Logic of Phantasy 116 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 116
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 24
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 24: Wednesday, June 21, 1967

But, all the same, what I do not tell him, but which is the position from which he starts, is that it is only the truth, in the final analysis, which is here posed as having to be searched for in the faults (failles) of statements. Faults that in short, I give him plenty of time – that I almost recommend him – to multiply, but which then, of course suppose, suppose at the source of the very rule that I give him, a coherence implying the eventual making good of the aforesaid faults. A making good which is to be done, according to what norms if not those evoked, suggested, by the presence of the dimension of truth. This dimension is inevitable, in the instauration of analytic discourse.

但是，同样地，我所没有告诉他的，那就是他開始的位置。追根究底，就是这個真理在这裡被提出，作为必须要被搜寻的问题，在陈述内容的错误裡。这些错误加倍增加，總之，我给予他许多时间，我几乎推荐他，但是在我给他的规则的来源，这些错误假定会有一个一致性，暗示着前述的错误最後会得到改正。这个改正应该做，依照那些名称所建议的，即使不是它们所诉求，依照真理向度的存在。这个真理的向度是無可避免的，在精神分析真理論述的定位。

Analytic discourse, is a discourse submitted to this law of soliciting this truth – which I already spoke about in the terms which are here the most appropriate: a truth that speaks – to solicit it, in short, to state a ver-dict, dict that is truthful.

精神分析的真理論述，是遞交给召唤这個真理的法则的真理論述。我已经谈論到它，使用在此再贴切不过的術语：真理会说话。为了召唤真理，總之，陈述一個真理的判决。

Naturally, from this, the rule takes on a quite different value! This truth which speaks and whose verdict one is waiting for … one strokes it, one tames it, one pats it on the back! This is the true sense of the rule!

当然，從这裡，这個规则形成一個相当不同的价值！会说话的这個真理，我们正在等待的这個真理的判决，我们撫摸它，我们驯服它，我们轻拍它的背部！这就是这條规则的真实的意義！

One wants him to do better. And in order for him to do better one pretends, in short – this is the sense of the rule of free association – one pretends not to be concerned about it and not to give a fuck about it, to be thinking about something else, in that way it will perhaps let something important appear. That is the principle. These things … I almost blush, anyway … to be making a big deal of it here! But do not forget that I am dealing with psychoanalysts. namely, with those who – as regards what I am saying here, which is, in any case, tangible and almost within everyone’s reach – who have the greatest tendency to forget it and, of course, they have the strongest reasons for that. I am going to say what they are right away.

我们想要他做得更好。为了讓他做得更好，我们假装，總之，这是自由联想的规则的意義，我们假装不關心它，根本不在乎它，这样我们才能思考某件其它的事情，它才会讓某件重要的事情出现。这就是原则。这些事情，容我厚颜地自誇，可是驚天动地的大事。但是不要忘记，我处理的对象是精神分析师。换句话说，關於我目前在此所说的，無論如何，很具体，而且几乎是老妪皆懂，精神分析师有最大的倾向，会忘记真理的存在。当然他们会忘记，也是振振有词。我马上就要说出他们是怎样的特性。

(6) So then the question is there. I highlight it in passing. The fact is that, in short, one questions the truth of a discourse, which – if it is true, following Freud, as I said earlier – is the truth o a discourse which can say yes or no, at the same time, about the same thing (since it is a discourse that is not subject to the principle of contradiction) and which in being said, in being constructed, as a funny old discourse, introduces a truth. This is also fundamental!

（第六）所以问题就在那裡。我偶然地强调它。事实是，總之，我们质疑一个真理論述的真理，如我早先说过，追随佛洛伊德，这個真理論述的真理，对於相同的事情，能够同时肯定，也能够同时否定，（这种真理論述並不隸属於矛盾的原则）。当它正在被说，正在被建構，作为一個好笑的古老的真理論述，它介绍了一個真理。这也是最基本的。

For proof, so fundamental (even though of course it is not always brought out in the type of teaching that I evoked earlier), it is so fundamental that it is from there, that there comes the shock with which we know or sense, we have the testimony, Freud had to deal with, when he had … it is surely there that it happened – to explain to his band (you know, the Viennese pals, huh, on Wednesday) that he had a patient who had dreams that were expressly designed to drop Freud in it! A shock! A shock in the audience and even, probably, an outcry!

作为证据，这是如此的基本，（即使它未必是以我早先召唤的教学的方式所显现），这是如此的基本，以致從那裡開始，我们知道或感受到，这個震撼的来临。我们拥有这個证词，佛洛伊德必须要处理的，当他必须要跟他的聼眾解释，这件事确实是發生在那裡。（你们知道，我指的是星期三，那些维也纳的聼眾朋友。）佛洛伊德有一個病人，做了一些梦，这些梦被设计要将佛洛伊德牵涉進去！那真是一大震撼！在聼眾裡面引起很大的震撼，甚至很可能是一种呐喊！

Since, moreover, one sees that Freud … finally, sets about taking some trouble to resolve the question.

而且，我们看出，佛洛伊德最後開始费些心力来解决这個问题。

He explains it, of course, as he can. Namely, that dreams are not the unconscious, that dreams can be liars. It nevertheless remains that the least that one can say is that you must not push this unconscious! I mean if this dimension is to be preserved, as Freud does, it is in the name of the following. That the unconscious for its part preserves a truth that it does avow! And that if one pushes it, well then, of course, it can start lying on all cylinders. With the means that it has. But what does all that mean?

当然，他儘可能解释它。换句话说，梦並不就是無意識，梦有时候会说谎话。可是，这個问题仍然存在，至少我们能够说，你们一定不要逼迫这個無意識！我的意思是，假如这個向度应该被保存，如佛洛伊德所做的，那是用以下的名義。就本身而言，無意識保存了一個它确实宣称的真理！假如我们逼迫它，当然它会開始会在各個管道说谎。用它拥有的工具。那是什麽意思？

Naturally, the unconscious only has a sense, except for the imbeciles who think that it is evil, only has a sense, henceforth, if one sees that it is not, what we will call, like that, if you wish, a “whole subject” (sujet a part entiere).

当然，無意識只有一個意義，除了有些白痴以为它是邪惡。它只有一個意義，假如我们看出，它並不是一個我们所谓的「完整的生命主体」。

Or more exactly that it is before, before the whole subject. There is a language before the subject … is supposed … to know … anything whatsoever.

更确实地说，無意識是在完整的生命主体之前。这是一個在生命主体之前的语言，它应该知道任何事情。

There is then a logical priority of the senses of the truth with respect to anything, described as subject, which may come to dwell in it.

真理的意義有一個逻辑的優先顺序，關於被描述为生命主体的任何事情，这個優先顺序会渐渐驻住在裡面。

It is this that … I know well that when I say these things, when I wrote them for the first time in the Freudian thing, this produced … in any case this had its little romantic resonance. Who cares, I cannot do anything about it. The truth is a personage to whom there has for a very long time been given a skin, hair and even a well to dwell in and to act the imp. It is a matter of finding the reason for that. What I want simply to tell you is that it is, as I told you earlier, impossible to exclude, for the reason that you are going to see.

当我说这些事情时，当我第一次在「論佛洛伊德的真实界」，书写它们时，我知道得很清楚，这会產生，無論如何，这個会有它的小小的浪漫的迴响。谁又在乎，我其实对它束手無策。真理是一個大人物，长久以来，它被给予皮膚、頭髮、甚至是重新装饰，然後表现出他的精神。问题是找出这样做的裡由。我所要告诉你们的僅是，如我早早告诉过你们，它不可能被排除掉，因为你们将会看到的理由。

The fact is that if interpretation does not have this relation to what there is no means of calling anything other than the truth; if it is only what, finally, one shelters behind, like that, in our everyday manipulations, huh … one is not going to worry, like that, the little dears that one is supervising, stick on their backs the responsibility of truth (7)

事实是，假如解释跟顾名思義的真理没有關係，假如真理最後僅是我们躲避的地方，在我们日常的操控当中，我们不要憂虑，我们正在监视的这个小小的亲爱的人物，他将真理的责任扛在他们的背上。

… So then one tells them that the interpretation has, or not, “succeeded”, as it is put, because it has … what? –

然後我们告诉他们，解释有没有如其所说地成功，因为它有、、、

This is the criterion, huh! – Had its discourse-effect! … Which can be nothing other … than a discourse!

这就是標準！它拥有它的真理論述的效应！那道道地地就是一個真理的論述！

Namely, that there was material, it rebounded, the chap continued to blather on.

换句话说，那裡会有物质反弹回来，那個人会继续喋喋不休。

Good. But if that is it then … if it is only a pure discourse-effect, this has a name that psychoanalysis knows perfectly well and which is, moreover, a problem for it, which is funny. This, and not anything else, is very precisely what is called suggestion! And if interpretation were only something that produces material, I mean, if one radically eliminates the dimension of truth, all interpretation is only suggestion.

好吧。但是假如事情是这样，假如那只是一個纯粹的真理論述的效应，这会有一個精神分析学耳熟能详的名字，这对於它是一個问题，好笑的问题。就是这個问题，不是别的，这确实是我们所谓的「建议」！假如解释只是某件產生物质的东西，假如我们積極地减少这個真理的向度，那所有的解释其实只是建议而已。

This is what puts in their place these very interesting speculations – because one clearly sees that they are only designed to avoid the word truth – when Mr Glover speaks about correct or incorrect interpretation, he can only do so by avoiding this dimension of the truth and he does it, the dear man, (a man who knows very well what he is saying) not simply to avoid the dimension – for you are going to see that he does not avoid it. only look. The fact is that one can speak about the dimension of truth, but that it is very difficult to speak about a “false” interpretation.

这就是为什麽我们用这些有趣的推理来代替它们，因为我们很清地看出，它们被设计就僅是要避免「真理」这个字眼。当格洛波谈論到正确或不正确的解释时，他只能这样做，以逃避真理的向度，他成功地做到，这位可爱的人（他心知肚明，他正在说些什麽），他不僅逃避这個真理的向度。你们将会看出，他其实並没有逃避掉。你们不妨瞧瞧！事实是，我们能够谈論到真理的向度，但是我们很难谈論一個「虚假」的解释。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com