着作里。每一个人都知道。

The prevalence of this fundamental median function – which is not nothing, since it operates – that I called the ego ideal, in so far as there depends on it a whole cascade of secondary identifications, specifically that of the ideal ego, which is the kernel of the ego. All of this has been presented and remains inscribed at its place and in its time, and just by itself gives rise to the question about the motive which necessitates the multiplicity of these identifications. It is clear that it is enough to refer to the little optical schema that I gave of it which, for its part, is only a metaphor, while this has nothing metaphorical about it, since they are metaphors which precisely are operative in the structure!

基本的中庸之道非常盛行，不是没有意义。因为它运作，以我所谓的自我的理想，全部的次要认同完全依靠着它，明确地说，就是理想的自我功用，这是自我的核心。所有这些都被呈现出来，始终被铭记在它的位置跟它的时间，本身也产生这个关於动机的问题，使这些认同有必要加倍发展。显而易见的，我们只要提到我所给予的眼睛凝视的基模就足够了。就它而言，那只是一个比喻。虽然它本身没有比喻的地方，它们的比喻的功用，确实是在结构里运作。

In short, that the link between the One and the Other by identification and especially if it takes on this reversible form which makes of the One the supreme Being is properly speaking typical of the philosophical error. Naturally, if I told you to read Plato’s Sophist, it is because in it people are far from falling into this One, and Plotinus is here the best reference in order to test it.

总之，这个「一」跟「大它者」之间的认同关系，特别是它具有翻转的形式，以崇高的生命实存当着是这个「一」，适当地说，这是哲学典型的错误。当然，假如我告诉你们阅读柏拉图的「辩护士」，因为里面的人们根本就没有成为这个「一」，你们若是要验证一下，普罗提拿斯在此是最佳的例子。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw