Logic of Phantasy 98 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 98
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 21
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 21: Wednesday, May 31, 1967

This is not the whole story, once we know that the unconscious is the discourse of the Other. From that moment on, it is clear that everything that brings into play the order of sexuality in the unconscious, only penetrates into it around the putting in question of: is the sexual act possible? Is there this knot, definable as an act, in which the subject grounds himself as sexed, that is, as male or female, being in itself, or, if not, proceeding in this act to something which can – even if only at its term – culminate at the pure essence of male or female? I mean, at the disentangling, at the distribution, in a polar form of what is
male and what is female, precisely in the conjunction that unites them in something – whose term I am not
introducing here, at this hour, nor for the first time – in something that I named as jouissance. I mean introduced a long time ago and, specifically, in my seminar on Ethics.

一但我们知道，無意识就是大它者的真理論述，整个故事就没完没了。從那时開始，显而易见的，每一样东西都运作於無意识的性行为的秩序上，结果是自始自终就环绕着这个问题：性的行动是可能的吗？这个被定义为行动的环结，生命主体以自己为基础作为性化的实存，也就是男性或女性的生命实存。要不然就是，以这个性的行动，继续到某件以男性或女性的纯净本质达到高潮，即使是在它的期限之内。我的意思是，在鬆開时，在分散时，以所谓男性及所谓女性的两极，确实就是在联合他们的某物的连繫，它的術语，我在此刻並不是第一次介绍，这个某物就是我称之为「欢爽」。我是指不久以前，我在讨论精神分析的伦理学时，明确介绍的。

It is in effect required that this term jouissance should be put forward, and properly so, as distinct from pleasure, as constituting its beyond.

事实上，「欢爽」这个術语应该理所当然地被提出，作为跟一般的欢乐有所不同，因为它具有超越欢乐的本身。

What indicates it to us, in psychoanalytic theory, is a series of converging terms, in the first rank of which is libido, which represents a certain articulation of it. And we must point out – at the end of these talks this year – point out how its use can be so slippery as not to sustain, but make slip away, the essential articulations that we are going to try to introduce today.

在精神分析理论，我们所得到的指示是一连串的汇集的術语。其中第一个层次就是力比多，它代表生命力的某种表达。我们必须指出，在今年演讲结束时，我们必须指出，它的用途是多麽溜滑不定，無法维持我们今天所要介绍的这个基本的表达，而任其溜走。

Jouissance, namely, this something that has a certain relation to the subject, as this confrontation with the hole left in a certain questionable register of act, that of the sexual act. This subject is suspended by a series of modes or states of dissatisfaction. This is what, just by itself, justifies the introduction of the term jouissance, which, moreover, is what, just by itself, justifies the introduction of the term jouissance, which, moreover, is what at every instant, and specifically in the symptom, is proposed to us as being indistinguishable from this register of satisfaction, since at every moment the problem for us is to know how a knot, which is only sustained by discontent and suffering, is precisely that through which there is manifested the agency of suspended satisfaction, the one, properly speaking, to which the subject keeps in so far as he tends towards this satisfaction.

「欢爽」，换句话说，它跟生命主体有某种的关系，当它面临行动的可疑铭记，性的行动的铭记，所留下的这个空洞。这个生命主体，被一连串总是無法满足的模式或状态所悬置。这就是为什麽，我们很有理由介绍「欢爽」这个術语的本身。在每一瞬间，特别是在病癥，欢爽被提出当着跟这个满足的铭记，密不可分辨。在每一个时刻，我们的问题就是要知道，仅是由不满足及痛苦所维持的一个环结，确实就是被悬置的满足的代理者的展现。适当地说，当生命主体倾向於这个满足时，他会坚守这个环结。

Here the law of the pleasure principle, namely, of least tension, only indicates the necessity of detours from the path by which the subject is sustained along the path of his search – search for jouissance – but does not give us its end, which is this proper end, an end nevertheless entirely masked for him in its final form, in as much as one can also say that its completion, its completion is so questionable, that one can just as well start from this foundation that there is no sexual act, just as much as the fact that it is only the sexual act which motivates this whole articulation.

在此，快乐原理的法则，换句话说，最少量的激情，只是指示着迂迴前进的必要，绕过生命主体被维持的途径，沿着他的追寻的这条途径，追寻「欢爽」的途径。但是它並没有给予我们有关它的目标，这个适当的目标的最终形式，是他自己都被蒙蔽不见的一个目标。我们也能够说，这个目标的完成，它的完成是如此的受到置疑。我们很有理由從这个基础開始说，性的行动並不存在，虽然事实上只有性的行动，才能引发整个表达的动机。

This is why I wanted to bring in the reference – which everyone knows I have used for a long time – the reference to Hegel, in as much as this process -this process of the dialectic of different levels of the certainty of oneself, of the Phenomenology of the Spirit, as he said – is suspended on a movement which he calls “dialectical” (and which undoubtedly, in his perspective, can be held to be only dialectical) of a relation that he articulates from the presence of this consciousness, in so far as its truth, its truth escapes it as regards what constitutes the operation of the relation of a self-consciousness to another self-consciousness in the relation of intersubjectivity.

这就是为什麽我要带进这个指称，（大家都知道我曾经使用这个指称很久一段时间），这个黑格爾的指称，这个对於自我的确定性的不同层次的辨证法过程。他所说的「精神现象学」，被悬置在他所称为的「辨证法」的行动，（無可置疑的，以他的观点而言，只有靠着辨证法才能维持。）他從这个意识的存在，表达彼此关系的辨证法。关於一个自我意识跟另外一个自我意识，在互为主体性的关系，组成运作的内涵，它的真理却是意识所無法掌握。

Now it is clear, it has been proved for a long time – if only by the revelation of this social gap, in so far as it does not allows us to assimilate to a confrontation of one consciousness to another consciousness, what is presented as a struggle, specifically, (4) of the master and the slave – it is not even for us to criticise what is left open … what is left open by the Hegelian development. This has been done by others and specifically by one other, by Marx, to name him, and keeps the question of its outcome and of its modes in suspense.

现在显而易见的，它长久以来己经被证明，只有憑藉这个社会的差距的显示，所表现的鬥争，明确地说，就是主人与奴隶的鬥争，这是黑格爾思想发展所展開的。但是我们無法憑藉它来接纳一个自我意识跟另外一个自我意识的衝突，所以我们甚至没有办法来批判所被展開的内涵。有别的哲学家曾经这样做过，明确地说，就是另外一位哲学家，名字叫马克思。但是它的结果及它的模式的问题，还是悬而未决。

The way in which Freud comes and takes things up at a point that is only analogical to the Hegelian position, is inscribed, is already sufficiently inscribed in this term, in this term of jouissance, in so far as Hegel introduced it.

类似黑格爾的立场，佛洛伊德適逢其会，前来探讨这些问题。他探讨的方式被铭记，已经充分地被铭记在这个術语，「欢爽」这个術语，如同黑格爾所介绍的。

The starting point, he tells us, is in the fight to the death between the master and the slave. After which there is established the fact that the one who had not been willing to risk, risk the stake of death, falls into a state of dependency with respect to the other, which for all that is not without containing the whole future of the dialectic in question.

他告诉我们说，開端点就是主人与奴隶之间的生死鬥争。然后这个事实才被建立，不愿意冒险，不愿意冒着死亡危险的人，会陷入对於对方的依赖。儘管这样，它己经涵盖到，这个受到置疑的辨证法未来的发展。

The term jouissance comes into it. Jouissance, after the end of this fight to the death, of pure prestige, we are told, is going to be the privilege of the master, and for the slave the path then traced out will be that of work.

「欢爽」这个術语開始加入这个辨证法。我们听说，男女之间经过这番生死鬥争，及纯粹尊嚴的鬥争後，「欢爽」将会成为主人的特权。而对於奴隶而言，被追踪出来的途径将是工作的途径。

Let us look at things more closely and at this jouissance that is at stake. Let us see in Hegel’s text … (that, after all, I cannot produce here and still less with the shortening that we are constrained by today) … what the master enjoys?

让我们更仔细地观看一下，岌岌可危的这个「欢爽」。让我们從黑格爾的文本里看出，（我在此無法唸出整个原文，特别是今天我们的时间被缩减。）主人享受到些什麽？

The matter is very adequately seen in Hegel. The relation established by the articulation of the work of the slave means that if, perhaps, the master enjoys, it is not at all absolutely. At the limit and to force things a little, which is to our cost as you are going to see, we might say that he enjoys only his leisure. Which means, the disposition of his body.

在黑格爾的文本，主人是堂而皇之地被看见。奴隶的工作的表达所建立的关系意味着，主人所享受到的，其实没有那麽绝对。让我们勉强将它发挥的极限，勉为其难地说，因为後来你们会看出，那其实是不够周延的说法：主人只享受到他的悠闲。言下之意，他享受到对自己身体的支配权。

In fact this is very far from being the case. We will indicate it again later, but let us admit that from everything that he has to enjoy as things, he is separated by the one who is charged to put them at his mercy, namely, the slave, of whom one can then say – and I do not have to defend it, I mean this crucial point, since already in Hegel it is sufficiently indicated – that for the slave there is already a certain jouissance of the thing, in so far as he not only brings it to the master, but he has to transform it in order to make it acceptable to him.

事实上，情况根本就不是这样。我们以後将会再一次指出来，但是让我们承认，從主人所必须享受作为物的一切东西，他被本来应该是替他服务的人所隔离，换句话说，被奴隶所隔离。我们可以这样说，我也不必替它辩護，我的意思，这个重点，在黑格爾的文本里，已经有充分的指示。对於奴隶而言，物的本身已经具有某种的「欢爽」。他不但将这个欢爽带给主人，而且他必须先将欢爽改头换面一下，这样它才能够被主人所接受。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Logic of Phantasy 97 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 97
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 21
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 21: Wednesday, May 31, 1967

For those who find themselves, for example, returning today after having followed my teaching for a while, I have to signal what I have been able, these most recent times, to introduce into it in terms of new articulations.

对於那些曾经听过我的演讲有一阵子，今天又回来的听眾，我必须指明，最近几次，我始终能够用一些新的表达，来開展探讨。

An important one, which dates from our antepenultimate meeting, is undoubtedly to have designated, expressly, I would say – since, in fact, it was not inaccessible to those who understand me – expressly, the locus of the Other – everything that I articulated as such up to now (I mean since the beginning of my teaching) – designated the locus of the Other in the body. (“Voila”, murmurs a feminine voice.)

從倒数第三次開始，一个重要的议题，無可置疑地曾经生动地指明，我不妨说，事实上，即使是那些了解我的听眾，都会觉得是霧里看花。生动地说，就是大它者的轨迹。迄今我所表达的一切（我是指自從我的演讲開始以来）都指明这个大它者的轨迹在身体里（一个女性的声音喃喃而语：「哇塞！」）

The body itself is, from the origin, this locus of the Other, in so far as it is there that, from the origin, there is inscribed the mark qua signifier.

这个身体的本身，從一開始，就是大它者的轨迹。就在那里，從一開始，生命主体作为意符的符号，就被铭记在那里。

It was necessary for me to recall it today, at the moment that we are going to take the next step, in this logic of the phantasy, which is found – you will see it being confirmed in the measure that we advance – which is found to be able to accommodate itself to a certain logical laxity. Qua logic of phantasy it pre-supposes this dimension described as fantasy, in the sense that, at the beginning, exactness is not required of it.

今天我需要回想到它，就在我们将要採取第二步骤的时候，在这个幻见的逻辑。你们在我们所提出的策略中，看到它被逻辑的幻见被证实，而且被发现能够接纳自己进入某种逻辑的鬆散当中。作为逻辑幻见的本身，它预先假设这个被描述为幻见的向度，只是在開始的阶段，它不要求那麽的精确。
，
Moreover, we find that what is most rigorous in the exercise of an articulation that deserves the title of logic includes in itself a growing approximation. I mean a mode of approximation which involves in itself not alone a growth, but a growth that as far as possible is the best, the most rapid there is, towards the calculation of an exact value.

而且，我们发现到，以逻辑的名义表达得最淋漓尽致的东西，本身会包括逐渐增加的接近。我的意思是，一种接近的模式，将自己牵扯进入不但是成长，而且是盡快速度的成长，未曾有过的成长，朝向精确价值的计量。

And it is because of this that … in referring to an algorithm of very great generality, which is none other than the one most proper to guarantee the relation of an ideal incommensurable, the most simple there is, the most spaced out also, by circumscribing what it constitutes in terms of the irrational by its very progress.

因为这样，当我们提到概念化的演算时，那恰恰是最适当作为保证，一个理想的不可测量的关系，最单纯的一种，最宽敞的一种，只有限制它的组成内涵，在进展过程無理数的方式。

I mean that the incommensurability of this o … that I only image as being the golden number for the legibility of my text. Because those who know, know that this sort of number constituted by the very progress of its approximation is a whole family of (2) numbers and, as one might say, can start from anywhere whatsoever, from any exercise whatsoever of relation, on the single condition, that the incommensurable requires that the approximation should have no term, while being, nevertheless, perfectly recognisable at each instant as rigorous.

我的意思是，这个小客体的不可测量性，我只是想像为，我生命文本的可阅读的黄金数。因为那些知道的人，他们知道这种数目，由於它的接近的进展所阻成，是一群组的数目。我们不妨说，它们從任何地方開始，從任何关系的运用開始，根据单一的条件，这个不可测量的东西要求，这个近似值没有条件，可是，在某个瞬间，它会清楚鲜明地让你认出。

This then is what is at stake: to grasp what we are confronted with in the form of the phantasy as reflection of a necessity. In other words, the problem, which for a Hegel could be contained in this simple limit constituted by the certainty included in self-consciousness… (at this point a loudspeaker starts up in the room: “OK then five … four … three …”) … this certainty about oneself, with which Hegel can allow himself, can allow himself, given certain conditions that I will evoke later which are the conditions of history, to put in question the relation with a truth – this certainty, in Hegel – and this is how he concludes a whole process through which philosophy is the exploration of knowledge. He can allow himself to introduce into it the telos, the end, the goal, of an absolute knowledge. It is in so far as at the level of certainty, he finds himself being able to indicate that it does not contain its truth in itself.

这就是岌岌可危的地方：使用幻见的術语，了解我们所面临的，作为一种必须的反思。换句话说，这个自我意识的问题，黑格爾能够被包括在这个确定性组成的限制里，（在这个时候，大廳的扩大器响起：開始算，五、、四、、三、、、）这个关於自己的确定性，黑格爾能够让他自己置疑到他跟一个真理的关系，假如他考虑到，我後来召唤的历史的条件。对於黑格爾而言，这个确定性，他如何来替整个历程下个结论，那就是哲学是探讨知识的历程。他会让自己将目的论介绍到里面，绝对知识的目的或目标。就是在这个确定性的层次上，他发现他自己能够指示，它並没有将它的真理包括在自己里面。

(Another loudspeaker starts up)

（另外一个扩大器又响起。）

This is the way that we find ourselves being able not simply to take up again the Hegelian formula, but to
complicate it. The truth with which we have to deal depends on this act through which the foundation of self consciousness, through which subjective certainty is confronted with something which of it nature is radically foreign to it and which is properly the fact that …

这就是为什麽，我们发现自己無法再一次仅仅是运用黑格爾的公式，而必须将它复杂化。我们必须处理的真理，是依靠行动，透过这个行动，自我意识的基础，生命主体确定要面临某件的属性，他是完全地陌生，适当地说，事实就是这样。

(”Dr. Lacan is interrupted once again. “The minister has insisted …”, says another loudspeaker.

拉康教授再一次被中断讲演。「牧师坚持、、、」另外一个扩大器说。

Dr. Lacan – “Can nothing be done to stop this interruption?”

拉康教授：「难道没有办法不要受到干扰？」

Madame Aubry – “Unplug the microphone!”
欧布瑞夫人：「拔掉麦克风！」

Murmuring and interruptions. One of the audience climbs up onto a window to try to unhook the microphone, without success … (That’s dangerous, someone says, anticipating his gesture). A lot of whispering goes on in the room.

窃窃私语及干扰声音。有一位听眾爬上窗户，设法拔掉麦克风，没有成功、、、（那太危险，某个人说，预期会有动作。）讲堂到处窃窃私语。

“If there is an examination of perspective, there is an entrance examination.” continues another loudspeaker

「假如有观点的检查，那就是入学检查。」另一个麦克风说。

Dr. Lacan – “Which loudspeaker seems to be speaking, at the moment? Are all of them?”

拉康教授：「现在是哪一个扩大器在说话？全部都说吗？」

Dr. Falade heads towards the tape-recorder

法拉得博士朝向录音机走过去。

Dr. Lacan – “Can anything be done?”

拉康教授：「能再想点办法吗？」

One of the audience: “Switch off the mains”?

有一位听眾说：「关掉大门？」

Dr. Lacan (pointing at the emergency exit) … “Yes but it is closed!”

拉康教授：（指着紧急出口处）、、、「是可以，可是它本来就是关着。」

Madame Aubry – “It must be in the projection room.

欧布瑞夫人：「一定是放映室出的问题。」

Dr. Lacan, (to the official, who arrives and who is heading towards the emergency exit) … “It’s closed. You weren’t told? But I have just told you”)

拉康教授：（对着刚来到的行政人员，他正走向紧急出口处）、、、「那道门关闭着。你没有听到吗？但是我不是刚刚告诉过你们？」

The official – “Is it open down there?” (He points at the little room on the left, gets into it and fixes the problem without delay)).”

行政人员说：「那边不是開着吗？」他指着左边的小房间，走进去，立刻修理发生状况的问题。

What it’s a matter of introducing today, then, and all the more rapidly since our time has been shortened, is the following: psychoanalytic experience introduces the fact that the truth of the sexual act gives rise to questions in experience.

今天所要介绍的内容，要讲得更加快些，因为时间被缩短。精神分析经验介绍这个事实：性的行动的真理产生了精神分析经验的一些问题。

Naturally, the importance of this discovery only takes on its relief starting from a positioning of the term sexual act as such. I mean, for ears already sufficiently formed to the notion of the prevalence of the signifier in any subjective constitution, to notice the difference between a vague reference to sexuality that – one can scarcely say as a function – as a dimension proper to a certain form of life, the one specifically most profoundly linked to death. I mean, intermixed, interlaced with death.

当然，这个发现的重要性显现出来，開始於「性的行动」这个術语本身的立场。我的意思是，那些对於生命主体的形成，作为一个意符的流行观念耳熟能详的人，很容易注意到，它跟我们一般提到的性行为有些差異。我们很少将一般的性行为当着是一种功用，当着是生命的某种形式的向度，当着是跟死亡有密切关系的明确的「性的行动」。我的意思是，性的行动会跟死亡糾缠不清。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Logic of Phantasy 96 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 96
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 20
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 20: Wednesday, May 24, 1967

That if we had to leave deserted and uncultivated this central field, that of the One, of sexual union – in so far as we find slightly unsettling the idea of a process, whatever it may be, of partition, in so far as we find slightly unsettling the idea of process, whatever it may be, of partition, allowing there to be grounded what are called “the roles”, and that we, for our part, call the sigsifiersnio of man and of woman – that if what I left you on the threshold of the (10) last time, namely, a quite different conjunction, that of the Other, of the big Other, on the register, on the tablets of which there is inscribed this whole adventure,
and I told you that this register and these tablets, were nothing other than the body itself, that this relation of the Other, of the big Other, to the partner which remains to him, namely, what we started from – and it is not for nothing that I called it small o- namely, your substance, substance as subject, in so far as, as subject, you have none, except this object fallen from signifying inscription, except what ensures that this small o is this sort of fragment, belonging to big O, ”en ballade; namely, you yourselves, who are indeed here as subjective presence, but who, once I shall have finished, will clearly show your nature as o-object, from the aspect of a great clearance that will take place immediately in this room! Well then, I will leave in suspense the question of what is involved in the phallic object.

假如我们必须将生命主体的「一」，这个性的结合的这个中心的领域，任其荒废，不加耕耘，我们会发现这一个区隔的过程的观念会稍微令人不安。无论是什麽区隔，都是以所谓的「空洞」作为基础，就我们而言，就是我们所谓的男人跟女人的「意符化」。假如上一次我将你们遗置在一个截然不同的门槛，大它着的门槛，人生的冒险之旅就是铭记在它的门板上。我告诉过你们，这个铭记及这些门板，道道地地就是身体本身。这个跟大它者的关系，跟始终跟他同在的伴侣，换句话说，我们刚開始同在的东西，我称之为小客体，不是没有道理的，换句话说，它是你们的质料，作为生命主体的质料。作为生命的主体，你们没有别的东西，除了这个從意符铭记掉落下来的小客体，除了确保这个小客体是这种属于大它者的碎片，「欲望小客体」，换句话说，你们自己，在此确实作为一个生命主体的存在，但经过我的一番解说，你们会清楚看出，你们的特性是作为小客体，在这个大廳经过大扫除後的小客体！嗯，我会将这个阳具客体所牵涉到的问题，先卖个关子。

Because it is necessary – and it is not a necessity which is imposed only on me – for me to carefully examine the way in which it is supported as object. All of this, precisely, in order for me to perceive that it is not supported itself. This is what the castration complex means: there is no phallic object!

因为我必须仔细地检视一下，（並非只有我被赋予这个需要），生命主体如何被支撑成为客体。确实地，我这样做，是为了要感受到，它本身没有拥有支撑。这就是阉割情结的意思：阳具的客体並不存在！

This is what leaves us our only chance, precisely, for there to be a sexual act.

这就是我们仅剩的机会，确实地说，为了让性的行动能够存在。

It is not castration, it is the phallic object which is the effect of the dream, around which the sexual act fails!

这不是阉割。这是阳具的客体是梦幻的结果，环绕着它，性的行动功败垂成。

To make you sense what I am in the process of articulating, there is no lovelier illustration than the one given us by the sacred book, by this unique book, by the Bible itself. And if you have become deaf to its reading, go to the narthex of what is called the Church of St. Mark, in Venice, in other words the Doge’s Chapel. It is nothing else, but its narthex is worth the trip. Nowhere, in an image, can there be expressed with more relief what is in the text of Genesis. And among others, you will see there, I must say sublimely magnified, what I would call “this infernal idea of God’s” when from Adam-cadmus, from the one who, since he was One, had to become two – he was man under its two aspects, male and female – “It is good”, said God (Lacan punctuates this with a laugh) “that he should have a companion”! Which would still be nothing, if we were not to see that, in order to proceed to this adjunct, all the more strange in that it seems that up to then, the Adam in question, a figure made o red earth, had done very well without it, God takes advantage of his sleep, to take from him a rib, from which he fashions, we are told, the first Eve!

为了让你们感受到，我正在表达的内涵，最可爱的范例莫过於这本聖书，这本独特的书，这本聖经所给予我们的范例。假如你们对於聖经的内容讳莫如深，可以去威尼斯，所谓的聖马克教堂的前廳，换句话说，道啟的教堂。那里没有别的，但是它的前廳值得拜访。創世纪的浮雕画的意象，没有一个地方能够表达得比它们更栩栩如生。其中，你将在那里看出，我所谓的「上帝的炼狱的观念」，被昇华地渲染，我不妨这样说。從亞当、卡得繆思，從他作为生命主体的「一」，必须化身为二，他的身上禀赋两种属性，陰性与阳性。「他应该拥有一个伴侣才好！」上帝如是说。（拉康咯咯笑，作为强调。）这依舊不算什麽，假如我们没有看出，为了继续製造这个伴侣，说来更加奇怪，似乎直到当时，亞当的身份颇为可疑。他是被用红土創造而成，没有伴侣，他一直也过得不错。上帝利用他睡觉的时刻，從他身上拿了一根肋骨。我们听说，上帝就用他这根肋骨，創造了人间第一位夏娃！

Could there be any more gripping illustration of what introduces, into the dialectic of the sexual act, this fact that man, at the precise moment at which there comes to be marked on him a supplementary divine intervention, is found henceforth to have to deal, as object, with a piece of his own body?

还有比这个更加引人入胜的范例吗？它介绍这个事实进入性的行动的辩证法：就在一个补充的神的介入发生的时刻，人被发现必须要处理他自己的身体，充当是一个客体。

Everything that I have just said, the Mosaic law itself and, moreover, perhaps the (11) accent added to it by underlining that this piece is not the penis, since, in circumcision it is in a way incised in order to be marked by this negative sign. Is this not designed to make there arise before us the perverse gate, I would say, there is in the establishment, on the threshold o what is involved in the sexual act, of this commandment: “They shall be one flesh”.

我刚刚说的一切，摩西的律法本身，我们必须要强调的一点是，这个客体並不是陰莖，当陰莖被行割礼，也就是被割掉包皮，为了用负面的标记来表示他。这难道不就是被设计要让变态的大门敞開在我们前面？我不妨这样说，性的行动所牵涉的内涵，就出现在人生的这个大廳的门槛那里，这个上帝的命令：「我规定，你们男女将结合成为一个肉身！」

Which means that in a field interposed between us and what is involved, in what might be, something that can be called the sexual act, in so far as the man and woman valorise themselves in it for one another. First – and we would have to know whether this thickness can be crossed – there would be the autonomous relation of the body to something that is separated from it, after having formed part of it.
Such is the enigma, the sharp threshold where we see the law of the sexual act in its crucial datum. That the castrated man can be conceived of as never having to embrace anything but this complement, with which he can deceive himself – and God knows he does not fail to do so – by taking it as a phallic complement.

这意味着，某件被称为性的行动，被插入在我们与其所牵涉的内涵之间的领域。在那里，男人与女人相辅相成。首先，我们必须要知道，这个隔阂是否能够被跨越过？因为身体跟某件隔离開它的东西，形成自己的一部分，有自动自主的关系。这就是这个谜团，这个輪廓鲜明的门槛，我们看到性的行动处於生死存亡的关口上。被阉割的人可以被構想成为：一切皆可离棄，唯独这个互补的伴侣，他可以用来欺瞒自己，把它当着是阳具的互补。（天晓得，他一定能做到否？）

I pose today, in ending my discourse, this question: that we still do not know how to designate this complement.

结束今天的演讲时，我提出这个问题：我们依舊不知道，如何来指明这个互补。

Let us call it, logic.

让我们称之为「逻辑」。

The fiction that this object is other, undoubtedly requires the castration complex.

小客体就是大它者的这个幻觉，無可置疑的，需要以阉割情结作为前提。

It is not astonishing that we are told, that we are told in the mythical asides of the Bible, these asides, curiously, that one finds in the little marginal additions by the rabbis, I am not the one who gets involved in these stories! – whom they call Lilith. That it was she, perhaps, who, in the shape of a serpent and by the hand of Eve has presented to Adam … what? The apple! The oral object, and which, perhaps, is there for no other reason than to awaken him to the true sense of what had happened to him while he was asleep! It is indeed in this way, in effect, that things are taken in the Bible. Since we are told what starting from there, he enters for the first time into the dimension of knowledge.

这是不足为奇，当我们听到，在聖经的神秘的旁白里，耐人寻味地，这些旁白，我们发现，神父在聖经边缘空白处填加的旁白，这些故事可不是我憑空杜撰的！他们称之为「夜间活动的李莉斯」。她以蛇的形态出现，夏娃的手伸出给亞当，给予什麽？一粒蘋果！这个口腔的客体出现在那里，没有别的理由，除了就是要唤醒他，当他在睡觉时，他所经历的真实的感觉。事实上，确实就是以这种方式，聖经记载的一切。我们听说，自從那时，他首次进入知识的向度。

It is precisely because, this dimension of knowledge, the effect of psychoanalysis is the following: that we have located in it at least in two or three of its major forms and one could say also in two others, even though the link to it is not yet made, what the nature, what the nature and function is of this object completely concentrated in this apple. It is only along this path that we may be able to come to specify better, and, precisely, from a series of contrasting effects, what is involved in this object, the phallic object, of which I said that it would be necessary, in order finally to articulate it, for me to carefully examine it first.

确实是因为这个知识的向度，精神分析学的结果如下：我们在里面找出至少两三个主要的形式，我们也可以说，在两个其它的形式，即使彼此的关联还没有形成，我们发现，这个客体的特性跟功用，完全集中在这粒蘋果。只有沿着这条途径，我们渐渐能够根据一连串的对照的效应，更清楚地指明，这个客体，这个阳具的客体牵涉到内涵。关於这些牵涉到的内涵，我说过，我必须小心翼翼地检查，我最後才有办法表达得出来。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Logic of Phantasy 95 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 95
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 20
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 20: Wednesday, May 24, 1967

And, from then on, that the smaller the evil is, the more it is reduced, the more perfect is the evasion. This is the mainspring that we put our finger on clinically, in everyday treatments, of everything that can come under the different modes of impotence, especially in so far as these are centred around premature ejaculation.

从那时開始，邪惡越小，它就越被化简，逃避就越无影无踪。这就是我们在精神分析诊所，每天的治療，理解的主流观念。就诊的患者有各色各样的性无能模式，特别是这些问题都圍绕早泄的困擾。

Therefore, there is no jouissance, in any case one that can be located, except of one’s own body. And what is beyond the limits that the pleasure principle imposes on it, it is not chance but necessity which associates it as such with the evocation of the sexual correlate, by making it appear only in this conjuncture of the sexual act, without our being able to say any more about it.

因此，「欢爽」並不存在，无论在任何我们可以找出位置的病例，除了在自己的身体。超越快乐原则所赋加的限制之外，这不是偶然，而是必然，它们的原因跟性的相关召唤的联想，让它出现在性的行动的关键时刻，我们却无法说出什麽道理。

In other words, for all those who already have their ears open to the usual terms of psychoanalysis, it is on this plane and on this plane alone that Thanatos can be found to be in any way connected to Eros. It is in the measure that the jouissance of the body – I am saying of one’s own body, beyond the pleasure principle – is evoked, and is not evoked elsewhere than in the act, precisely in the act which puts a hole, a void, a gap, in its centre, around what is localised in hedonistic detumescence, it is from that moment on that there is posed a possibility of the conjunction of Eros and Thanatos. It is starting from there that the fact is conceivable, and is not a crude mythical lucubration, that into the economy of the instincts, psychoanalysis introduced what, not by chance, it designates under these two proper names.

换句话说，那些对於精神分析学的通用術语已经耳熟能详的人，，在这个层次，只有在这个层次，死亡之神跟爱欲之神才会被发现彼此有关联。在这个层面上，身体的欢爽被召唤。（我是指我们自己的身体，超越快乐原则。）身体的欢爽被召唤，不是在别的地方，就是在这个性的行动，确实在这个性的行动，放置一个空洞、一个空無、一个缺口，环绕着被局部化的享乐的阳具消腫。从那时候開始，爱欲之神跟死亡之神的结合的可能性才被产生。从那里開始，这个事实才能被想像，这个事实並不是憑空玄虚杜撰。这並非是偶然恰合，精神分析学以这两个专门術语指明的内涵，介绍到本能的经济动力。

Well then, all of that, as you see, it still only turning around it! God knows, nevertheless, that I am making an effort so that it will not be like that! We have to believe then that if we are still going around it, it is because it is not easy to enter into it!

你们看到，在这一切当中，本能的经济动力就只是绕着爱欲打转！可是，天晓得，我正在努力不要让它成为这样！我们必须相信，假如我们依舊绕着爱欲打转，那是因为要进入並不容易。

We can, at least, retain, gather, these truths: that the sexual encounter of bodies does not pass, in its essence, by way of the pleasure principle.

至少，我们能够保留、聚集这些真理：身体在性的层面邂逅，在其本质上，並没有经由快乐原则的管道通过。

Nevertheless, that to orient oneself in the jouissance that it involves (I am saying, that it involves, supposedly, because to orient oneself in it does not yet mean entering it, but it is very necessary to orient oneself with respect to it) … to orient oneself with respect to it, it has no other reference point than this sort of negating brought to bear on the jouissance of the organ of copulation, in so far as it is the one that defines the presumed male, namely the penis. And that it is from there that the idea arises, (these words are chosen), that the idea arises of a jouissance of the feminine object. I said, that the idea arises, and not the jouissance, of course! It is an idea. It is subjective.

可是，为了使自己认同爱欲牵涉到这个「欢爽」（我是说，它被认为会牵涉到，因为认同它並就是意味着进入它，但是先认同是不可或缺的。）为了要先认同它，我们没有别的指称，除了就是这种赋加在交媾器官的「欢爽」的否定。就是这否定定义了作为男性的假定，换言之，那就是陰莖。这个观念就是起源於那里（这些字词可是精挑细选的）。这个观念起源於女性的客体的「欢爽」。我说，这个观念起源於，当然不是「欢爽」起源於！是观念起源於，这是生命主体的主观性。

Only what is curious and what psychoanalysis affirms – only for want of expressing it in a logically correct fashion, naturally, no one notices what it means, what it involves! – is that feminine jouissance itself can only pass by way of the same (9) reference point! And that this is what is called, in the case of the woman, the castration complex!

只是耐人寻味的是，精神分析学所肯定的，並不是女性的「欢爽」本身，只能藉由相同的指称点通过！（由於欠缺逻辑正确的方式表达，没有人注意到那是什麽意思，及它牵涉到的内涵。）就女人而言，这就是所谓的阉割情结！

It is indeed because of that that the woman-subject is noted to articulate, and that at a certain level I propose to you the Homme-elle. That does not mean that every woman limits herself to that , precisely.

确实因为这样，我们注意到，女人作为生命的主体，表达自己的层次，我跟你们的建议是，阳刚男性。这並不意味着，每个女人的自我设限於此，确实的。

There is something of the woman somewhere … “odor di femina” … But she is not always easy to find! I mean, to put in her place!

某个地方，女人的氣息瀰漫着、、、那是「女性香水」。但是只闻其味，未必就能见其人！我的意思是，杳然不见伊人的芳踪！

Since, to organise a place there, a reference is necessary whose organic accidents mean that it is only found in what is called, anatomically, the male. It is only starting from this suspense posed on the male organ, that an orientation for the two, the man and the woman, is encountered, that the function, in other words, takes on the value of being, with respect to this hole, this gap of the castration complex, in a reversed (renversee) position.

组织一个地方，一个指称是需要的，这样它的有机体的机缘会意味着，从生理解剖的观点来看，它只能在男性那里被找到。只有从这个对於男性器官的悬念，男人跟女人双方的认同，才可能交会邂逅。换句话说，这个功用禀赋有生命实存的价值，关於这个空洞、这个阉割情结的裂口，以一个翻转的立场。

A reversal is a sense. Before the reversal, it may happen that there is no subjectifiable sense! And after all, it is perhaps to this that there must be referred the altogether striking fact that I told you earlier, namely, that women psychoanalysts have taught us nothing more than men analysts had been capable of lucubrating about their jouissance. Namely, very little!

一个翻转是一种意义。在翻转之前，生命主体的情况是没有生命实存。畢竟，我早先告诉你们的那个耐人寻味的事实，必须被回歸到这一点。换句话说，女性精神分析师所能够教导我们的，跟男性精神分析师所能够详细论述的有关他们的「欢爽」，没有什麽两样。换句话说，就是有，也不多。

Starting from a reversal, there is an orientation, and however little it may be, if it is all that can orientate the jouissance involved, in the woman, in the sexual act, well then, you understand that until further notice we have to be content with it.

从这样一个翻转開始，就有了交会认同。无论那是多麽微不足道，那是我们能够在女人，在性的行动，认同到所牵涉的「欢爽」。你们了解到，我们目前必须满足仅仅是这样。

In short, this leaves us at a point that has its characteristic. We will say that as regards the sexual act, what can be currently formulated about it, is the dimension of what is called, in other registers, good intentions. A good intention, concerning the sexual act, here, at last in what can, at the point that we are in it, be formulated, this is what, reasonably, according to the psychoanalysts, here is what reasonably we can and we should be content with.

总之，这带我们到达具有它自己特性的一点。我们会说，关於这个性的行动，我们目前能够对它有所阐述的，就是在其它领域的所谓的「好的意图」。一个好的意图，关於这个性的行动，最後在我们能够阐述的地方，在我们介入的地点，这就是精神分析师所说的，很有理由，我们只能够，也只应该满足的地方。

All of this is very well expressed in the myth, the fundamental myth. When the Father, the original Father is said to “enjoy all the women”, does that man that the women have any enjoyment, however little it may be? The subject remains intact. And it is not only with a humorous intention that I am evoking it at this point. The fact is, as you are going to see, this is a key question! I mean that everything that I am going to have to articulate, I am saying in our next meeting, concerning what I am going to take up again, namely, what I left open the last time.

这一切在神话中表达得很清楚，这个基本的神话。当父亲，原初的父亲，据说是「享受所有的女人」，那些女人可有那麽一点儿，享受到那个男人？这些女性主体始终保持完好如初。目前我正在谈论这一点，不但作为幽默嘲讽。你们将看得出来，事实是，这是一个关键的问题！我的意思是，我将要表达的这一切，我是说我们下一次演讲，关於我再一次要探讨的，换句话说，我上一次展開的议题。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Logic of Phantasy 94 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 94
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 20
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 20: Wednesday, May 24, 1967

(6) In short, the interest of introducing the word act is to open up the question, which after all is worth opening up – because I am certainly not the one who makes it circulate among you – of whether, in the sexual act (in as much as for any of you it has ever happened: a sexual act), whether it is related to the advent of a signifier representing the subject as text for another signifier, or whether it has the value of what I called in another register, the encounter, namely, the unique encounter! The one which, once it has happened, is definitive.

（第六）总之，介绍「行动」这个字词的興趣，等於是開展这个问题。这个问题畢竟是值得我们開展的，因为我确实並不是让它流通的始作俑者，是否这个性的行动（它同样会发生到你们任何一个人的身上，这是一个性的行动），是否它跟这个意符的到来有关，这个意符代表生命主体，作为另一个意符的文本。或它具有我在另外一个层次所谓的「邂逅」的价值有关，换句话说，这个独特的心灵交会的邂逅！这个邂逅一但发生，可说是很明确的！

Naturally, people talk about all of that. People talk about it and – this is what is serious – people talk about it frivolously.

当然，人们会谈论这一切。人们会谈论到它。嚴重的地方就在此，人们光是会i轻佻地谈论。

In any case, to mark that there are two distinct registers, namely, whether in the sexual act, man arrives at Man, in his status as man, and the woman in the same way, is a completely different question to whether one has, yes or no, encountered one’s definitive partner. Since this is what is at stake when people evoke the encounter.

无论如何，要注意到，这里有两个不同的层次，换句话说，在性的行动，是否人到达作为「人」的层次，作为「人」的地位。同样的方式，就女人而言，问题却是截然不同，是否她已经邂逅到她明确的伴侣。因为这就是岌岌可危的地方，当人们召唤邂逅的渴望。

Curious! It is curious that the more the poets evoke it, the less efficacious it is in the conscience of each one as a question, That it is the person, in any case, may make anyone who has had a little glimpse of feminine jouissance smile a little!

真是耐人寻味！耐人寻味的是，诗人越是召唤邂逅的渴望，它就越是不灵验，使每一次邂逅的意识都受到置疑。无论如何，这个人的邂逅经验，可能会使曾经瞥见过女性的欢爽的人，不禁会心一笑。

There is here, undoubtedly, a first point that is very interesting to put right in the forefront, as an introduction to any question that may be posed about what is involved in what is called feminine sexuality. When what is at stake is precisely her jouissance.

无可置疑的，这是第一个耐人寻味的重点，值得我们将它摆置在枱面上，作为介绍一个可能会被提出的问题。那就是所谓的女人的性会牵涉到什麽？岌岌可危的确实就是她的「欢爽」。

There is one thing very certain and which is worthwhile remarking. It is that psychoanalysis, without a question like the one that I have just produced, renders all the subjects installed in its experience – specifically the psychoanalysts – incapable of confronting it in the slightest way.

有一件事情非常确定，值得我们再三强调。无可置疑的，精神分析学就像我刚刚所介绍的，要使生命主体都被安置在它的经验里，明确地说，就是精神分析师的经验里，但是又完全没有办法面对它。

The males – the proof has been given superabundantly – this question of feminine sexuality has never taken a serious step, when it comes from a subject apparently defined as male by his anatomical constitution. But the most curious thing is that women psychoanalysts, then, for their part, in approaching this theme, manifestly show all the signs of a feebleness that suggests just one fact. That they are absolutely terrified by what they might have to formulate about it!

我们已经被给予充份的证据，对於男人而言，女人的性的问题从来没有被认真地看待，当问题来自男人被明显定义他的生理解剖构造。但是最耐人寻味的是，女性的精神分析师，就本身而言，当她们接近这个主题时，显而易见地表现出一种软弱的迹象，这只表明一个事实：她们对於她们所必须说明的东西，感到惊骇不已。

So that the question of feminine jouissance does not seem to be really going to be studied in the near future, since this is, good God, the only locus in which one could say something serious about it. At the very least, to evoke it in this way, to suggest to everyone, and especially the feminine part of those who are gathered here as listeners, the fact that one can express oneself in this way about feminine jouissance, is enough for us to place it, to inaugurate a dimension, which, even if we do no enter it, for want to being able to do so, is absolutely essential to situate everything that we have to say along another route.

所以在不久的未来，女性的「欢爽」的问题似乎不会真的被研究。谢天谢地，因为这是唯一的轨迹，我们能够说一些认真的事情。至少，以这种方式召唤，对於每一个人意味着，特别是在场听众的那些具有女性化倾向的人，关于女人的「欢爽」，我们能够以这种方式来表达自己，足够让我们来定位它，为它開啟一个向度。这个向度，即使我们没有进入，却是绝对必须，这样我们才能在沿着另一条途径前进时，定位我们必须要说出的一切。

(7) The object, then, is not at all given in itself by the reality of the partner! I mean the object involved in the normed dimension, described as genital, of the sexual act. It is much closer – in any case it is the first approach that is given to us – to the function of detumescence.

（第七）因此，这个客体本身根本就不是伴侣的现实界所给予！我指的是牵涉到这个定额分配的向度的客体，被描述为性器官的性的行动。它靠近於性器官「消肿」的功用。无论如何，这是我们所得到的最早的接触。

To say that there is a castration complex, is precisely to say that detumescence in no way suffices to constitute it.

说阉割情结存在，确实等於是说：消肿根本就不足以组成性的行动。

This is what we have, rather dully, taken care to affirm at first. Now, of course, this fact of experience that it is not the same thing to copulate or to masturbate.

这个是我们曾经费心来处理，起初是用来作为肯定。现在，精神分析经验的事实当然已经证实：它跟交媾或手淫，並不相同。

It nevertheless remains, that this dimension which ensures that the question of the value of jouissance is
attached, takes its point of support, its pivotal point, where detumescence is possible, ought not to be neglected!

可是，问题仍然存在。这个向度保证「欢爽」的价值的问题息息相关，获得它的支持点，它的轴钮点。在那里，消肿是可能的。这一点不应该被忽略掉。

Because the function of detumescence, whatever we may have to think about it on the physiological plane, (royally neglected by psychoanalysts, who on this point have not brought the slightest little clinical light that is new, which is not already in all the manuals , about the physiology of sex, I mean, which could not be found everywhere before psychoanalysis was born) but what matter! This only re-enforces what it is a matter of knowing: that detumescence is only there for its subjective utilisation, in other words, to recall the limit described as the pleasure principle.

因为这个阳具「消肿」的功用，无论从生理的层面，我们必须如何看待它（正统的精神分析师常忽略，对於这一点，他们根本就没有给治疗带来新的希望。他们只是按照治疗手册，看待性的心理学，我的意思是，在精神分析学诞生之前，大家对於这个功用都讳莫如深），那都无关紧要！这只是重新强调，问题要如何知道，阳具消肿发生只是因应生命主体的利用。换句话说，他们撤消快乐原则所描述的限制。

Detumescence, by being the characteristic of the functioning of the penile organ, specifically, in the genital act -and precisely in the measure in which what it supports in terms of jouissance is kept in suspense – is there to introduce, legitimately or not (when I say legitimately, I mean, as something real, or as a supposed dimension), to introduce the fact that there is jouissance beyond. That the pleasure principle, here, functions as a limit at the edge of a dimension of jouissance in so far as it is suggested by the union described as the sexual act,

阳具消肿作为男性陰莖器官的功用的特色，明确地说，就在性器官的行动，确实就在於它支撑的欢爽被悬置的程度。阳具消肿在那里，无论合理与否，（我所说的合理，是指某件真实的东西，或是一个被认为的向度），就是要介绍这个事实：超越的欢爽存在。快乐原则在此充当欢爽的向度边缘的一个限度，我们从被描述为性的行为的结合，可以看得出来。

Everything that experience shows us, what is called premature ejaculation and what it would be better to call, in our register, premature detumescence, gives rise to the idea that the function, that of detumescence, can represent in itself the negative of a certain jouissance.

精神分析经验所教导我们的一切，所谓过早地泄精，我们最好称之为「过早地阳具消肿」，产生这个观念：阳具消种的功用，本身能够代表某种「欢爽」的负面。

Of a jouissance which is precisely the following, and the clinic only shows us too much of it, of a jouissance which is …what the subject sets his face against. Indeed the subject makes off, in so far, precisely, as this jouissance is, as such, too consistent with this dimension of castration, perceived in the sexual act, as a threat.

关於以下确实要描述的「欢爽」，诊所的记录的例子多到不胜枚举。这种「欢爽」是生命主体所正面交锋的。的确，生命主体会临欢爽而迴避，当这种欢爽的本身，跟阉割的向度过於狼狈为奸，在性的行动中被感觉是一种威脅。

All this precipitation of the subject with respect to this beyond allows us to conceive that it is not without foundation that, in these stumblings, these lapses of the sexual act, there is demonstrated precisely what is at stake in the castration complex. Namely, that detumescence is cancelled out as a good in itself, that it is reduced to the function of protection, rather, against a dreaded evil, whether you call it jouissance or (8) castration, as itself a lesser evil.

关於这个超越的欢爽，生命主体的突然萎靡不振，使我们能够构想到，不是没有根本原因。在这些的欲振乏力，性的行动的这些挫折中，被显示出来的，就是阉割情结岌岌可危的部分。换句话说，阳具消肿被取消，本身就是足可称道，它被化简成为一这的保护功用，来对抗一种可怕的邪惡，无论你名之为「欢爽」，或是阉割，两害相权取其轻嘛。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Logic of Phantasy 93 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 93
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 20
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 20: Wednesday, May 24, 1967

In any case, normed has a very precise sense in the breakthrough from affine geometry to metric geometry. In short, one enters into a certain order of measure, which is the one that I am trying to evoke with my golden number, which here, I repeat, is of course only metaphorical. Reduce it to the term of the most spaced out incommensurable there is with respect to the One.

无论如何，「定额分配」有一个明确的意义，从仿射几何学，突破到公尺几何学。总之，我们进入某种的测量的秩序。这个秩序是我设法用我的黄金数目召唤的。在此，我重述一遍，那只是比喻的用法。你们不妨将它化简到关於生命主体的这个「一」，具有无可测量的廣大空间。

The castration complex, then, – I am saying it, good God, I hope I only have to say it here for the ears of novices – can in no way content itself with the support of the little story of the kind: Daddy said “It’s going to be cut off … if you claim to succeed your father”. First of all, because most of the time, (as naturally everyone has been able to see for a long time, as regards this little story, this little remark), it is Mammy who says it. She says it at the precise moment when John, or Johnny, in fact, succeeds his father, but in the moderate measure that he fiddles with himself quietly in a little corner, as quietly as simpleton (Baptiste) … that he fiddles with his little gadget … obviously, the way Daddy had already done when he was his age!

阉割情结，（我是说，我的天呀，我希望我只必须说，给新进来的人听），根本就无法满足於自己，用这种小故事：父亲说：「假如你宣称要继承你老爸的地位，我要将你这个切割掉。」首先，大部分的时候，都是老妈说这句话。（当然这种话是老生常谈，每个人多少都听过。）事实上，当约翰要继承他的父亲时，老妈就会这样说，但是通常他只是安静地躲在角落，自己玩弄，像个呆瓜一般地安安静静。他玩弄他的小玩意儿。显而易见地，老爸在他这样的年纪，也曾经这样玩弄过。

This has nothing to do with the castration complex. It is an amusing little story which (4) is not made anymore likely by the fact that guilt about masturbation is encountered at every turn in the genesis of the troubles that we have to deal with.

这跟阉割情结根本没有关系。这是一个有趣的小故事，这个故事听起来不太合情理，关於手淫的罪恶感随时都会遭遇到，在我们成长历程，我们必须要处理的麻烦。

It is not enough to say that masturbation is not physiologically harmful and that it is through its place in a certain subjective economy, we will say precisely, that it takes on its importance. We will even say, as I recalled one of these last times, that it can take on a quite clear hedonistic value, since it can, as I recalled, be pushed as far as asceticism. And that one or other philosophy can make of it, on condition of course of adopting behaviour completely coherent with its practice, can make of it a foundation for one’s wellbeing. Remember Diogenes to whom it was not alone familiar, but who promoted it as an example of the way one should treat what remains, in this perspective, of the tiny surplus of organic tickling: titillatio. It must be said that this perspective is more or less immanent in every philosophical position and even encroaches on a certain number of positions that can be described as religious, if we consider the retreat of the hermit as something that, of itself, involves it.

光是说手淫对於身体无害，是不够的。我们说得确实些，就生命主体的经济动力而言，它透过手淫占有的举足轻重的地位，来显现它的重要性。当我回想前几次的演讲，我们甚至可以说，手淫具有显而易见的享乐的价值，大家回想一下，手淫对於禁欲苦行者，可说是功莫大焉。还有一两个哲学流派，对於从事手淫的性为，认为是跟其禁欲苦行做法，完全一致，並以这种观点来解释人的幸福的感觉。你们还记得戴奥珍尼斯，他对於手淫不但熟悉老练，而且还提倡它，作为典范，因为从这个观点来看，手淫对於性器官的骚痒难耐，蠢蠢欲动，发挥了善加利用的功能。我们必须说，这种观点对於每一个哲学的立场，可是内在本质，它甚至霸占了某些被描述为宗教的的立场。我们不妨考虑一下那些从社交界撤离的隐士，手淫对於他们是不可或缺的。

It only begins to take on its interest – thus on this occasion its guilty value – where one is trying to reach the sexual act. Then the following appears. The jouissance, sought for in itself, of a part of the body, and which plays a role – I am saying “which plays a role” because one must never say that an organ is made for a function. One has organs … (I am telling you that … if you generalise a little, if you make yourself from time to time into a mussel of some other little beast and if you try to reflect what would it be like if you were in what one can scarcely call their skin, then you would understand quickly enough that it is not the function that makes the organ, but the organ that makes the function.

只有当我们正在设法到达性的行动时，它才開始展现它的興趣，在这个场合，它才具有罪惡感的价值。因此，会出现以下的状况：在本身被寻求的「欢爽」出现了，作为身体的一部份，並去扮演一个角色。我说「它扮演一个角色」，因为我们一定不要说是，器官是为了被扮演而制造，或是我们拥有器官。我要强调的是，假如你们稍微推论一下，假如你们有时候，耽溺於这种动物性的享受，假如你们设法反思一下，你们身历其境，那会是怎样一回事，你们会很快了解到，不是功用造成器官，而是器官造成功用。

But, in any case, it is a position that goes too much against the obscurantism described as transformist in which we bathe, for me to insist on it. If you do not want to believe me, go back into the main stream.) … It is therefore completely out of place to allege, in accordance with the moralising tradition … anyway, according to the way this is explained in the Divine Comedy … that masturbation is culpable and even a grave sin, because it not only deflects a means from its end … (the end being the production of little Christians, indeed – I come back to it, even though people were scandalised the last time that I said it – indeed, little proletarians) … well then, the fact that it raises a means to the rank of an end has absolutely nothing to do with the question as it should be posed, because it is that of the norm of an act, taken in the full sense that I recalled about this word act, and that this has nothing to do with the reproductive shoots that it can take on, with the end of perpetuating the animal.

无论如何，这个立场过於違背蒙昧主义所描述的器官因功用而突变，虽然有人洋洋自得这种说法，但是我无法继续苟同。（假如你们对於我的话有所存疑，那就回到主流的思潮去。）因此，若是依照道德化的传统，依照在但丁的「神曲」所解释的方式，手淫的该受到谴责，甚至是一个嚴重的原罪，因为它使工具偏离目标。（目标就是要生产基督徒的婴孩，确实地说，就是生产普罗阶级的婴孩，上一次我提到时，就有人受到抨击，容我再回头谈论它，）这种宣称真是大谬不然。它将工具提升到目标的地位，並且跟它应该被提出的问题，风马牛不相及。一个行动的标準的意义，当我回想到「行动」这个字词的充分意涵，跟它所具有的作为繁殖功用，跟它作为动物品种延续的目标，丝毫没有关系。

On the contrary, we ought to situate it with respect to the following. The passage of the subject to the function of signifier, in this precise locus – completely outside the ordinary field in which we are at ease with the word act – which is called this problematic point that is the sexual act.

相反的，我们应该将它定位在跟以下有关。生命主体变成为意符的功用的过程，在这个明确的轨迹，完全外在於这个普通的领域，使我们无法自在於「行动」这个字词的意涵。这就是「性的行动」所谓最具有争议性的地方。

(5) That the passage from jouissance, where it can be grasped, should be … – by such an interdiction (to keep to the word that is used), by a certain negativing (in order to be more precise fashion) – that this passage, in any case, has the most manifest relation with the introduction of this jouissance to a value function, is what, in any case, can be said without being imprudent.

（第六）从「欢爽」变成意符的过程，它能够被理解，应该根据某种的禁制（忠实於这个字词的原意），应该根据某种的否定（为了要更加精确些）。无论如何，这种过程拥有最显而易见的关系，跟「欢爽」被介绍到一个「价值的功用」。无论如何，我们可以大胆地这样说。

That experience – an experience, even, in which, as one might say, a certain listener’s empathy is not foreign – announces to us the correlation between this passage of a jouissance to the function of value, namely, its profound adulteration: the correlation between this and … (I have no reason to refuse myself what the literature gives here, since as I have just told you, the only way in here is an empathic one; this should be purified in a second moment, but after all we do not refuse ourselves this way in either, when we are on a difficult terrain) … should then, this castration, should have the closest relation with the appearance of what is called the object in the structure of orgasm, in so far – I am repeating it to you: we are still talking about empathy – as it is mapped out as distinguish from a jouissance that is – ah! what are we going to call it!, autoerotic! this is a concession … masturbatory, and that is all, given what is at stake, namely, an organ, and a quite specific one.

那个经验 （我们不妨说，某些听众的同理心，对於这样的经验並不陌生），对我们宣称，欢爽变成价值功用的过程，换句话说，它深深地受到掺杂，它个跟阉割之间有相互的关系。（我没有理由排斥同理心这个文学用词，如我刚刚所说的，仅有的方法就是透过同理心，这个同理心转用到精神分析用词时，可能会略失原义。但是我们並不排斥它的用法，当我们处於不好解释的平台。）阉割跟所谓器官高潮的结构的客体的外表，有最密切的关系。我再跟你们重复一遍，我们谈论到同理心，因为它被描绘，有别於「欢爽」的什麽。啊！我们要怎麽称呼它！自体性欲望！「手淫」是一种特许的专利，就是这样，假如我们考虑到，岌岌可危的地方是一个器官，一个相当明确的器官。

Since, like autoerotism … God knows what has already been made of it and therefore what is going to be made of it! And as you know this is precisely what is in question here, namely, that this autoerotism which has here, in effect, which can have, an altogether specific sense, that of a local and manageable jouissance, like everything that is local! is soon going to be made into the oceanic bath in which we are going to have to map out all of this!

就像自体性欲望一样，天晓得那是什麽东西所构成，什麽东西将会构成它！你们知道，这确实就是受到置疑的地方，换句话说，这个自体性欲望，实际上，具有非常明确的意义，那是一个局部性的可处理的「欢爽」，就像是局部的一切！它不久将会掉入汪洋大海般的人生之浴中，让我们载浮载沉，无法自拔。

As I told you: whoever, whoever grounds anything whatsoever on the idea of a primary narcissism and starts from there to generate what is supposed to be investment in the object, is quite free to continue (since it is with this that psychoanalysis functions throughout the world as a guilty industry) but can, moreover, be sure that everything that I am articulating here is designed to repudiate him absolutely.

我告诉过你们，任何人若是以原初自恋的观念来建构生命的基础，从那里产生对於客体应有的投注，他有充分的自由继续下去（全世界的精神分析学充当的功用，就是要满足人的自恋，这难道不是於心有愧？），但是可确定的是，我目前正在表达的一切，恰恰就是跟人的自恋完全背道而驰。

Good! I said that, I admitted. I spoke about an object present in orgasm. There is something easier, from that, than to slip – and of course people do net fail to do so – towards simpering about the dimension of the person!

好吧！我说了，我承认，我谈论到性器官的高潮存在着一个客体。那个客体很容易滑溜不见，当然有些人一定会渾然不觉，它会滑溜成为那个人滑稽可笑的一面。

When we copulate, those of us who have arrived at genital maturity, we have a reverence for the person.

当我们在交媾时，我们已经到达性器官成熟的人，我们会尊重那个人的滑稽可笑的一面。

This is how it was expressed, twenty-five or thirty years ago, especially in the circle of French psychoanalysts, who have after all their interest in the history of psychoanalysis. Yes … Well then, there is nothing less sure. For precisely to pose the question about the object involved in the sexual act, is to introduce the question of whether this object is Man, or indeed a man, Woman or indeed a woman.

这就是它被表达的方式，二十五或三十年前，特别是在法国的精神分析师的圈子里，他们对於精神分析学的历史感到興趣。是的，我们非常确定。提出性的行动所牵涉到的客体的问题，等於就是介绍这个客体是否就是「人」的问题，确实是人或是男人的问题，或确实是「女人」，确实是女人的问题。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Logic of Phantasy 92 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 92
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 20
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 20: Wednesday, May 24, 1967

I am going to try to make you enter today into this arcanum, which, even though it is trivial in psychoanalysis, is nonetheless an arcanum. Namely, the following that you will meet at every turn: that if the analysed subject, if the analysable subject, adopts what is called a regressive, or again, pre- (pre-oedipal, pre-genital, anyway presomething or other …) position, which could be very desirable, and one might moreover be astonished, on this occasion, that it is not designated as post-, since it is in order to evade the operation, the impact of castration, that the subject is supposed to have taken refuge there …

我将设法让你们今天进入这个奥秘。即使在精神分析学，这是琐碎不堪，可是它仍然是个奥秘。换句话说，以下你们随时会遇到的是：假如被分析的主体，假如可被分析的主体，接受所谓的倒退，或回到「前期」的位置，（伊底普斯情结的前期、性器官前期、或任何事情的前期、、、），回到我们渴望的前期，在这个场合，我们可能会大吃一惊，为什麽不是被指明是「後期」？假如我们要的是逃避这个运作，这个阉割的盟约，主体本来应该躲避到那个地方。

If I am trying, this year, to sketch out before you a structure that presents itself as logical – a chancy, very
precarious logic, perhaps, in which also I am sparing you, not giving too quickly, the forms that I have come to trust in my own scribblings, but am trying to show you what is accessible in an articulation of such a kind, in this easy form that, after all, I chose among others, which consists very simply in taking what is most incommensurable to the One, specifically, the golden number – and this with the aim simply of making tangible for you how along such a path, in which, I repeat to you.

今年，假如我设法在你们面前，描绘一个表现自己作为逻辑的结构，可能，这会是一个冒险的，非常不稳定的逻辑。用这个逻辑，我慢条斯理地讲，替你们省略我自己潦草书写时，信心满满的那些形式。但是我还是要设法告诉你们，在诸如其类的简单的表达时，什麽是容许我们接近的。畢竟，在眾多的形式当中，我仅是挑选对於生命主体的这个「一」，最不可能用同一标準计算的部分，明确地说，就是这个黄金数目。我的目的仅仅就是要让你们明白，我一再跟你们重复的这条途径，你们实际上会遇到什麽。

I do not claim at all either to have given you the definitive steps, nor even to have taken them myself, but how much more preferable is such a path, which is guaranteed by some truth concerning the dependency of the subject, rather than giving oneself over to these painful exercises of the usual analytic prose which distinguish themselves by these sort of prevarications, of senseless detours, which seem to be always necessary to account for the operation of libidinal positions: the bringing into play of a whole population of subjective entities, that you know well and which can be found everywhere, the ego, the ego ideal, the super ego, the id even, without counting the new and refined things that can be added to them by distinguishing the ideal ego from the ego ideal.

我也根本没有宣称曾经给你描述明确的步骤，我自己也甚至没有去从事这些步骤。但是这条途径是多麽让人爱不释手！因为生命主体依赖的真理，保证是经由这条途径通往。所以我们不要沉迷不拔於通常的精神分析技俩，这些令人痛苦不堪的摆弄。这些技俩的摆弄用一些没有意义的拐弯抹角，左右逢源般地炫耀展现，可是有关生命力比多立场，到底如何运作，却始语焉不详。生命主体的整个实体立场如何运作，你们知道的很清楚，到处都可以找得到：自我、自我的理想、超我、甚至本我 ，更不用说，后来填加的那些新颖而精鍊的词语，为了区别理想的自我与自我的理想。

Does not all of this carry in itself, indeed – as has been done in Anglo Saxon literature for some time – to add in the self, which, by manifestly being added to remedy this ridiculous multitude, nonetheless fails because it only (2) represents, in the way in which it is handled, a supplementary entity. Entities, beings of reason, always inadequate from the moment that we bring into play in a correct way the function of the subject as nothing other than what is represented by a signifier for another signifier.

所有这些本身难道不是，为了彌补这个荒谬的眾多词语，本身再多填加词语？如同央格鲁、撒克逊的英国文学有段时间，常在自我（self）前面填加不同的人称所有格，可是还是无法徹底表达它所要代表的，作为它所处理的一个补充的具有生命的实体。作为生命的实体，理性的实存主体，从我们正确运作的那个时刻開始，生命主体的功用道道地地就是：以一个意符代表另一个意符的意义。

In no case is a subject an autonomous entity. Only the proper name can give the illusion of it. The I, it is too much to say that it is suspect – since I have been speaking to you about it, it ought even no longer to be so! – It is only very precisely this subject that – as signifier – I represent for the signifier walk, for example, or for the couple of signifiers: la boucle: “I shut up” (je la boucle)!

生命主体决非是一个具有自主权的主体。只有专有的名字才会产生这样的幻觉。这个「我」，说它是可疑的，未免太过份。（既然我一直谈论到它，它应该不再是如此可疑！只是非常确实地，这个生命主体作为一个意符，例如，对於这个意符，我给予的代表是「走路」，或对於两三个意符，我给予的代表是：闭嘴！

You can sense that if I took this formula, it is to avoid the pronominal form “I keep myself quiet” (Je me tais) which undoubtedly would begin to take us very far if we were to pose ourselves the question of what the me means in such a form as in many others. And you would see the degree to which its so-called reflexive acceptation is displayed across a range which does not allow it to be given any degree of consistency. But I will not extend myself, of course, in this direction, which is here only a reminder.

你们能够感觉到，假如我採用这个公式，那是为了避免这个代名词的形式：「我自己保持沉默」。无可置疑地，假如我们想要跟自己提出这个问题：相较於许多其它的「我」，这个「我」是什麽意义？这可是个大哉问！你们将会看出这个程度，它的所谓反身的通用意义，被展示的範围，无法让它获得任何程度的一致性。当然，我自己不会朝着这个方向发挥，我在此只是提醒你们。

There is therefore a function, a subjective function, called castration as regards which one ought to recall how striking it is that it is presented to us (and this had never been said previously, I mean before psychoanalysis) … that it is presented to us as essential to gain admission to what is called the genital. If this expression were appropriate to the highest degree – I mean that it is not so – one might marvel at this something which, in that case, might be expressed as follows.

因此有一个功用，一个主体性的功用，被称为「阉割」。关於阉割，我们因该回想一下，我们会有被阉割的现象，是多麽耐人寻味！（以前从来没有人这样说过，我指的是精神分析学以前）。我们被给予阉割的重要意义，是为了要得到准许，以便得以使用所谓的性器官。假如将这个观点发挥到淋漓尽致，（我的意思，平常我们並没有这样做），我们可能会大吃一惊，在那种情况，这个某件东西可以被表达如下：

That – let us say, in any case, how it might be presented if one tackled it from outside and after all we are, all of us, still there! – that the passage to the phantasy of the organ is, in a certain function – an undoubtedly privileged one, henceforth, the genital precisely -necessary for the function to be accomplished I do not see any way of getting out of the blind alley, here, except by saying – and a psychoanalyst of importance, one notable in the political topography, used this means. I mean at the turning point of a sentence, without even properly noticing the import of what he is saying, he affirms to us that, after all, castration … well it is a dream! This, used in the sense that it is one of the stories told by sick people.

我们不妨说，无论如何，假如我们从外面去处理它，畢竟我们人都还在那里，我们是如何被阉割的！通往这个性器官的幻见的过程，从某个功用来说，是一个无可置疑的特权的过程。因此，确实就是这个性器官，对於这个功用的完成，是不可缺少的。我看不出有任何方法，挣脱这样的僵局，除了说阉割只是一场梦。（一位举足轻重的精神分析师，在政治领域颇具盛名的精神分析师，使用这个方法，我的意思是，在句子转折点，甚至是没有注意到自己在说的是什麽意义，他对我们肯定说：阉割只是一场梦！）这种说法宛如精神病患正在说出他的故事。

Now it is nothing of the kind! Castration is a subjective structure – as I recalled just now – altogether essential precisely for something of the subject, however slim, to enter into this affair that psychoanalysis calls : “the genital.”

事实上完全不是那麽一回事！阉割是一个生命主体的结构，如我刚才所回溯描述的。它对于这个生命主体，要进入精神分析学所谓的「性器官期」的事情时，无论多麽轻描淡写，都是非常重要的事情。

I have to say that I think I have made a little opening in this blind alley, changed – as they say – something in it, in as much as, good God, not too long ago – four or five of our meetings ago – I introduced the remark that it could not simply be a matter of introducing the subject into this function of the genital! … (If in fact we know that (3) we mean when we call it that). namely, about the passage from the function to the act, And the putting into question of whether this act may merit the title of sexual act. There is none? … There is? .. Chi lo sa? There is, perhaps …

我必须说，我认为我已经替这个僵局打開一个解决的小缺口。如人们所说，我改变了一些说法。感谢上帝，不久以前，在我们四五次演讲以前，我介绍这个谈话，我不仅仅是介绍生命主体到这个性器官的功用！（事实上我们知道，当我们这样称呼时，我们态度是认真的）。换句话说，关於从性器官的功用到这个行动的过程。我们置疑到，这个行动是否可以得到行的行动的头衔。有没人知道？谁知道？可能有人知道、、、

We will know perhaps one day whether there is a sexual act – whether, I am going to give a commentary, sex (mine, yours) reposes on the function of a signifier capable of operating in this act.

有朝一日，我们会知道，是否性的行动存在，容我评述一下，是否性（无论是我的性，或是你的性）能够交付给一个意符的功用，这个意符能够以性的行动来运作。

In any case, one cannot in any way evade the fact, which is not alone affirmed by the doctrine, but that we encounter at every turn of our experience, that the only one who is capable of operating in the sense of the sexual act -I am speaking about something which resembles it and is not … (this is what I am going to try to refer myself to today, to introduce register of, properly speaking), namely, … perversion – the only one capable of operating in a fashion that is not fully (fautive) is, let us say, the subject who is castrated and – let us repeat ourselves like dictionaries, (a sense to add to the word “castrated”) – in order (en regle). (expressing ourselves in this way does not take us far), in order with this complex called the castration complex.

无论如何，我们无法逃避这个事实。它不但被这个信条所肯定，而且我们在精神分析经验随时都会遭遇到。唯一能够以性的行动的意义来运作人生的人，我是谈论到某件类似它的事情，换句话说，跟变态无关。（这就是我自己今天要提到的，适当地说，我要介绍的内容）。唯一能够以这种方式运作的人，我们不妨说，这个方式也不完全是怙惡不赦，被阉割的生命主体，让我们像字典般再三重复（对于「被阉割」这个字词的填加意义），以便跟所谓的「阉割情结」的情结相一致。（以这种方式表达自己，有点翻来复去。）

Which of course does not mean that one has a complex, but quite the contrary, as any literature worthy of this name (psychoanalytic, I mean), which is not the chatter of people who do not know what they are saying (which happens to even the highest authorities), which means well and truly, in any sound analytic literature, that one is, I would say, normed (norme with respect to the sexual act. This does not mean that one gets to it. It means, at the very least, that one is on the right path!

这当然並不是意味着，我们有阉割情结。相反地，如同任何值得让人尊重的学问（我是指精神分析学），並不是许多不知所云的人在扯淡（即使是那些高阶的权威当局，常就发生这样的情形）。那真实地意味着，在任何健全的精神分析的知识里，我不妨这样说，关於性的行动，我们被「定额分配」。这並意味着，我们從此就範。它意味着，至少，我们要循规蹈矩。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com
0933481945

Logic of Phantasy 91 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 91
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 19
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 19: Wednesday, May 10, 1967

Moreover, it is not at all explanatory. Because it is not sufficient that terror should exist for it to explain anything whatsoever. It is rather it that should be explained. That is why it is better to direct oneself along the path of what I call a consistent, logical system for, in effect, it is necessary that we should now come to the following: why is there this Other (with a capital O)?

而且，它根本也无法解释什麽？因为光是说恐惧存在，只是让它可以解释事情，这样是不足够的。相反的，它本身才应该被解释。这就是为什麽我们最好沿着我称之为一致性的途径前进。事实上，那是一个逻辑的系统，我们顺理成章应该得到以下的疑惑：这个以大写字母O代表的大它者，为什麽会在那里？

What is the position of this strange double that – you should note – the single takes on? Because the Other (with a capital O), for its part, is not two.

这个大它者的奇怪的双重身份的立场是什麽？你们应该注意到，这个单一的大它者形成双重身份。大它者以及大写字母O的代表是双重身份，但是它本身並非是两个。

This position, then, of double that the single takes on, when it is a matter of explaining this curious One which, for its part, is tied together in the beast with two backs, in other words in the embrace of two bodies. Because this is what is at stake. It is not this funny One; that the Other, for its part, is still funnier. There is no link between them – I mean: this field of the One, this field of the Other. Quite the contrary. This is even the reason why the Other is also the unconscious. Namely, the symptom without its sense, deprived of its truth, but on the contrary always more responsible for what it contains in terms of knowledge. What cuts them off from one another, is very precisely what constitutes the subject.

这个单一实体形成双重身份的立场，会牵涉到如何解释生命主体的这个奇怪的「一」的问题。就本身而言，这个「一」被紧连在一起，作为两个後背的动物，换句话说，两个身体拥抱在一起。因为这是岌岌可危的地方，滑稽好笑的不是这个「一」，大它者，就本身而言，更是滑稽好笑。它们之间没有关连。我的意思是，这个「一」的领域，以及大它者的这个领域，彼此之间。相反的，甚至就是这个理由，为什麽大它者也就是我们的无意识。换句话说，大它者是一种病癥，被剥除掉它的意义，它的真理。但是在另一方面，它总是更加承担责任，对於它用知识所包括的东西。是什麽将它们彼此切割開来，这确实就是组成生命主题的内涵。

There is no subject of the truth, unless it is of the act in general, of the act which, (17) perhaps, cannot exist qua sexual act. This is very specifically Cartesian; the subject knows nothing about itself, except that it doubts. Doubt … doubt, is the jealous man says when he has just seen through the keyhole hindquarters about to affront legs that he knows well. He asks himself whether it is not God and his soul!

真理的生命主体並不存在，除非他属於这个一般的行动，这个行动可能无法作为性的行动而存在。这个很明确是笛卡爾的我思故我在。生命主体对於他自己一无所知，除了它会懷疑。懷疑、、、懷疑，那就是妒忌的男人所说的话，当他透过鑰匙孔，窥看到身体的後半身，即将四脚合併，他知道得很清楚。他自言自语，是否那就是上帝跟他的灵魂在做爱。

The foundation of Descartes’ subject, its incompatibility with extension, is not a sufficient reason for identifying the body with extension. But its exis…its exclusion as subject is,on the contrary, grounded in that. And by taking it from the angle that I am presenting to you, the question of its intimate union with the body – I am speaking about the subject, not the soul – is no longer one.

笛卡爾的生命主体的基础，它跟延伸想像的不合谐，並不是充分的理由，来将身体认同为是延伸想像。但是，相反地，它作为生命主体的被排除在外，基础就是在这里。从我现在呈现给你们的这个角度，来看事情，跟身体亲密结合的问题，就不再是一个问题，（我谈论的是关於生命主体，不是灵魂。）

It is enough to reflect on the fact that there is (attention, huh, those who are not used to it!) as regards the
signifier, namely, for the structure, no other support – of a surface, for example – than the hole that it constitutes by its edge. This is all that defines it. Raise this by a degree, take things at the level of volume.

我们光是反思一下这个事实就很足够。（那些还没有习惯的人，请注意听！）关於意符，换句话说，关於一个表面的结构，这里並没有其它的支撑，除了就是这个空洞，它在边缘形成的这个空洞。这就是它的全部的定义所在。然后从这个空洞慢慢提升，以数量的层次提升。

There is no other support for the body than the sharp edge that presides over its cutting up.

身体没有其它的支撑，除了就是这个尖锐的边缘，这个边缘统辖它被切割成碎片。

These are topological truths as regards which I will not decide here whether they have or not a relation with the sexual act, but every possible development of what is called an algebra of edges, requires the following – which gives us the image of what is involved in the subject, at this joint between what we have defined as the One and the Other – the subject is always a structural degree below what constitutes its body.

这些都是地形拓樸学的真理。关於这个真理，我在此将不会决定，它们跟性的行动有没有关系，但是在所谓的边缘代数学发展的每一个阶段，都要求以下的条件：关於生命主体牵涉到的意象，在我们所定义为生命主体的这个「一」跟大它者之间的这个关连，生命主体总是一个结构的层次，在组成它的身体的内涵之下。

This also explains why in no way, can its passivity, namely, this fact through which it depends on a mark of the body, cannot in any way be compensated for by any activity, even its affirmation in act.

这也解释为什麽，它的被动性，换句话说，它依靠身体的标记来运作这个事实，根本就没有办法以任何行动来彌补，即使那个行动是肯定的行动。

So then, of what is this Other the Other?

那麽，这个大它者跟大写字母O代表的大它者，又是什麽关系？

I am very distressed. The time, a certain inordinate, perhaps also a certain paradoxical use of the cut – but in this case you can take it as intentional – means that I will leave you here, today, at the end of the hour.

我深感懊恼。时间又到了，真是难於掌控的时间。可能这也是切割的某种矛盾的用途。但是目前这个状况，你们可以将时间到视为是刻意的，意思是，今天这个小时的结束，我非停在这里不可。

The Other is only the Other of what is the first moments of my three lines: namely, this small o. This is where I started from during our last talks, in order to tell you that its nature is that of the incommensurable, or rather, that it is from its incommensurability that there arises every question about measure.

大它者仅是我这三行的最初的时刻的大它者：换句话说，就是这个小客体。这是我在前几次的演讲过程，我開始讲述的地方。我为了要告诉你们，这个小客体的特性是无法测量的特性。换句话说，从它的不可测量的特性中，关於测量的每一个问题，因此而产生。

It is on this small o, object or not, that we will take up our conversation the next time.

就在这个小客体，无论它是否真的是一个客体，我们下一次的演讲，就会从这里開始。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Lacan Seminar 14: The Logic of Fantasy 19

Logic of Phantasy 90
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 19
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 19: Wednesday, May 10, 1967

At the origin, one does not know where it comes from. It is nothing, as I told you the last time, but this stroke which is also a cut, starting from which the truth can be born.

在起源处，我们不知道它来自哪里。我上一次曾经告诉过你们，它仅仅就是这个被切割时的一劃。真理的诞生可能就是从那里开始。

The Other is the reservoir of material for the act.

大它者是行动的材料的储藏所。

Material accumulates, very probably, because of the fact that the act is impossible.

材料会累积，这是很可能的，因为行动无法进入不可能界。

When I say that, I am not saying that it does not exist. It is not enough to say it. Since the impossible is the real, quite simply. The pure real. The definition of the possible always requiring a first symbolisation.

当我这样说时，我並不是说行动不存在。这样说是不够周详，因为不可能界就是真实界，很简单，那是纯粹的真实界。不可能界的定义总是要求先给予符号象征。

If you exclude this symbolisation, this formula will appear much more natural to you: the impossible is the real.

假如你将这个符号象征排除，你会觉得这个公式比较自然：不可能界就是真实界。

(15) It is a fact that the possibility of the sexual act has not been proved in any formal system. As you see, I am insisting, huh? am coming back to it!

（第十五）性的行动的可能性，还没有被任何正式的系统所证明，这是事实。你们看到，我一直在坚持，我会回到这一点！

What proves that one cannot prove it? Now that we know very well that non-computability, non-decidability do not in any way imply irrationality, that people define, that people circumscribe perfectly well, that whole volumes are written on this domain of the status of the non-decidability and that one can perfectly well define it logically.

什麽东西证明，我们无法证明它？既然我们知道得很清楚，无法用电脑分析，无法明确决定，丝毫並不意味着，人们定义的非理性。人们定义得很清楚，整个内容被书写在无法明确决定的地位的领域，我们能够很合乎逻辑地定义得很清楚。

At this point, then, what is it? What is this Other, the big one, there, with a capital O? What is its substance? Huh?

那麽，在这个时候，它是什麽？这个大它者是什麽？这个以大写字母O代表的大它者是什麽？什麽是它的具体资质？

I allowed myself to say – for in truth, even though in truth, you must believe that I allow myself to say it less and less, because one no longer hears, anyway, I no longer hear it no longer comes to my ears – I allowed myself to say, for a time, that I camouflaged under this locus of the Other, what is called agreeably and, after all, why not, the spirit. The trouble is that it is false.

我容许我自己说它，因为在真理当中，即使在真理当中，你都必须相信，我容许自己越来越少说它，因为我们不再听见，无论如何，我不再听见它传到我的耳朵。有一阵子，我容许我自己说，我伪装在大它者的这个轨迹之下，以所谓的灵魂的名分，这样比较舒适，畢竟，有何不可呢？问题是，灵魂是虚假的。

The Other, when all is said and done, and if you have not already guessed it, the Other here, as it is written, is the body!

大它者，就是身体。当一切都说都做了，假如你尚没有猜测到，这里所书写的大它者，就是身体。

Why would one call something like a volume or an object, in so far as it is subject to the laws of movement, in general, like that, a body? Why should one speak about falling bodies? What a curious extension of the word “body”! What relation is there between a little ball which falls from the tower of Pisa and the body which is ours, if not that it is starting from the fact that it is first of all the body, our presence as animal body which is the first locus in which to put inscriptions, the first signifier, as everything is there to suggest to us in our experience; except, of course, that things always impassion us. When one speaks about a wound, one adds narcissistic and one thinks right away that this ought to annoy the subject, who naturally is an idiot! Nobody imagines that what is interesting in a pound, is the scar.

我们为什麽称呼某件东西为体积或客体呢？只因为它隶属於动作的法则，通常，它就像是我们的身体一样。为什麽我们会谈到物体的掉落呢？那是「身体」这个字词耐人寻味地延伸使用。一个跟从比萨斜塔掉落的小球，跟我们的身体有什麽关系呢？难道不就是起源於这个事实，首先是我们的身体，我们存在作为动物的身体？我们将它当着第一个轨迹，铭记第一个意符。每一样存在那里的东西，都被视为是我们的经验，当然除了事情总是令我们激动。当我们谈论到受伤，我们会自恋地联想，我们马上会认为，生命的主体应该感到懊恼，好似他当然是个白痴般！没有人想像，被切割的那一磅肉，就是瘡疤。

The reading of the Bible could be there to remind us, with roses put at the bottom of the rushes where Jacob’s flocks are going to graze, that different devices to impose a mark on the body do not date from yesterday and are quite radical. That if one does not start from the idea that the hysterical symptom, under its simplest form, that of a “ragade” does not have to be considered as a mystery, but as the very principle of any signifying possibility. You do not have to rack your brains. The fact that the body is made to inscribe something that is called the work would avoid a lot of worries for everyone and the resifting of a lot of stupidities. The body is made to be marked. It has always been done. And the first beginnings of the gesture of love, is always to outline more or less this gesture a little bit.

阅读聖经有时会提醒我们，约伯的牛羊将去吃草的激湍底端，有玫瑰花被摆放在那里。我们人在身体铭记的不同的策略，並不是起源於昨天，而是渊源流长。歇斯底里的病癥，有一个简单的形式，一个「勃然大怒」的病癥，並不需要将它当着是神秘，而是要当着是可能意符化的原理。你们不需要因此绞尽脑筋来理解。身体的存在就是要铭记所谓的工作的东西，这个事实可以替每一个人减少许多的焦虑，甩落许多无谓的愚蠢想法。身体的存在就是要被铭记。它总是已经被铭记。那是爱情的姿态的最早的开端，总是有人会以这个姿态描绘轮廓。

There you are. This having been said, what is the first effect, that most radical effect of (16) this irruption of the One (in so far as it represents the sexual act), at the level of the body.

问题就在这里。说完这些后，它第一个影响是什麽？这个生命主体的「一」，处於身体的层次，作为性的行动的代表，进入世界最激烈的影响是什麽？

Well then, this is what gives us our advantage over a certain number of dialogued speculations about the relation of the One and the many. We, for our part know that it is not as dialectical as all that. When this One irrupts into the field of the Other, namely, at the level of the body, the body breaks into fragments.

这就是为什麽我们被给予这个优势，对於某些的对话的推想，有关生命主体的这个「一」跟众多的「一」的关系。就我们而言，我们知道，这个优势並不是那麽的顺理成章。当生命主体的这个「一」突然闯入大它者的领域，换句话说，在身体的层次，身体崩塌成为碎片。

The fragmented body; this is what our experience shows us to exist at subjective origins. The child dreams of dismemberment! He breaks the beautiful unity of the empire of the maternal body. And what he experiences as a threat, is to be torn apart by her.

这个碎片的身体，这就是我们精神分析的经验告诉我们，它们存在於主体的起源处。小孩梦想到被肢解成碎片！他将母亲的身体的帝国的美丽的一致性崩解。他所经验到的是一种威脅，他会母亲撕裂成碎片。

It is not enough to discover these things and to explain them by a little mechanics, a little ball game: aggression is reflected, reflects back, comes back, starts again! What began it? Before this, it could well be useful to put in suspense the function of this fragmented body. Namely, the only angle from which it has interested us in fact, namely, its relation to what may be involved in truth, in so far as it is itself suspended on aletheia and on Verborginheit, on the hidden character of the sexual act.

光是发现这些事情，然后用一些机械结构理论，或一些球戏理论来解释它们，这样是不足够的。攻击性被反映出来，被反弹回来，会从头一再开始！是什麽使它开始？在讲这个之前，我们最好先将碎片化的身体的功用悬置一旁。换句话说，从我们感到興趣的唯一的角度，也就是说，从它跟真理所牵涉到的层次的关系，因为它本身被悬置在「真理」及「生命的遮蔽处」，在性的行动被隐藏的特性。

Starting from there, of course, the notion of Eros, in the form that I recently railed against as being the force which is supposed to unite by an irresistible attraction all the cells and the organs that our sack of skin gathers together: a conception that is at least mystical, because they do not put up the least resistance to being extracted from it and the rest do not carry on too badly! It is obviously a compensatory fantasy of the terrors linked to this Orphic phantasy that I have just described for you.

当然，从那里開始，从性爱的观念，以我最近嚴厲批评为这个力量，这个力量被认为用无可抗拒的吸引力，联合所有的细胞及器官，这样我们全身的皮囊才聚合得起来。这至少是一个神秘的观念，因为他们完全没有从事抗拒，被从那里被抽离出来，而其馀的部分进行得也还不赖。显而易见的，这是一个当代的暴力的幻见，跟我刚刚跟你们描述过的奥菲斯的幻见有关连。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

Logic of Phantasy 89 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 89
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 19
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 19: Wednesday, May 10, 1967

I am coming back to it. What Freud lagged the “river of mud”, concerning the largest field of knowledge, this whole part of absolutely inundating knowledge from which we are scarcely emerging, to pinpoint it by the term of mystical knowledge. At the basis of everything that has manifested itself to the world, in this order, there is only the sexual act. The other side of my formula: there is no sexual act.

我将回头来探讨它。佛洛伊德命名为「泥泞之流」，关於这一大堆知识，这整个的溢满出来的知识，我们几乎沉迷不拔，名之为「神秘的知识」。在这个秩序，作为展示自身给这个世界看，有的就是这个性的行动。跟我的公式：性的行动不存在，恰恰背道而驰。

It is altogether superfluous to pretend to be referring to the Freudian position in any way whatsoever, if one does not take literally the following. At the basis of everything that (13) has been contributed, up to the present, my God, in terms of satisfaction, knowledge … (I am saying, knowledge. I pinpointed it as mystical in order to distinguish it from that has been born in our day in the form of science)…of everything that belongs to knowledge, there is nothing, at its source, except the sexual act.

假如我们将以下的话实质看待，那假惺惺提到佛洛伊德的立场，纯属多馀。迄今，我们所提出的一切，我的天，都是以满足名义得到知识、、、（我所说的知识，我强调为神秘的知识，以便区别它跟我们的时代以科学之名，得到的知识。）属於知识的一切，在其根源处，除了性的行动外，没有别的。

To read, in Freud, that there are, in the psyche, desexualised functions, means – in Freud – that one must seek sex at their origin. This does not mean that there is what is called in one or other place, for political needs, this famous “non-conflictual sphere”, for example, an ego that is more or less strong, more less autonomous, that can have a more or less aseptic apprehension of reality.

从佛洛伊德那里阅读到，在心理的层面，有些功用的排除性的性质。那意味着，在佛洛伊德那里，我们必须从它们的起源寻找性。这並不意味着，在某个地方，有所谓的这个著名的「非冲突的领域」，可供政治的需求。例如，自我是是否强烈，是否自主，能够有助於客观地理解当时的现实。

To say that there are relations to the truth – I am saying: the truth – that do not involve the sexual act, is properly speaking not true, there are none such.

当我说这里跟真理有些关系，我是说：真理若是没有牵涉到性的行动，适当来说，就是不真实。根本就没有跟性无牵扯的真理。

I apologise for these formulae, whose cutting edge, I suggest, may perhaps be felt in too lively a manner.

我很抱歉提出这些公式，它的尖锐的意涵，我猜想，很可能会引发过分誇张的联想。

But I made this observation to myself. First of all, that all of this is implied in everything that I have ever stated, in so far as I know what I am saying. But also this remark: that the fact that I know what I am saying is not enough! That is not enough for you to recognise it there. Because, basically, the only sanction of the fact that I know what I am saying, is what I do not say! This is not a fate proper to me. It is the fate of all of those who know what they are saying.

但是我自己做过这样的观察。首先，所有这些意涵都暗含在我曾经陈述的一切内容里，所以我知道我在说些什麽。但是还是请注意这句话：光是我知道我在说些什麽，是不足够的！要让你们能够接受，光是这样还不够。因为基本上，我知道我正在说些什麽的唯一认可，是我没有说出来的东西！这不仅是我本人的无可奈何。它也是许多知道他们正在说些什麽的人，所面临的无可奈何。

This is what makes communication very difficult. Either one knows what one is saying, or one says it.

这就是为什麽沟通会变得困难。我们要不就是知道我们正在说些什麽，要不就是我们将它说出来。

But, in many cases, we must consider that it is pointless, because no one notices that the core of what you have to get across is precisely what you never say! This is what the others say and what continues to make noise and, still more, involves certain effects. This is what forces us, from time to time, and even more often that our turn, to do a good sweeping out. Once one is engaged on this path one has no reason to finish. There was, formerly, someone called Hercules who, it appears, finished his work in the stables of someone call Augias. It is the only case that I know of stables being cleaned up, at least when it is a certain domain that is at stake!

但是在许多情况，我们必须考虑到，这是没有意义的，因为没有人会注意到，你必须要传达的核心内容，确实是你意在言外的东西！这就是其他人所说的，闲言闲语喋喋不休，会造成某些的影响。这就是为什麽我们有时候，不得不反复再三地出面澄清一下。一但我们步上这条途径，我们就没有理由不一路走到底。以前，有某个人名叫赫丘勒斯，他似乎完成他在马厩清理马粪的工作。这是唯一的例子，我知道马厩被清理乾净。至少，当时岌岌可危的就是那个领域。

There is only a single domain, it seems – and I am not sure about it – which has no relation with the sexual act in so far as it concerns the truth: it is mathematics, at its point of confluence with logic. But I believe that this is what allowed Russell to say that one never knows whether what one is putting forward is true. I am not saying, truly true! Quite simply, true.

似乎只有这麽一个领域，我不是很确定，它跟性的行动没有关系，因为它关心的是真理：它像数学一样，处於跟逻辑的汇合点。但是我相信，这就是为什麽罗素能够说，我们从来不知道，是否我们所提出的是真实。我没有说是绝对的真实！我只是单纯地说，是真实。

In fact, it is true, starting from a definitional position of the truth. If such and such of some axioms are true, then a system develops, which one can judge to be consistent or not.

事实上，这确实是从真理的定义的立场开始。假如某某公理是真实，那麽根据它们发展出来的系统，我们能够判断是否是前后一致。

What is the relation of this with what I have just said, namely, with the truth, in so far as it requires the presence, the putting into question as truth of the sexual act?

这跟我刚刚所说的，有什麽关系？换句话说，跟真理有什麽关系？作为性的行动的真理，当它受到置疑时，它要求现场的证明。

(14) Well then, even after having said that, I am not sure, all the same, that this marvellous, this sublime modern deployment of mathematical logic, or of logical mathematics, is altogether without a relation with the hesitation about whether there is or not a sexual act.

（第十四）即使说完这段话后，我依旧还不确定，这个神奇，这个崇高的现代的运用数学的逻辑，跟性的行动是否存在，我犹豫不定，完全没有关系？

It is enough for me to hear the groans of someone like Cantor. Because it is in the form of a groan that at given moment of his life he states that people do not know that the great difficulty, the great risk of mathematics, is that it is a place of freedom. We know that Cantor paid very dearly for this freedom!

就我而言，我只要听到像康特这样的人发出哀鸣，我就满意了。因为以这种哀鸣的方式，在他生命的某个时刻，他陈述说，人们不了解数学会牵涉到什样的困难，或怎样的危险，因为那是一个自由的空间。我们知道，康特为了这个自由，付出多麽大的代价！

So that, the formula that the true concerns the real, in so far as we are engaged in it by the sexual act, by this sexual act about which I am advancing, first of all, that one is not too sure that it exists – even though it is the only thing that interests truth -( appears to me the most correct formula, at the point that we are getting to in it.

「真理跟真实界有关」这个公式，我们以性的行为来探讨它，以我正在提出的这个性的行动。首先，我们不要太武断说它确实存在，即使它是唯一让真理感到興趣的部分（我觉得，这是最正确的公式，在我们正在从事它的这个时刻）。

The symptom, then, any symptom, is knotted together at this locus of the holed One. And this is why it always involves, however astonishing this may appear to us, its aspect of satisfaction. I am saying, for the symptom.

因此，病癥，任何病癥，就在生命主体作为空洞的「一」的这个轨迹，被团结在一起。这就是为什麽，就病癥而言，它总是会牵涉到它令人满足的一面，无论我们会多麽大吃一惊。

Sexual truth is exigent and it is better to satisfy it a little bit more than not enough.

性的真理是迫切性的，我们最好无论怎麽满足它，也不过份。

From the point of view of satisfaction, we can conceive that a symptom, in this respect, may be more satisfying than reading a detective story.

从满足的观点而言，我们能够感受到，在这一方面，病癥比阅读侦探小说，还要更引人入胜。

There is a greater relation between a symptom and the sexual act, than between the truth and the fundamental “I am not thinning”, with which I reminded you at the beginning of these reflections, man alienates his “I am not”, which is not easy to tolerate. Compared to which, our earlier alibi of “to be rejected”, even though it is not all that agreeable in itself, may appear more tolerable.

在病癥跟性的行动之间，还有一层更大的关系，远胜过真理跟基本的「我没有比较廋」之间的关系。我一开始时，就使用后者来提醒你们有关这些思想的反省，人疏离他的「我並没有实存」，因为要忍受这个事实並不容易。跟这个疏离比较起来，我们早先「应该被拒绝」的藉口，看起来就比较能让人忍受，即使它的本身也是令人不太好受。

So then? We are finished for the moment with the One. I had to indicate this. Let us go to the Other, as the locus where the signifier takes place. Because I did not tell you up till now that the signifier was there, since the signifier only exists as a repetition. Because it is what brings about the thing that is at stake as true.

那麽要怎麽办？我们目前已经探讨完生命主体的这个「一」。我必须指示出来，让我们继续探讨「大它者」，作为意符发生的轨迹。因为直到现在，我並没有告诉你们，意符在那里，因为意符存在仅是作为一个重复，因为意符所导致的部分，要作为真实，是岌岌可危的。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com