拉康论移情 0118e

拉康论移情 0118e

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK VIII
拉康研讨班第八册

Transference 论移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根据未编辑的法语录音英译

Seminar 8: Wednesday 18 January 1961

If he hands over to Diotima, why should it not be because, concerning love, things could not go any further with the properly Socratic method. I think that everything is going to demonstrate this and the discourse of Diotima itself.

假如他让帝奥提玛接替,那有何不可?倒不是因为关于爱,事情就无法用适当的苏格拉底的方法,更深入下去。我认为,每一样东西将会证明这一点,及帝奥提玛的论述本身。

Why should we be surprised about it, I would say already: if there is
a step which constitutes compared to the contemporaneity of the sophists the beginning of the Socratic procedure, it is that a knowledge (the only sound one Socrates tells us in the Phaedo), can affirm itself from the simple consistency of this discourse which is dialogue which is carried on in terms of the necessary apprehension, the apprehension as necessary of the law of the signifier.

为什么我们对此并不感惊奇,我将会这样说:跟辩护士的当代性相比较,假如有个的步骤组成苏格拉底的程序的开始,那就是:一种知识能个肯定它自己,从这个论述的简单的一致性,(这是苏格拉底在费得篇告诉我们的唯一健全的知识,)这个论述是被执行的对话,用必须能让人理解的术语,这种理解是能指的法则所需要的。

When one speaks about odd and even, with which, do I need to remind you that in my teaching here, I think I took enough pains, exercised you for long enough to show you that it is a question here of the domain which is entirely closed off in its own register, that the odd and the even owe nothing to any other experience than that of the operation of signifiers themselves, that there is no odd or even, in other words nothing countable,
except what is already raised to the function of an element of the signifier, of the texture of the signifying chain.

当我们谈论到奇数与偶数,我并不需要提醒你们,在我这里的教学,我认为我已经尽了足够努力,跟你们运作足够长久时间,为了跟你们显示,在此地是领域的问题,这个领域完全被封闭在它自己的铭记里。奇数与偶数并没有归属于任何其它经验,除了就是能指本身的运作经验。没有奇数或偶数存在,换句话说,没有任何可数的东西,除了已经被提升到能指的元素的功用,能指锁链的材料的功用。

One can count words or syllables, but one can only count things because
of the fact that words and syllables are already counted.

我们能够计算文字或是音节,但是我们仅能计算事情,因为这个事实:文字与音节已经被计算。

We are on this plane, when Socrates begins to speak, outside the
confused world of the discussion, of the debate of physicists who
like the sophists preceded him who, at different levels, in different ways, organise what we might call in an abbreviated fashion – you know that I would only accept it with the greatest of reservations – the magical power of words.

我们处于这个層次,当苏格拉底开始谈话,在讨论的混淆的领域之外,在物理学家的辩论领域之外。这些物理学家,就像辩护士,抢先在他之前,以不同的层次,不同的方法,组织我们简单称为的「文字的魔术力量」—你们知道,我仅是接受它,带着最大的保留。

How does Socrates affirm this knowledge which is internal to the operation of the signifier: he posits, at the same time as this knowledge which is entirely transparent of itself, that this is what constitutes its truth.

苏格拉底如何肯定这个知识,作为能指的运作的内部。他跟这个知识同时提出,这种知识的本身完全是透明的。这就是组成它的真理的原因。

Now is it not on this point that we have taken the step which
makes us disagree with Socrates; in this no doubt essential step
which assures the autonomy of the law of the signifier, Socrates, for us, prepares this field of the word precisely, properly speaking, which, for its part, has permitted the whole critique of human knowledge as such.

现在并不是在这一点,我们曾经採取这个步骤,让我们不同意苏格拉底。在这个无可置疑是很重要的步骤,它确定能指的法则的自主权。对于我们而言,苏格拉底确实准备文字的这个领域。适当地说,就它本身而言,文字容许人类知识的本身承受所有的批评。

But the novelty, if what I am teaching you about the Freudian revolution is correct, is precisely the fact that something can be sustained in the law of the signifier, not simply without this involving a knowledge but by expressly excluding it, namely by constituting itself as unconscious, namely as necessitating at its level the eclipsing of the subject in order to subsist as unconscious chain, as constituting what is fundamentally
irreducible in the relationship of the subject to the signifier.

但是新奇,假如关于佛洛伊德的革命,我正在教导你们的是正确、那确实就是这个事实:在能指的法则,某件东西能够被维持,这个东西不仅没有牵涉到一种知识,而且生动地被排除在外。也就是说,它组成它的本身,作为无意识。也就是作为在它的层次,生命主体的被遮蔽成为必要,作为组成基本上是无法化简的东西,在生命主体与能指的关系。

All this to say that this is why we are the first, if not the only ones, not to be necessarily surprised that the properly Socratic discourse, the discourse of episteme, of knowledge transparent to itself, cannot be pursued beyond a certain limit (8) with regard to a particular object, when this object, if indeed it is the one on which Freudian thought has been able to bring new light, this object is love.

所有这一切,是用来表达,为什么我们是開前锋者,即使不是仅有的一批人,我们并没有必然要大吃一惊,适当的苏格拉底的论述,认识论,知识对自己本身而言是透明的,它无法被追寻到某个限度之外,关于一个特别的客体。当这个客体,假如这确实是佛洛伊德的思想始终能够跟我们啟明的:这个客体就是爱。

In any case, whether you follow me in this or whether you do not follow me, with respect to a dialogue whose effect, throughout the ages, has maintained itself with the force and the constancy, the interrogative power and the perplexity which develop around it, Plato’s Symposium, it is clear that we cannot satisfy ourselves with such miserable reasons as saying that if Socrates allows Diotima to speak, it is simply to avoid too greatly irritating the self-love of Agathon.

无论如何,你们是否同意我的看法,或是不同意,关于一个对话录,经过几世纪以来,它的影响力持续而坚定地屹立不摇,这个询问于困惑都环绕它发展,柏拉图的「飨宴」。显而易见,我们无法满足我们自己,对于如此悲惨的理由,譬如说:假如苏格拉底容许帝奥提玛谈论,仅是为了避免阿加封的自恋,引起太强烈的令人愤怒

If you will allow a comparison which keeps all its ironic value, suppose that I have to develop for you the totality of my doctrine on analysis verbally and that – verbally or in writing does not matter – in doing it, at a certain point, I hand over to Francoise Dolto, you would say: “All the same there is something…. why, why is he doing that?” This, naturally
supposing that if I hand over to Francoise Dolto this is not to have her say stupid things!

假如你们容许一种比较,保持它的反讽价值,假定我必须跟你们,使用口说文辞,发展我对于精神分析的论述的整体性—使用口说文辞,或使用文字书写,都无所谓—当在某个时刻这样做时,我让法兰克兹、德投接替下去,你们将会说:「这仍然是某件东西、、、为什么他这样做?」当然,这假定,假如我让法兰克兹、德投接替下去,这并不是要她说一些傻事情!

This would not be my method and, moreover, I would have great trouble making her say such things.

这将不是我的方法。而且,真的让她说这些事情,我会惹来很多的麻烦。

This embarrasses Socrates much less, as you are going to see, because the discourse of Diotima is characterised precisely by something which at every instant allows there to appear gaps which undoubtedly allow us to understand why Socrates does not assume them.

苏格拉底则是比较不会因此感到尴尬,你们将会看出,因为帝奥提玛的论述的特色,确实是某件在每个时刻都容许差距出现。无可置疑的,这些差距容许我们了解为什么苏格拉底让他一直讲下去。

What is more, Socrates punctuates these gaps with a whole series of replies which are in a way – it is tangible, it is enough to read the text – more and more amused.

而且,苏格拉底用一整个系列的回答,强调这些差距。这些回答在某方面,是具体的,越来越感到興趣,我们阅读文本就知道。

I mean that there are first of all very respectful replies, then more and
more of the style: “Do you really think that?”, then afterwards: “Very well, let us go as far as you are leading me”, and then, at the end, that becomes clearly: “Have fun, my girl, I’m listening, talk away!”. You must read this discourse in order to understand that this is what is in question.

我的意思是,首先,有些回答是表示敬意,越来越多是对于风格的回答:「你真的这样认为?」然后再询问:「呵呵,让我们跟随你的引导前进。」然后在最后,就变得很清楚:「说得有趣,小姐,我正在听,继续说下去!」你们一定要阅读这篇论述,为了了解,这是受到质疑所在。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.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: