Anxiety 254

Anxiety 254

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

12.6.63 XXII 258
Seminar 22: Wednesday 12 June 1963

For after all it is quite clear that whatever critique, whatever effort of reduction, phenomenological or not, that we apply to it, this category functions, and not simply as an archaic stage of our development.

畢竟,這是顯而易見的,無論述什麼批評,無論是怎樣的化簡努力,無論是現象學與否,我們都會應用到它,這個範疇會發生功用,不僅是作為我們精神分析學發展的一個過時的舞臺。

What is indicated by the way in which I intend to refer it here to the original function of the object o as cause of desire, signifies the transference of the question of the category of causality, from what I would call with Kant the transcendental aesthetic, to that which – if you are willing to agree to it – I would call my “transcendental ethics”.

這個方式指示的內涵,指明會有因果的範疇的問題的移情。以這種方式,我在此打算提到客體的原初的功用,作為欲望的原因。這種移情就是從康得哲學所謂的「超驗的美學」,到我所謂的「超驗的倫理學」,假如你們能夠認同的話。

(5) And here I am forced to advance onto a terrain that I am
forced to propose simply, in order to sweep the sides of it with a searchlight.

在此,我被迫要前進到一個平臺,我被迫要建議,為了要用探照燈偏照它的周邊。

Without being able even to insist, it would be well, I would say, for the philosophers to do their work and notice for example, and dare to formulate something which would allow us truly to situate in its place this operation which I am indicating in saying that I extract the function of cause from the field of “the transcendental aesthetic”, from that of Kant, it would be fitting for others to indicate to you that this is only a sort of completely pedagogical extraction, because there are many things, other things, that it would be fitting to extract from this “transcendental aesthetic”.

我不妨說,我甚至無法堅持,我們最好讓哲學家來做他們份內的工作,例如,去注意到,並且敢去說明某件某件東西。這個東西容許我們真實地將這個運作定位在它的位置。我正在指出的這個運作,我抽離原因的功用,從「超驗美學」的領域,從康得的領域。最好有別人跟你們指示,這只是一種完全是教學方便的抽離,因為有許多事情,其他的事情,我們最好從這個「超驗的美學」抽離出來。

Here I have to do, at least by way of indication, what I
succeeded in eluding the last time by a conjuring trick, when I spoke to you about the scopic field of desire. I cannot avoid
it.

在此,我必須要做到,至少作為指示,上一次我憑藉召喚的詭計,成功地閃避。我跟你們談論有關欲望的視覺的領域。我無法逃避它。

It is necessary all the same that I say, that I indicate
here, at the very moment that I am advancing further, what was implied in what I was telling you, namely that space is not at all an a priori category of sensible intuition, that it is very astonishing that at the point of advancement that we are at in science no one has yet attacked directly something that everything encourages us to do:

我仍然有需要說,我在此指示的,在我正在向前進的時刻,我先前我所告訴你們的意涵,換句話說,空間根本不是一個理解直覺得因果範疇。令人驚奇的是,在我們所屬的科學界進步的這個時刻,並沒有人直接攻擊某件東西,種種跡象都鼓勵我們這樣做。

to formulate that space is not a feature of our subjective constitution beyond which the thing in itself would find, as one might say, a free field, namely that space forms part of the real, and that, after all, in what I enounced, articulated, drew here before your eyes last year with all this topology, there is something whose note some of you certainly felt: this topological dimension, in the sense that its symbolic handling transcends space, evoked for many, not only for some, so many shapes which are presentified for us by the schemas of the development of the embryo, shapes that are singular through this common singular Gestalt which is theirs and which carries us very very far from the direction in which the Gestalt has advanced, namely in the direction of the good shape, shows us, on the contrary something which is everywhere reproduced, and regarding which, in an impressionistic notation, I would say that it is tangible in a sort of torsion to which the organisation of life seems to be obligated in order to lodge itself in real space.

種種跡象都鼓勵我們說明:空間並不是我們主觀的構成的一種特徵。我們不妨說,超越我們主觀的構成之外,事物的本身會發現一個自由的領域。換句話說,空間組成真實界的部份。畢竟,我宣佈,我表達,我獲得的內容,去年在你們面前,用所有這個拓樸圖形。有某件東西,它的主調,你們有一些人會感覺到:這個拓朴圖形的向度,它的象徵符號的處理超越了空間,對於許多人,不僅是一些人,召喚這麼多的形狀。這些形狀呈現給予我們,以胚胎的發展的基模。透過這個共同的奇特形態,這些形狀具有奇特形態。這個形態是他們的形態,它引導我們遠離形態前進的這個方向。換句話說,朝著好的形狀的方向。它跟我們顯示,相反的,有某件東西到處被複製。關於這個東西,以一個印象主義的符號,容我這樣說,顯而易見的,生命的組織似乎受制於某種的扭力,為了要在真實的空間,找到自己的住所。

The thing is everywhere present in what I explained to you last year, and also moreover this year, for it is precisely at these points of torsion that there are also produced the points of (6) rupture whose importance I tried to show you in more than one case in a fashion linked to our own topology, that of the S, of the 0 and the of the o, in a fashion which is more efficacious, more true, more conform to the operation of functions than anything that is mapped out in the doctrine of Freud, in the way that the differences, the vacillations are themselves already indicative of the necessity of what I am doing there, which is linked to the ambiguity on his part for example about the relationships between ego/non-ego, container/contained, ego/outside world. It leaps to the eyes that all of these divisions do not overlap. Why?

在我去年及今年跟你們解釋的內容裏,這個東西處處都出現。確實就是在扭力的這些點,斷裂點也被產生。它的重要性,我設法跟你們顯示,在不只一個個案裏,用跟我的拓樸圖形有關的方式,這個生命主體、客體、及大它者的拓樸圖像,以一個更加有效,更加真實,更加符合於功用的運作,超過佛洛伊德的理論的任何被描繪出來到東西。這些差異,這些搖擺,本身已經指示著,我在這裏所做的是有需要。就他而言,這個模糊曖昧有關,例如,自我與非自我,包容者與被包容者,自我與外在的世界。我們觸目所及的是,所有這些區分並沒有重疊。為什麼?

It is necessary to grasp what is involved and to have found other reference points of this subjective topology that we are exploring here. I will finish with it with this indication,
whose import I know that at least some of you know very well from having heard me now, that the reality of space qua three
dimensional space is something essential to grasp in order to define the form taken at the level of the stage that I tried to illuminate in my first lecture, as the function of the scopic
stage, the form taken on there by the presence of desire,
specifically as phantasy, namely that what I tried to define in the structure of the phantasy, namely the function of the frame – understand by that the window – is not a metaphor. If the frame exists, it is because space is real.

我們需要理解裏面牽涉的東西,並且找到其他的指稱點,對於我們正在此探索的這個主觀的拓樸圖形。我將會以這個指示完成它。它的意義,我知道,你們有一些人也知道,既然你們已經聽我演講。空間的現實界,作為「意符界」、「想像界」、「真實界」三個向度的空間,對於理解是很重要的,為了定義我在我的第一次演講,我設法啟明的這個階段的層次所形成的形式。視覺階段的功用,由於欲望的存在所形成的形式,明確地說,作為幻見。換句話說,架構的功用,並不是一個比喻,(我是根據窗戶的架構來理解)。假如架構存在,那是因為空間是真實的。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pcome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

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: