Seminar IX :Identification 02

Seminar IX :Identification 02
第九研讨班 :认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

15.11.61 I 2
Seminar 1: Wednesday 15 November 1961

It is not however from this angle that I intend to begin. I will put the accent rather on that which, in identification, poses (5) itself immediately as identical, as founded on the notion of the same, and even of the same to the same, with all the difficulties that this gives rise to.

可是,我并没有打算从这个角度开始。我将强调放置在认同时,立刻提出自己作为认同的东西。如同被建立在相同的基础上,甚至相同针对相同,以及这会产生的各种困难。

You surely know and can even rather quickly spot what difficulties have always been presented for thinking by the following: A = A. Why separate it from itself in order to
replace it there so quickly? What we have here is not purely and simply a jeu d’esprit.

你们确实知道,并且甚至很快就觉察出,对于思想会呈现怎样的困难,有关以下的:A等于A. 为什么要将它分开,为了要这么快就取代它?我们这里所拥有的,不单纯是一种「机智隽语」。

You can be sure, for example, that, along the line of a movement of conceptual elaboration, which is called logical-positivism, where one or other person strives to aim at a certain goal which would be, for example, that of not posing a logical problem unless it has a meaning that can be located as such in some crucial experiment, it would be decided to reject any logical problem whatsoever which could not in some way offer this final guarantee by saying that it is as such a meaningless problem.

譬如,你们能够确定,沿着观念建构的动作脉络,所谓的逻辑实证论,在那里,有某个人要到达某个目标,譬如,那个目标将是不提出一个逻辑的问题,除非在某个重要的试验里,它具有本身能够被定位的意义。假如逻辑的问题无法以某种方式,提供这种最后的保证,因为它的本身是一个没有意义的问题,那它将会被决定排除掉。

It nevertheless remains that if Russell can give a value to these mathematical principles, to the equation, to the equivalence of A = A, someone else, Wittgenstein, opposes it because precisely of the impasses which seem to him to result from it in the name of the principles he starts with and that this refusal will even be set forth algebraically, such an equality requiring then a change of notation in order to find what can serve as an equivalent of the recognition of the identity A is A.

可是,问题仍然是,假如罗素能够赋予价值,给予这些数学的原理,给予平等方程式,给予这个A等于A的相等,某位其他的人,维根斯坦,反对这种相等,因为确实地,他觉得这西僵局是由于它而形成,以他开始使用的原理的名义。这种拒绝甚至会用代数来表达。这样一种相同要求一致符号标记的改变,为了找到什么能够充当A就是A的认同的体认的相等。

For our part, we are going, having posed the fact that it is not at all the path of logical-positivism which appears to us, in logical matters, to be in any way the one which is justified, to (6) question ourselves, I mean at the level of an experience of
words, the one in which we put our trust despite its equivocations, even its ambiguities, about what we can tackle under this term of identification.

就我们而言,我们正要,我们已经提出这个事实:我们觉得,这根本不是逻辑实证论的途径。在逻辑事物上,要成为能够自圆其说的东西,为了询问我们自己,我的意思是,处于文字的经验的层次,我们信任文字的这个经验,尽管它的模糊暧昧,关于我们能够克服的东西,在这个认同的术语下。

You are not unaware of the fact that one observes, in all tongues, certain rather general, even universal historical turning points so that one can speak about modern syntaxes opposing to them in a global way syntaxes which are not archaic, but simply ancient, by which I mean the tongues of what one can call Antiquity.

你们并不知道这个事实:在所有的语言里,我们观察到某些相当一般性,甚至普及性的历史的转捩点。这样,我们才能够谈了关于现代的句法。这些现代的句法以并非是过时,而仅是古代的句法,以全球性的方式,跟它们相提并论。关于这些句法,我指的是我们所谓的古代的语言。

These sorts of general turning points, as I told you, are those of syntax. It is not the same with the lexicon where things are much more changeable; in a way each tongue
contributes, as compared to the general history of language, vacillations which are proper to its own genius and which render one or other of them more propitious for highlighting the history of a meaning.

我告诉你们,这些一般性的转捩点,就是句法的转捩点。这跟事情更加多变的词汇并不相同。跟语言的一般历史比较起来,每个语言都以某种方式造成摇摆,这些摇摆就语言自己的天才而言,是适当的,并且让他们的语言更加吉利,因为强调意义的历史。

Thus it is that we can pause at what is the term, or the substantival notion of the term, of identity (in identity, identification, there is the Latin term idem), and this will go
to show you that some significant experience is supported in the common French term, which is the support of the same signifying function, that of the meme.

因此,我们能够在认同的这个术语的内涵部分稍作停留,或是对于这个术语的实质的观念,(认同一词,是拉丁文的词源)。这将有助于跟你们显示:某个重要的经验,在通用的法文术语里,找到支持。那就是相同的能指化的功用,模拟的功用。

It seems, in effect, that it is the em, the suffix of i in idem, in which we find operating the function, I would say of the radical in the evolution of Indo- European at the level of a certain number of italic tongues; this em is here redoubled, an ancient consonant which is rediscovered then as the residue, the remainder, the return to a primitive
thematic, but not without having collected in passing the intermediate phase of etymology, positively of the birth of this theme which is a commonplace Latin met ipsum, and even a (7) metipsissimum from the expressive low Latin, pushes us then
to recognise in what direction here experience suggests we should search for the meaning of all identity, at the heart of what is designated by a sort of redoubling of moi-meme, this myself being, as you see, already this metipsissimum, a sort of au jour of aujourd’hui which we do not notice and which is indeed there in the moi-meme.

实际上,似乎就是这个「em」,认同这个词的字尾。在这个字尾,我们发现,在印欧语系的进化,除掉字首字尾的本体字根的功用的运作。在某些「斜体字语言」的层次,这个「em」在此被双重重复,一个古代的子音因此被重新发现作为残余物,剩余物,回转到一个原始的主题。但是并非每有偶尔收集的字源的中间部分,正面来说,就是这个主题的诞生的中间部分,这个主题数通用的拉丁字met ipsum, 甚至是一个从表态的通俗拉丁字metipsissimum 认同。这个字逼使我们去体认,精神分析经验跟我们暗示应该从怎样的方向寻找一切认同的意义,在「成为我自己」的一种双重重复所指明的核心。你们看出,这个「属于我的生命实存」已经就是这个metipsissimum认同, 这是一种 au jour of aujourd’hui 自动出现,确我们没有注意到,它确实就是在「成为我自己」那里。

It is then in an metipsissimum that there are afterwards engulfed the me, the thou, the he, the she, the them, the we, the you and even oneself, which happens then in French to be a soi-meme.

因此,就在一个认同,随后的这个「我」,这个「你」,这个「他」,这个「她」,这个「他们」,这个「我们」,这个「你们」,甚至这个「自己」,都被吞没在里面。在法文,那恰好成为一个「自我」。

Thus we see there, in short in our tongue a sort of identification through the operation of a special significant tendency, that you will allow me to qualify as “mihilisme” in so
far as to this act, this experience of the ego is referred.

因此,我们在那里看出一直认同,总之用我们的语言,通过一种特别的重要的倾向。请你们容许我将这个倾向的特质称为「mihilisme」,因为自我的这个经验被提到这个行动。

Naturally, this would only have an incidental interest if we were not to rediscover in it another feature in which there is revealed this fact, this difference which is clear and easy to locate if we think that in Greek, the auton of the self is the one which serves to designate also the same, just as in German and in English the selbst or the self will come into play to designate identity. Therefore I do not believe that it is for nothing that we pick up here and that we interrogate this kind of permanent metaphor in the French expression.

当然,假如我们并没有想要在题那里重新发现另外一个特征,这仅是会引起我们偶然的興趣。在这个特征里,这个事实被显示,这个差异很清楚而且容易找出位置,假如我们认为,在希腊文,自我的这个「自动」就是用来指明也是相同,就像在德文及在英文,「自我」这个词语将会运作,来指明「认同」。因此,我并不相信,我们在此挑选,我们质疑在法文的表达这种永远的比喻,是白费力气。

We will allow it to be glimpsed that it is perhaps not unrelated to what happened at
a quite different level: that it should have been in French, I mean in Descartes, that being was able to be thought of as inherent in the subject, in a mode in short which we will describe as captivating enough to ensure that ever since the formula was proposed to thought, one might say that a good share (8) of the efforts of philosophy consists in trying to extricate oneself from it, and in our own day in a more and more open fashion, there being, as I might say, no thematic of philosophy which does not begin, with some rare exceptions, by trying to master this famous: “I think therefore I am”.

我们将容许它被瞥见,它或许跟完全不同层次所发生的事情,并非不相关。它本来应该存在于法文里,我的意思是存在于笛卡尔里。生命的实存能够被认为是主体的本质,总之,这种模式,我们将描述为足够迷人地确定:自从这个公式被建议给思想,我们可以说,哲学的一大部分的努力,在于尝试将自己从那里挣脱出来。在我们的时代,方式越来越开放。我不妨说,除了少数例外,没有一个哲学的主题,不是从这里先开始。哲学的主题总是尝试驾驭这个「我思故我在」。

I believe that for us it is not a bad point of entry for this “I think therefore I am” to mark the first step of our research. It is understood that this “I think therefore I am” is on the path taken by Descartes. I thought of indicating it to you in passing, but I will tell you right away: it is not a commentary on Descartes that I can try to tackle today in anyway whatsoever, and I have no intention of doing it.

我相信,对于我们而言,这并不是一个不好的进入点,对于这个「我思故我在」,用来标示我们研究的第一步。它被了解为,这个「我思故我在」是笛卡尔採取的途径。我想到要顺便跟你们指明它,但是我将立刻告诉你们:我今天尝试各种方法要克服的,并不是对于笛卡尔的评论,我并没有这样做的意图。

The “I think therefore I am”, naturally if you referred to Descartes’ text is, both in the Discourse and in the Meditations, infinitely more fluid, more slippery, more vacillating than this kind of lapidary expression with which it is marked, both in your memory and in the passive or surely inadequate idea that you may have of the Cartesian process. (How would it not be inadequate because moreover there is not a single commentator who agrees with another one as regards its exact sinuosity).

当然,假如你们提的是笛卡尔的文本,在「真理论述方法论」及「沉思录」,这个「我思故我在」,比起它被用来标示这种珠光宝气的表达,会更加流动,更加闪烁,更加摇摆不定,无论是在你们的记忆,或在笛卡尔的思维过程,你们可能拥有的这个被动,或确定是不足够的观念里。( 这种观念怎么可能会足够呢?因为没有一位评论者会同意另外一位评论者,关于这个观念的曲折变化。)

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: