Logic of Phantasy 57 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 57
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 14

Seminar 14: Wednesday 8 March 1967

What I am establishing, in short, is a method without which one can say that everything that, in a certain field, remains implicit about what defines these fields, namely, the presence as such of the subject, well then, this method that I am establishing, consists, allows there to be warded off, as I might say, everything that this implication of the subject in this field introduces into it in terms of fallaciousness, of falsity at the foundation. It is something as regards which one sees, in short, by standing back a little, whether this method has indeed all this generalising. And, of course, I did not start from such a general aim. I would even say more: something that I see myself, after the event, that one day it may happen that people will use this method in order to rethink things where they are most interesting, on the political plane, for example. Why not?


It is certain that with enough adaptations (amodiations), some of the schemas that I give will find an application there. It is perhaps even there that they will have most success. Because, on the terrain for which I forged them, the outcome is not sure, given that, perhaps, it is here, it is on this terrain, on this terrain which is that of psychoanalysis, that a certain impasse, which is essentially the one that manifests what I call – and they are not univocal – the fallacies of the subject, finds it easiest to put up a resistance.


In any case, it nevertheless remains that is it here that these concepts will be forged. And, one can even further say, that the whole contingency of the adventure, namely, the very mode off what these concepts will have to confront, namely, for example, analytic theory as it has already been forged, the way in which they have to introduce a correction into this analytic theory and the very dialectic that their introduction into analytic theory involves in terms of difficulty, indeed of resistance – indeed of external contribute to the modes in which I have circumscribed them. I mean that what one can call the resistance of psychoanalysts themselves to what is their own field, is, perhaps, what contributes the most striking testimony to the difficulties that have to be (2) resolved, I mean to their very structure.


Here, then, is why, today, we are coming to a terrain that is still more alive, when what is in question is for me to speak to you about what I situated at the fourth vertex of the quadrangle, that we will describe – I am supposing that my listeners today were all there are my two previous lectures – that we will qualify – this quadrangle – as the one connoted by the moment of repetition. Repetition, I have said, to which there corresponds, as foundational of the subject, the passage a l’acte. I showed you, I insisted on (I will come back to it today because it is necessary to come back to it) the importance of this status of act that the sexual act has. Without defining it at act, it is absolutely impossible to situate, to conceive of, the function that Freud gave to sexuality, as regards the structure of what one should call, with him, satisfaction – subjective satisfaction, Befriedigung – which cannot be conceived of from any other locus than that from which the subject is established as such.


It is the only notion which functions in a way that can give a sense to this Befriedigung.


In order to give to this sexual act structural reference points – outside of which it is impossible for us to conceive of its place in what is involved, namely, Freudian theory – we have been lead to bring into play one of the most exemplary mainsprings (ressorts) of mathematical thinking. Undoubtedly, when I use such means, it is to be clearly understood that it always only reaches something partial in it – partial for whoever only knows about mathematical theory from what I myself have made use of as an instrument.


But of course, the situation may be different for whoever knows the place of such a mainspring, that, no doubt, with some inexperience on my part, I extract, believe me, all the same, not without knowing the ramifications of what I am using in the totality of mathematical theory. And not without having assured myself, that whoever might want to make a more in-depth use of it, will find – in the theory as a whole, at the precise points that I chose to ground such a structure – will find the prolongations that will allow him to give it its proper extension.


Some echo has come back to me that in hearing me speak about the sexual act, by making use, in order to structure the tensions in it, of the ternarity that was provided for me by the proportion of the golden number, someone made this remark through clinched teeth: “The next time I go screwing, I must not forget my slide-rule!”


Undoubtedly, this remark has all the agreeable character that one can attribute to the witticism, but it remains for me to be shaken a little like the curate’s egg when the one responsible for this amusing remark is a psychoanalyst. For in truth, I think very (3) precisely that successful jouissance in bed essentially results, as you have been able to see – I will dot the i’s – from forgetting what may be found on the slide-rule. Why is it so easy to forget? This is what I will once more insist on later. It is even the whole source, in short, of what is satisfying in what, on the other hand, (subjectively) is expressed by castration. But it is quite clear that a psychoanalyst cannot forget that it is in the measure that another act interests him, that we will call, to introduce the term today, the psychoanalytic act, that some recourse to the slide-rule may evidently be required.


The slide-rule, of course, to avoid any misunderstanding, will not consist on this occasion, in using it in order to read on it (we are not yet at that point) what can be read at the meeting place of two little lines. But, because of what it carries in itself in terms of a measure, which is described as nothing other than a logarithm, it provides us in effect with something that is not completely unrelated to the structure that I am evoking.


There it a striking thing in the psychoanalytic act – to name it thus with reference to the whole theory – there is a striking thing which is going to allow us to make a remark, which perhaps was seen by some people in the margins of what I have announced up to now. It is the following. I insisted on the character of act that is involved in the sexual act. One could remark in this connection, that everything that is stated in analytic theory seems destined to efface – for the individuals, suffering or unsatisfied in different ways, that we take responsibility for – the character of act that exists in the fact of the sexual encounter.


(886) 0933481945

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: