Anxiety 55 Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 55

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 8: Wednesday 16 January 1963

If the o which we are dealing with here was all the same
introduced a long time ago and along the path which brings it to you, was therefore announced elsewhere, it was announced in the formula of the phantasy $ <> o, desire of o, this is the formula of the phantasy qua support for desire.

假如我們在此處理的這個客體,在很久以前就已經被介紹,在我引導你們的這條研究途徑,它因此在別的地方,就已經被宣佈過。它被宣佈,以幻見這個公式:
生命的主體對於欲望客體的辯證法。這就是幻見的公式,作為對於欲望的支持

My first point will be then to recall, to articulate, to add one more specification certainly for those who have heard me, one not impossible for them to master by themselves, even though it does not seem superfluous to me to underline it today.

我首先要做的,是提醒,表達,及增添另外一個明確的東西,給那些曾經聽過我演講的人。這個明確的東西,他們雖然光憑他們自己,要領悟出來,也不是不可能。不過,我還是不覺得我今天強調它是多餘的。

As a first point – I hope to reach point four – and to specify this function of the object in so far as we define it analytically as object of desire, the mirage coming from a perspective that one could call subjectivist, I mean the one which in the constitution of our experience puts the whole accent on the structure of the subject, this line of elaboration that the modern philosophical tradition brought to its most extreme point, let us say, around Husserl, by separating out the function of intentionality, is one
that makes us the captives of a misunderstanding, concerning what can be called the object of desire. The object of desire cannot be conceived of in a fashion which teaches us that there is no noeme, no thinking about something’which is not turned towards something, the only point around which idealism can turn in its path towards the Real.

作為一個起始點,(我希望我能講到第四點),為了指明這個客體的功用,我們從精神分析的立場,給它定義為欲望的客體。這個海市蜃樓的幻景來自一個觀點,我們可以稱之為「主觀主義者」。我的意思是,當我們在建構我們的生活經驗時,我們整個的強調點,都放置在生命主體的結構上。這種精心建構的技倆,現代哲學的傳統將它運用得最為淋漓盡致。它環繞著現象學家胡塞爾,區隔開一个意义的「意圖性」的功用。容我們這樣說,這種現象學會使我們成為一種誤解的奴隸,關於所謂的欲望的客體。欲望的客體不能夠用這種方式來構想,我們不可能思考有關某件東西,它不朝向某件東西。理想主義在它朝向真實界的途徑,都要環繞這個唯一的點、

(2) Is this how things are as regards desire? For this level of our listening which exists in everyone and which has need of intuition, I would say: “Is the object of desire out in front?

這就是關於欲望的事情本質嗎?存在於每一個人的我們傾聽的這個層次,它擁有直覺得需要,容我這樣說:「欲望的客體會暴露在前面嗎?」

This is the mirage that is involved and which has sterilised
everything that in analysis intended to advance in the direction described as object relations. It is in order to rectify it that I have already travelled along many paths.

這就是這個海市蜃樓的幻景所牽涉到,而且使得一切東西都貧瘠化。在精神分析裏,這一切東西都被用來提升朝向被描述為的「客體關係」。為了要矯正它,我已經沿著許多研究途徑,遠途跋涉。

It is a new way of accentuating this rectification that I am going to put forward to you now.

這是一種新的方式,強調我現在正在跟你們提出的這個矯正。

I will not make it as developed as it no doubt should be,
reserving, I hope, this formulation for a work which will reach
you along a different path.

我將按照它所應該被發展的方式,使它儘量被發展。我希望,我能保留這個說明,給沿著另外一條途徑,到達你們的作品。

I think that for most of you listening it will be enough to hear the gross formulae with which I believe I can content myself to emphasise today this point which I have just introduced.

我認為,對於你們大部份傾聽的人而言,能夠聽到大略的公式,應該就夠了。我相信,我今天能夠強調我剛剛介紹的這一點,我就心滿意足。

You know how, in the progress of epistemology, the isolation of the notion of cause has produced considerable difficulties.

你們知道,在認識論的進展過程,將原因這個觀念孤立出來,曾經產生相當多的困難。

It is not without a series of reductions which end up by leading it to the most tenuous and the most equivocal function that the notion of cause was able to be maintained in the development of what in the largest sense we could call our physics.

在我們廣義所謂的物理學的發展過程,原因的觀念能夠維持它微弱而模棱兩可的功用,不是沒有經過一連串的化簡的過程。

It is clear on the other hand that whatever reduction one submits it to, what one might call the mental function of this notion cannot be eliminated, reduced to a sort of metaphysical shadow.

在另一方面,顯而易見的,無論我們將它承受怎樣的化簡,我們所謂的這個觀念的精神層面的功用,就是無法被減少,被化簡成為一種形上學的陰影。

We clearly sense that there is something, which it is too little
to say that is a recourse to intuition, which makes it subsist,
which remains around this function of cause, and I claim that it is starting from the re-examination that we can make of it, starting from analytic experience, that the whole Critique of pure reason, brought up to date with our science, could
re-establish a correct status of cause.

我們很清楚地感覺到,有某件東西,因為份量太少,我們無法說它訴諸於直覺。直覺可以使它存在。但是會始終繞著這個原因的功用。我宣稱,從這個重新檢查開始,我們能夠解釋它。從精神分析經驗開始,純粹理性的整個的批判,隨著科學的進步成為一種顯學。它替原因重新建立一個正確的地位。

I scarcely dare to say to introduce it – for after all what I am going to formulate is here only a discourse event and scarcely anchored on this dialectic – I would say then, to fix our aims, what I intend to make you understand. The object, the object o, this object which is not to be situated in anything whatsoever which is analogous to the intentionality of an noeme, which is not in the intentionality of desire, this object ought to be conceived by us as the cause of desire, and, to take up my (3) metaphor of a little while ago, the object is behind desire.

我幾乎不敢說是要介紹它,(畢竟,我所要說明的是,在此它只是一個真理論述的事件,幾乎不會停駐在這個辯證法上)。我不妨這樣說,為了要確認我們的目標,這是我打算要讓你們明暸的。這個客體,這個客體不應該被定位在任何類同一個意義的「意圖性」的東西。它並不是欲望的意圖性,我們應該構想這個客體,當著是欲望的原因。這個客體躲在欲望的後面,用不久以前我用來當著比喻的方式來說。

It is from this object o that there arises this dimension whose
omission, whose elision, whose avoidance in the theory of the
subject constituted the inadequacy up to the present of this
whole coordination whose centre manifests itself as a theory of knowledge, gnoseology.

從這個欲望的客體,這個向度就出現。在生命主體的理論,這個向度的遺漏,它的省略,它的避免,構成了直到目前,整個座標不足的地方。這整個座標點中心證明它自己,是一種知識的理論,一名知識的哲學。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

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: