Furrows in the alethosphere 1

Furrows in the alethosphere 1


From The Other Side of Psychoanalysis


By Jacques Lacan


A lot of water has passed under the bridge since our meeting, I am speaking of the one in April, and not the most recent one, which took place elsewhere, and only with some of you.


The exchange of remarks on the steps of the pantheon was not of a bad level, since it enabled me to go over a number of points that deserved to be made precise, in response to questions that were not at all inept. That is what I think with the lapse of a week. But my first reaction immediately after when I was with someone who was accompanying me was, however, of a certain inadequacy.


Even the best of those who spoke, and who were not unjustified in their questions, seemed to me, except at the start, to be lagging behind a bit. This seems to me to have been reflected in the fact that, at least in this friendly interpellation that was still not a questioning, they situated me within a number of references.


These references are not all to be rejected, certainty. I recall that the first was to Georgias, of whom I am supposed to be conducting some sort of repetition. Why not? But what was inappropriate is that in the mouth of the person who evoked this character whose effectiveness we, in our days, cannot evaluate very well it was about someone from the history of thought. This is the distancing that seems disturbing to me—this term enables a sort of sampling of views from a distance concerning this person and that person whom one has bracketed together under “ function of thought.”


It seems to me that there is nothing less homogeneous here—if I can put it like that—nothing that would enable one to define a species. It is not legitimate to give some people, in whatever capacity one might imagine them, the function of a species representing thought. Thought is not a category. I would almost say it is an affect. Although, this is not to say that it is at its most fundamental under the aspect of affect.


There is only one affect—this constitutes a certain position, a new one to be introduced into the world, which, I am saying, is to be referred to what I am giving you a schema of, transcribed onto the blackboard, when I speak of the psychoanalytic discourse.


As a matter of fact, transcribing it into the blackboard is distinct from talking about it. I remember that at Vincennes, when I appeared there for the first time which hasn’t been repeated since, but which will be repeated. It occurred to someone to call out to me that there were real things that were truly preoccupying the assembly. Namely, that there was a brawl going on at a place at some distance from where we were gathered, that this was what we should be thinking about, that the blackboard had nothing to do with this real. That’s where the error is.


I would say that, if there is any chance of grasping something called the real, it is nowhere other than on the blackboard. And even, whatever commentary I am able to give it, which will take the form of speech, relates only to what is written on the blackboard.


That’s a fact. And it is demonstrated by this fact, by this artifice that is science, whose emergence one would be completely wrong to inscribe as arising solely out of a philosophical concoction. Metaphysical, rather than physical, science, perhaps. Does our scientific physics deserve to be called metaphysical? This is what would need to be spelled out.


Spelling it out seems possible to me, namely on the basis of the psychoanalytic discourse. In effect, from the perspective of this discourse, there is only one affect, which is, namely, the product of the speaking being’s capture in a discourse, where this discourse determines its status as object.


This is where the Cartesian cogito derives its exemplary value from, provided that one examine it and revise it, as I will do once again, today, to start with.





2 Responses to “Furrows in the alethosphere 1”

  1. Khalilah Kosanovic Says:

    The info is most useful. It is sometimes hard to keep up with all the recalls out there. Your site is another good source that I will include and check from now on for updates. Keep up the good work.

  2. springhero Says:

    Thank you for telling me what is in your mind.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: