Anxiety 43 Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 43

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK X
雅克、拉康研討會第十冊

ANXIETY 論焦慮

1962 – 1963

Seminar 5: Wednesday 12 December 1962

I said almost to be complete, because I have not the time to tell you why, the passage a l’acte in this place and acting out at a different one, but I will all the same make you advance along the path by pointing out to you, in the closest relationship with our remarks this morning, the opposition that was already implied and even expressed in my first introduction of these terms, and whose position I am now going to underline, namely between the dimension of too much which is in embarrassment and the dimension of the too little in what I told you, by means of an etymological commentary which you remember I think – at least those who were (10) there – I underlined about the sense of dismay.

我說我幾乎要講完，因為我沒有時間告訴你們為什麼，在這個地方的激情跟演出，處於不同的時刻。但是我仍舊要你們前進，沿著我跟你們指出的途徑，以今天早上，我們的對談所表現的最親密的關係。在我最初介紹這些術語時，已經暗示，甚至是明講出它的對立面。這些術語的立場，我現在將要再強調一次。換句話說，在太多的尷尬的向度，及我所告訴你們太少的真實界的向度之間，我憑藉詞源學的評論，你們會記得，至少在我演講的現場的那些人會記得，我強調過，我有沮喪的感覺。

Dismay, as I told you, is essentially the evocation of a power
which is lacking, esmayer, the experience of what you are lacking in need. It is in the reference to these two terms whose link is essential in our subject; for this link underlines the ambiguity: if there is too much, what we have to deal with then is not lacking to us; if it is lacking to us, why say that elsewhere it embarrasses us, let us be on our guard here not to yield to the most flattering of illusions.

我告訴過你們，沮喪基本上是召喚一種正在欠缺的力量，當你有所需求，卻偏偏欠缺的經驗產生的沮喪。這兩個術語的指稱，它們的連接在我們生命主體的身上是基本的。因為這個連接強調這個模糊曖昧。假如有太多的尷尬，我們所必須處理的就不是我們身上的欠缺；假如對於我們是一種欠缺，那為什麼要說，在別的地方，它讓我們感到尷尬。在此，讓我們小心警戒：我們切勿屈從於幻見場景的迷惑。

In attacking anxiety here ourselves, what are we trying to do, what do all those who have spoken of it ‘scientifically want? Good Lord, it was that it was pure need, what was required of me to posit at the beginning as necessary for the constitution of a world, it is here that this reveals itself not to be useless, and that you have control of it. This is better seen precisely because it is anxiety that is involved.

當我們自己在攻擊焦慮時，我們正在做些什麼？那些以科學術語侃侃而談的人，他們到底要什麼？我的天啊！那就是純粹的需求，我在開始時，所被要求要提出的東西，這個建構一個世界所必需的。就在這裏，這個焦慮顯示自己，不是一無是處。你已經控制它。這一點確實能讓人看得比較清楚，因為它牽涉到焦慮。

And what is seen is what? And to want to speak about it in a properly scientific way is to show that it is what? An immense deception. It is not realised that the whole domain which our discourse has conquered always ends up showing that it is an immense deception.

所被看見的是什麽？想要以正統科學的方法來談論它，這已經顯示它是什麽？巨大的欺騙！大家都沒有體會到，我們真理論述所克服的整個領域，結果總是顯示：它是一個巨大的欺騙。

To master the phenomenon by thought, is always to show how one can remake it in a falsified way, it is to be able to reproduce it, namely to be able to make a signifier of it.

使用思想來掌控這個現象，總是顯示出：我們如何能夠用虛假的方式，來重新鑄造它，如何能夠重新產生它，換句話說，如何能夠使它成為一個意符。

A signifier of what? In reproducing it the subject can falsify the book of accounts, which should not astonish us if it is true, as I teach you, that the signifier is the trace of the subject in the world’s course. Only, if we believe we are able to continue this game with anxiety, well then, we are sure of missing out, because precisely I stated right at the beginning that anxiety is concerned with what escapes this game.

使用什麼來成為一個意符？當重新產生它時，生命的主體能夠將人生的收支簿虛假編造。這一點不會令我們大驚小怪，如同我教導過你們，假如意符的確就是生命主體經歷人生的痕跡，。只是，假如我們相信，我們能夠帶著焦慮，繼續人生的這個遊戲，那麼，我們確定會迷失其中。因為從一開始，我就確實陳述過：焦慮跟這場人生之遊戲所逃離的東西，息息相關。

Therefore this is what we must be on guard against at the moment of grasping what is meant by this relationship of embarrassment to too much signifier, of lack to too little signifier. I am going to illustrate this relationship if you have not done so already: if there were no analysis, of course, I could not speak about it; but analysis encountered it at the first corner.

因此，這是我們必須提防警戒的地方，當我們理解到，尷尬跟意符太多的關係，以及欠缺跟意符太少的關係，是什麼意思。我將要舉例說明這個關係，假如你們還沒有這樣做。當然，假如沒有精神分析學，我本來無法談論它。但是因緣巧合，我在人生最初的轉捩點，邂逅它的就是精神分析學。

The phallus for example, little Hans, just as much of a logician as Aristotle, poses the equation: all animate beings have a phallus. I am presupposing of course that I am addressing myself to people who have followed ray commentary on the analysis of little Hans, who will remember here in this connection, I think, what I was careful to (11) accentuate last year concerning what is called the universal affirmative proposition. I told you the meaning of what I wanted to produce for you by this, namely that the affirmation which is described as universal, positive universal, only has meaning from the definition of the real, starting from the impossible.

例如，小漢斯的這個陽具，對於像亞利斯多德這樣的邏輯專家，他會提出這個平等式：所有的動物都會有陽具。當然，我是在預先假設，我自己正在對談的聽從，他們對於小漢斯的精神分析耳熟能詳。他們會記得在此這個關連。我想，去年我小心翼翼強調的，關於所謂普世皆準的肯定的命題。我告訴過你們，我憑藉這個，想要跟你表達的意思是什麽。換句話說，被描述為普世皆準的這個肯定，具有正面作用的普世皆準。它只有從真實界的定義，從這個不可能界開始，它才具有意義。

It is impossible for an animate being not to have a phallus, something that, as you see, poses logic in this
essentially precarious function of condemning the real, of
eternally stumbling into the impossible. And we have no other
means of apprehending it, we advance from stumble to stumble.
Example: there are living beings, Mummy for example, who do not have a phallus, so there must be no living beings, hence anxiety.

一個動物性的生命不具有陽具，是不可能的。你們看得出來，某件東西會提出邏輯的問題，在這個基本上是不穩定的功用。它一方面譴責這個真實界，另一方面又始終想要闖入這個不可能界。我們沒有其他的方法來掌握它，除了就是步步為營地前進。例如，有一些像母親一樣的生物，她們並沒有陽具，所以一定就沒有生物存在。焦慮因此產生。

And the following step is to be taken. It is certain that the
easiest thing is to say that even those who do not have one, have one. This indeed is why it is the one that we hold onto in general. It is that the living beings which do not have a phallus have one despite and against everything. It is because they have a phallus that we psychologists will call unreal – this will simply be the signifying phallus – that they are living beings.

以下的步驟應該被採取。的確，最容易的事情就是說，即使那些沒有陽具的生物，其實是有。這確實就是為什麼，一般來說，這就是我們掌握的陽具。儘管違背一切的證據，我們說，沒有擁有陽具的生物，其實是有。這是因為他們擁有的陽具，是我們的心理學家所謂的「非真實界」的陽具。這個僅僅是意符化的陽具，因為他們是具有生命的存在物。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw