sinthome 08 Jacques Lacan

sinthome 08

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Le Sinthome
病徵
II. Seminar 2: Wednesday 9 December 1975

I have on many occasions familiarised you with the fact that the Borromean knot, as one might say, in the third dimension, consists in this relationship which ensures that what is enveloped with respect to one of these circles is found to be enveloping with
respect to the other. This is why something that you ordinarily see in the form of the armillary sphere is exemplary. The armillary sphere used, that is used because it has sextants, is always presented as follows (Fig II-11). Namely, that in order to trace it
out in a clear way, the blue circle is always going to be reduced in the following way around the circle that here I have drawn in green. And that finally the red circle, in accordance with the reduction of the interaxis (l’entraxe) must be like that. I said it
earlier. There you are.

在許多場合，我曾經讓你們熟悉這個事實：波羅米因結，我們可以說是處於第三向度，它的組成的關係保證，這三個圓圈所被包裹的，被發現自己也正在包裹其他另外一個圓圈。這就是為什麽，你們在以這個圓環的形式通常所看的，是個典範。這個被使用的圓環，因為它們是六個一組，所以被使用，它總是被呈現如下（圖形II-11）。換句話說，為了清楚地追蹤它，這個藍色的圓圈總是以下面的方式環繞著這個圓圈化簡，我在此用綠色畫的這個圓圈。最後，為了跟這個內部的軸心相一致，這個紅色的圓圈必須像我早先說過那樣。你們看，就是這樣。

On the other hand, the difference between this circle and its ordinary arrangement in any manipulation of the armillary sphere, will find itself distanced if, let us say, for this circle which appears here in the middle there is found, for this circle there is found substituted the following arrangement (Fig II-12). Namely, that it cannot be reduced because it will be enveloping with respect to the red circle, and enveloped with respect to the green circle.

在另一方面，圓圈跟操作圓環球面時，它的通常的安排之間的差異，會發現自己被拉開距離，例如，假如出現在中央這裏的這個圓圈，在那裏被找到，因為那裏被找到的這個圓圈，代替了底下的安排（圖形II-12）。換句話說，它無法被化減，因為它將會包裹這個紅色的圓圈，並且被綠色的圓圈所包裹。

I am drawing again what is involved (Fig II-13), you see that here the green circle is thus found situated with respect to the blue circle and the red circle. Here even my manifest the awkwardness with which the Borromean knot, the very type of the knot, is necessarily manipulated.

我再一次畫牽涉到的內容（圖形II-13），你們看得出來，在此綠色的圓圈因此被找到，位在跟藍色圓圈及紅色圓圈的關係。在此，即使是我的證明是笨拙，波羅米因結，這種的結，還必須如此笨拙地操作。

(32) The fundamental character of this utilisation of the knot is to allow there to be illustrated the triplicity that results from a consistency which is only affected from the Imaginary, from a hole as fundamental which emerges in the Symbolic. And on the other hand, of an ex-sistence, written as I write it ex-sistence, which for its part belongs to the Real which is its fundamental character.

這個波羅米因結的基本特性，是要能夠容許這個三重性被具體展現，這個三重性來自這個一致性的結果，這個一致性則是受到想像界，從出現在意符界的一個空洞，作為基本的東西。在另一方面，一個預先的存在，被我書寫成為「預先–存在」。就它本身而言，它屬於這個真實界，真實界是預先存在的特性。

This method, since what is at stake is a method, is a method which presents itself as hopeless. Without hope of in any way breaking the constitutive knot of the Symbolic, the Imaginary and the Real.

因為岌岌可危是一個方法，這個方法呈現自己作為無助的狀態。它沒有希望以任何方法突破這個意符界，想像界，及真實界的構成的本質的結。

In this regard, it rejects there being constituted, it must be said, and in an altogether lucid way, a virtue, a virtue even described as theological, and that is why our apprehension, our analytic apprehension of what is involved in this knot is the negative of religion.

我們必須說，在這一方面，它拒絕以清晰的方式，被構成本質，而清晰的方式卻是一個優點，一個被描述為神學的優點。這就是為什麽我們的理解，我們分析的理解，對於這個結所牽涉到的，與宗教恰恰相反。

People no longer believe in the object as such, and that is why I deny that the object can be grasped by any organ. Since the organ itself is perceived as a tool. And that being perceived as a tool, as a separate tool, it is, in this respect, conceived as an object. In Chomsky’s conception, the object is itself only tackled by an object. It is by the restitution as such of the subject, in so far as it can only be divided, divided by the very operation of language, that analysis finds its diffusion. It finds its diffusion in the fact that it puts science as such into question. Science in as much as it makes of an object, that it makes of an object a subject, while it is the subject which is of itself divided. We do not believe in the object, but we affirm desire and from this affirming of desire, we infer the cause as objectivised.

人們不再相信這個客體的本身，那就是為什麽我否認，這個客體能夠被任何器官所掌握。因為器官本身被感覺當著是一個工具。器官既然被感覺當著是一個工具，當著是一個分開的工具，在這一方面，它被構想當著是一個客體。在莊士基的觀念裏，這個客體的本身，只能夠當著是一個客體來處理。憑藉著生命主體的恢復，這個主體只能是分裂的，被語言的運作所分裂，精神分析學發現語言會括散。它發現語言會擴散，當它質疑到科學的本身時。當科學在解釋一個客體，它把這個客體當著是主體，然而主體的本身卻是分裂。我們不相信這個客體，但是我們肯定人的欲望，從這個對於人的欲望的肯定開始，我們推論出的原因，被客體化。

(34) The desire to know encounters obstacles. It is to incarnate this obstacle that I invented the knot and one must break oneself into the knot. I mean that it is the knot, the knot alone which is the support, the conceivable support of a relationship between
anything whatsoever and something else. If on the one hand the knot is abstract it must be thought of and conceived of as concrete.

想要知道的欲望遭遇到阻礙。為了具體表現這個阻礙，我杜撰這個波羅米因結，我們必須將自己想像成為這個結。我的意思是，就是這個結，只有這個結，才是這個支持，才是這個關係的可想像的支持，這個關係處於任何東西及某件其他東西之間。在某一方面，雖然這個結是抽象的，可是我們必須想像或構想它是具體的。

The reason why, since today, as you clearly see, I am very weary, very weary from this American ordeal where, as I have told you, I was certainly recompensed, because I was able, with these figures that you see here more or less substantialised, substantialised in writing, in drawings, I was able to create with them what I will
call agitation, emotion. The sensed as mental, the sentimental is weak- minded. Because it is always from some angle or other reducible to the Imaginary. The imagination of consistency goes straight to the impossible of rupture, but this is why the rupture can always be the Real. The Real as impossible and which is no less compatible with the aforesaid imagination and even constitutes it.

今天，你們很清楚地看出，為什麽我經歷美國的考驗回來，如此身心俱疲。我曾經告訴過你們，在美國那個地方，我確實是受到豐厚的獎賞，因為我能夠運作你們在此看到的這些圖形，相當具體生動地，運用在書寫及描繪當中。我能夠使用它們來創造我所謂的興奮激情。可是這種興奮激情，對於意志薄弱的人，是精神層面的煽情。因為它總是從某個角度，化減到想像界的層次。這個一致性的想像，直接到達斷裂的不可能界，這就是為什麽這個斷裂，總是在真實界。這個真實界，作為不可能界，跟前述的想像界，是可以相容並存的，甚至是構成它的內涵。

I have no hope, in any way, of escaping from what I signal as the weak-mindedness of this debate. I can only escape from it, like anyone else, according to my means.

無論如何，我沒有希望逃避，我指明我的演說是討好意志薄弱者的煽情。像任何其他的人一樣，我只能依照我的方式，溜之大吉。

Namely, as if marching on the spot, sure of not being assured of any verifiable progress except in the long term.

換句說，好像在原地踏步行軍，我確定我並沒有獲得任何可驗證的進展，除了從長遠的觀點來看。

It is in a fabulatory way that I am affirming that the Real – as I think it in my pen-se in my pen-se léger – does not work without really comprising, the Real effectively lying, without really comprising the hole that subsists in it because of the fact that its
consistency is nothing other than that of the totality of the knot that it makes with the Symbolic and the Imaginary. The knot qualifies as Borromean. In other words uncuttable without dissolving the myth that makes of the subject, of the subject not supposed, namely as real, no more diverse than anybody that can be signalled
as parlêtre: a body which has a respectable status, in the common sense of the word, only from this knot.

使用寓言的方式，我肯定地說，真實界的運作，必然會形成這個空洞，（如同我在「我的想念中」，我想到它），真實界有效地存在那裡，形成這個空洞，作為它的本質，因為這個事實，它的一致性道道地地就是波羅米因結的整體性的一致性，真實界用意符界及想像界組成的結。這個結的特質是波羅米因結。換句話說，當它一但被切割，它就會瓦解這個解釋生命主體的神話，這個生命主體被認為不是處於真實界，它跟任何人一樣，能夠被標明是一塊畫板，隨你怎麽畫：人的身體擁有一個應該受到尊重的地位，用通俗的話來說，只有從這個波羅米因結開始。

So then after this exhausting attempt, since today I am very weary,

所以經歷這場令人疲憊的嘗試，今天，我真是身心俱疲。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw