Archive for January, 2012

The Psychoses 12

January 25, 2012

The Psychoses 12
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Ill

THE WORD AND THE REFRAIN
文字与叠句

AUTOMATISM AND ENDOSCOPY
自动机制与内视镜检视

PARANOID KNOWLEDGE
偏执狂的知识

GRAMMAR OF THE UNCONSCIOUS
无意识的文法

2
Those of you who attend my case presentations are aware that last time I presented quite a clear case of psychosis and will recall the amount of time I put into drawing from her the sign, the stigma, that proved we were indeed dealing with a delusional and not simply with a person of difficult character who quarrels with those around her.

你们参加我的个案讨论的那些人,都知道,上一次我呈现一个相当清楚的精神疾病的个案,让人想起我曾经花费许多时间从她那里获得这个讯息,这个羞辱。它证明我们确实是在处理一种幻觉,不仅是一个困难性格的人 她跟她周围的人物争吵。

The examination went well beyond the hour that it usually takes for it to appear clearly that, at the limits of this language that there was no way of making her go beyond, there was another one.

这个检查远超过通常所需要的那个小时,为了让它清楚出现。在这个语言的限制,不可能让她超越,还有另外一个方法。

This is the language, which has a particular and often extraordinary savor, of the delusional. It’s a language in which certain words take on a special emphasis, a density that sometimes err, giving it this frankly neologistic character that is so striking in the creations of paranoia. From out of the mouth of our patient of the other day there finally emerged the word galopiner,4 which gave us the signature to everything that had been said up to that point.

这就是这个语言,它具有一个特别而且时常特殊的嗜爱幻觉。这就是这个语言,在这个语言里,某些的字词具有一种特别的强调,一种有时犯错的密度,给予它这种坦白的铸造新词的特性。这种特性在偏执狂患者的创造物里,是如此的引人注意。从前天我们的病人的嘴里,出现「街头顽童」这个字眼,给予我们这个直到当时所被道及的一切的背书。

This was something quite different from the frustration of her dignity, of her independence, of her daily affairs, of which the patient was the, victim. This term frustration has belonged to the vocabulary of decent people for some time now – who doesn’t go on all day long about the frustrations they have experienced or will experience or that others about them experience? She was obviously in another world, in a world in which this term galopiner, and doubtless many others that she hid from us, constitute essential reference points.

这是某件完全不同于她的尊严,她的独立性,她的日常事物的遭受挫折,病人是这些的受害者。「挫折」这个术语,现在已经属于正当人们的字彙。这些正当的人们并没有整天从事关于他们曾经经验到,或是将会经验到的挫折,或是关于他们的人们经验到的挫折。她显而易见地处于另外一个世界。在那个世界,「街头顽童」这个术语,无可置疑地,许的其他的术语,她隐藏不让我们知道,组成了基本的指称点。

Let me pause here for a moment so you can appreciate how necessary are the categories of the linguistic theory that last year I was trying to make you feel comfortable with.

让我在此暂时停止一下,这样你才能够欣赏,去年我曾经尝试让你们感觉自在的语言学理论的范畴,所多么的需要。

You recall that in linguistics there is the signifier and the signified and that the signifier is to be taken in the sense of the material of language. The trap, the hole one must not fall into, is the belief that signifieds are objects, things. The signified is something quite different – it’s the meaning, and I explained to you by means of Saint Augustine, who is as much of a linguist as Monsieur Benveniste, that it always refers to meaning, that is, to another meaning.

你们回忆一下,在语言学,有能指与所指指。能指应该被理解为语言的材料。这个陷阱,我们一定不要掉落的空洞,就是这个信仰:所指是客体,是物体。所指是某件完全不相同的东西。它是意义,我凭借圣奥古斯丁跟你们解释。他跟边文尼斯特是同样的优秀的语言学家。它总是提到意义,换句话说,总是提到另外一种意义。

The system of language, at whatever point you take hold of it, never results in an index finger directly indicating a point of reality; it’s the whole of reality that is covered by the entire network of language. You can never say that this is what is being designated, for even were you to succeed you would never know what I am designating in this table – for example, the color, the thickness, the table as object, or whatever else it might be.5

语言的系统,无论你们在哪一点掌握它,从来没有产生一种中指,直接指向现实点。这是整个的现实,被语言的整个网络所遮盖。你们永远不能够说,这就是所被指明的东西,因为即使你们想要成功,你们永远不会知道,我以这个表格指明的是什么。譬如,这个颜色,这个厚度,这个表格作为客体,或是任何其他东西。

Let us pause at this quite simple little phenomenon of galopiner that came from the mouth of the patient the other day. Schreber himself constantly underlines the oddness of certain terms in his discourse. When he speaks to us for example of the Nervenanhang, nerve contact, he makes it quite clear that this word was spoken to him by the tested souls or the divine rays.

让我们暂时停止一下,对于前天来自病人嘴中的这个简单的「街头顽童」的小现象。苏瑞伯本人不断地强调在他的论述里某些术语的的奇特性。当他跟我们谈论,譬如,谈论到「神经接触」,他表达得相当清楚:这个字词是承受过煎熬的灵魂或是神性的光辉,跟他言说的字词。

These are key words, and he himself notes that he would never have found the
formula for them, for the original words, the full words, which are very different from the words he uses to communicate his experience. He himself makes no mistake about this, there are different levels here.6

这些都是关键字,他自己注意到,他本来永远不会发现到这个公式来代替它们,代替这些原创的字词,这些完整的字词。它们截然不同于他使用来沟通他的经验的那些字词。关于这一点,他自己并没有犯错误,在此有不同的层此。

At the level of the signifier, in its material aspect, the delusion is characterized
precisely by that special form of discordance with common language known as a neologism. At the level of meaning, it’s characterized by the following, which will appear to you only if you set out with the idea that a meaning always refers to another meaning, that is, precisely, that the meaning of these words can’t be exhausted by reference to another meaning.

在能指的层次,在它的材料的层面,幻觉的特殊性质,确实是跟众所周知的铸造新词的通俗语言的不协调,产生的那个特别形式。在意义的层次,它的特色如下:仅有当你们带着这样的观念出发,意义总是提到意义。也就是说,这些字词的意义,无法被提到另一个意义穷尽,这个意义才会出现在你们身上。

This can be seen in Schreber’s text as well as in the presence of a patient. The meaning of these words that pull you up has the property of referring essentially to meaning as such. It’s a meaning that essentially refers to nothing but itself, that remains irreducible. The patient himself emphasizes that the word carries weight within itself. Before being reducible to another meaning it signifies within itself something ineffable, it’s a meaning that refers above all to meaning as such.

在苏瑞伯的文本以及一位病人的面前,这一点能够被看得出来。让你们停止的这些字词的意义,具有这种特这种特色:它基本上是提到意义的本身。这一个意义基本上没有提到别的,仅是它自己的本身,这个意义始终无法被还原。病人本身强调:这个字词在它的本身之内,具有意义的份量。在意义被还原成为另外一个意义之前,它的意义是指向它的本身之内的某个无法被表达的东西。尤其重要的是,这一个意义提到意义的本身。

We can see this at the two poles of all the concrete manifestations of which these patients are the centre. However far the endophasia that covers the entire phenomena to which they are subject is taken, there are two poles where this characteristic is taken to its highest point, as Schreber’s text stresses, two types of phenomena where the neologism is displayed – the intuition and the formula.

在病人作为中心的所有的具体的证明的两极,我们能够看出这一点。无论它们臣服的涵盖整个现象,这个内化地无可表达是如何深入地被看待,总是有两个极端。在这两个极端,铸造新词被展示—直觉与公式。

The delusional intuition is a full phenomenon that has an overflowing, inundating character for the subject. It reveals a new perspective to him, one whose stamp of originality, whose characteristic savor, he emphasizes, as Schreber does in speaking of the fundamental language to which his experience introduced him.

幻觉的直觉是一个完整的现象,对于主体而言,这个现象具有满溢泛滥的特性。它对于主体显示一种新的观点,主体强调这一个观点的原创性印记,具有特色的风味,如同苏瑞伯所强调的,当他言说他的经验跟他介绍的这个基本的语言。

There, the word – with its full emphasis, as when one says the word for, the solution to, an enigma – is the soul of the situation.

在那里,这个字词—以它的完整的强调,如同当我们说:「一个谜团的字词,一个谜团的解答」。这就是这个情境的灵魂。

At the opposite pole there is the form that meaning takes when it no longer
refers to anything at all. This is the formula that is repeated, reiterated,
drummed in with a stereotyped insistence. It’s what we might call, in contrast to the word, the refrain.

在这个相反的极端,就是意义採取的形,式,当它不再提到任何东西。这就是这个被重复,被反复强调,灌输的公式,具有典型的坚持。这就是我们所谓的叠句,字词的对比。

These two forms, the fullest and the emptiest, bring the meaning to a halt,
it’s like lead in the net [plomb dans le filet], in the network, of the subject’s
discourse – a structural characteristic in which, once we approach it clinically,
we recognize the mark of delusion.

这两种形式,最完整与最空洞的形式,将意义终止。就像网罟里的铅块,在网络里的铅块。主体论述的铅块。这是一种结构性的特色。在里面,我们一旦从临床探讨到它,我们体认出幻觉的这个记号。

This is how this language we can let ourselves be taken in by in our first initial contact with the subject, sometimes even the most delusional subject, brings us to the point of going beyond his conception and positing the term discourse.

For, to be sure, these patients speak to us in the same language as ourselves. Without this component, we would be in total ignorance. It’s therefore the economy of discourse, the relationship between meaning and meaning, the relationship between their discourse and the common organization of discourse, that allows us to ascertain that delusion is involved.

这就是我们如何让我们自己被这个语言欺骗的方式,由于我们首次跟主体接触。有时甚至是最具有幻觉的主体,这个语言带我们来到这一点,要超越他的观念,并提出「论述」的这个术语。因此,这是论述的运作,意义与意义之间的关系,这个论述与共同的论述组织之间的关系,容许我们确定里面会牵涉到幻觉。

雄伯说
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 11

January 23, 2012

The Psychoses 11
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Ill
The Other and psychosis
大他者与精神疾病

HOMOSEXUALITY AND PARANOIA
同性恋与偏执狂

THE WORD AND THE REFRAIN
文字与叠句

AUTOMATISM AND ENDOSCOPY
自动机制与内视镜检视

PARANOID KNOWLEDGE
偏执狂的知识

GRAMMAR OF THE UNCONSCIOUS
无意识的文法

The life of a psychoanalyst – as I was reminded by my analysands [analysis]
several times on the one day – isn’t rosy.

精神分析家的生活并非是美好幸福—如同有一天我的几位分析者跟我提醒好几次。

The comparison that can be made between the analyst and a rubbish dump
is justified. All day long in fact he has to endure utterances that, surely, are
of doubtful value to himself and even more so to the subject who communicates
them to him.

将分析家与垃圾堆做类比,并非空穴来风。事实上,一整天他必须忍受一些表白,的确,这些表白对于他是否有价值值得怀疑,甚至对于跟他沟通的主体,更是如此。

This is a feeling that the psychoanalyst, if he is a real one, has not only been accustomed to overcoming for a long time, but, to be honest, it’s one that he purely and simply abolishes within himself in the exercise of his practice.

这是精神分析家不但长久以来已经习惯于克服的一种感觉,而且坦白地说,这种感觉,他实实在在从他的内心里面废除,当他运用他的实践时,假如他是实实在在的分析家。

I must on the other hand say that this feeling comes alive again with all its force when one is led to go over the sum total of works that make up what is called the analytic literature. There is no more disconcerting an exercise for scientific attention than to be made aware over a short space of time of the points of view that authors have elaborated on the same subjects. And nobody seems to perceive the flagrant and permanent contradictions that are brought into play whenever basic concepts arise.

在另一方面,我必须说,这种感觉再一次鲜活起来,由于它的力量,当我们被引导要温习那一大堆所谓的精神分析文献组成的著作的总数。这是最令人困窘的科学专注的运作,当我们被迫知道作者们对于相同的主题的建构的观点,往往仅维持一段短时期。似乎没有人感觉这些显著而永久的悖论会产生,每当基本的观念出现时。

1
You know that psychoanalysis explains the case of President Schreber, and paranoia in general, by portraying the subject’s unconscious drive as nothing other than a homosexual tendency.1 Drawing attention to all the facts grouped around such a notion was surely fundamentally new, and it profoundly changed our outlook on the pathogenesis of paranoia.

你们知道,精神分析解释苏瑞伯庭长及一般偏执狂的案例,描述主体的无意识冲动,当著实实在在是一种同性恋的倾向。吸引大家注意所有被汇集到事实,这样一个观念,确实基本上是新颖的。它深刻地改变了我们对于偏执狂的病因学。

But as for knowing what this homosexuality is, at which point of subjective economy it acts, how it occasions the psychosis – 1 believe I can testify that, in this sense, all the outlines we have contain the most imprecise, even the most contradictory approaches.

但是关于知道这个同性恋是什么,它根据主体的生命活力的哪一点运作,它如何产生精神疾病。我相信我能够证实,以这个意义,我们拥有的所有的轮廓,包括这个最不准确的,甚至最悖论的方法。

People speak of defense against the supposed irruption – and why this irruption at this point? – of the homosexual tendency. But this is far from having been proved, if one is to give a meaning that is in any way precise to the term defense – which one is very careful not to do, so as to be able to continue cogitating in the dark. It’s nevertheless clear that there is a constitutive ambiguity here and that the defense maintains a far from univocal relation with the cause that provokes it. It’s thought either that the defense helps maintain a certain equilibrium or else that it provokes the illness.

人们谈论对于防止所谓的同性恋倾向发作的防卫机制。为什么会在这个时刻发作?但是这根本没有被证明,假如我们想要给予意义,这个意义就「防卫机制」这个术语而言,实在是正确的。我们非常小心地不要去证明,为了要能够继续在黑暗里探索沉思。可是,显而易见的,在此有一个内容结构的模糊暧昧,这个防卫机制维持一个更加一致的关系,跟引起它的原因。大家也认为,这种防卫机制帮忙维持某种的平衡,要不然它会引起疾病。

We are also assured that the initial determinants of Schreber’s psychosis are to be sought in the moment of onset of the different phases of his illness.

我们也确定,苏瑞伯的精神疾病的这个最初的决定因素,应该被寻找,在他的疾病的不同时期的开始的时刻。

You know that around 1886 he had his first crisis, whose co-ordinates people
try to show us by means of his Memoirs – at that time he had nominated for
the Reichstag, we are told.2 Between this crisis and the second, which covers
a period of eight years, Magistrate Schreber was normal, with the exception
that his hope of paternity was unfulfilled.

你们知道,在1886年,他遭遇的他的第一次危机。人们尝试跟我们显示这次危机的座标,凭借他的回忆录—,在当时,他曾经提名充当首席法官,我们这样被告诉。在这次的危机跟第二次危机之间,中间区隔八年,苏瑞伯法官是正常的,除了,他想要拥有子女的愿望并没有被实现。

At the end of this period he happened to accede, in a way that up to a point was premature and certainly at an age at which it could not have been foreseen, to a very high function, that of Presiding Judge of the Leipzig Court of Appeal. This function, which was in the nature of an eminent distinction, conferred authority on him, so it’s
said, that elevated him to responsibility that, though not quite total, was at least greater and heavier than any he could have hoped for, which gives the impression that there was a relation between his promotion and the onset of the crisis.

在这个时期的结束,他恰巧必须同意,以直到当时是早熟的方式,确实在一个当时很难预见的年纪,他必须同意一个非常高的功用,雷普西格的上诉法庭的首席法官的功用,那是崇高地位的性质,授予权威给他。所以据说,那个权威提升他的责任,这个责任虽然不是全部,至少比起他本来所能期望的更大更沉重。这给予这个印象,在他的升官与危机的开始之间,有密切关系。

In other words, in the former case one appeals to the fact that Schreber was unable to satisfy his ambition, and in the other that it was fulfilled from the outside, in a manner that is virtually consecrated as being undeserved.

换句话说,在前者的个案,我们诉诸于这个事实; 苏瑞伯不能够满足他的企图心。在后者的个案,它从外在被满足,使用的方式几乎是被奉献,作为不值得。

These two events are given the same value as trigger. It’s carefully noted that
the President had no children, so as to assign a prime role to the notion of paternity. But at the same time it’s claimed that because he finally accedes to the position of father, the fear of castration thus comes to life in him again, with a corresponding homosexual craving.

这两个事件被给予相同的价值,作为启动者。我们细心地注意到,苏瑞伯首席法官并没有子女,为了指定一个重要的角色,给予充当父亲的观念。但是同时地,根据宣称,他最后同意的父亲这个位置,阉割的恐惧因此在他的身上,再一次栩栩如生起来,带有一种相应的同性恋的渴望。

This is what is supposed to be directly at issue in the onset of the crisis and to entail all the distortions, pathological deformations, and mirages that progressively evolve into a delusion.

这就是被认为直接引起争论的地方,在危机的开始,并且涵盖所有的扭曲,病态的畸形,及逐渐演化成为一种幻觉。

Surely the fact that the masculine characters in the medical entourage are present from the outset, that they are named one after the other and successively come to the centre of President Schreber’s extreme paranoid persecution, is enough to show their importance.

的确,在医学的照护,男性的角色从一开始就存在,他们陆续地被命名,并且连续第成为苏瑞伯的极端偏执狂的迫害的核心人物。这个事实,就足够显示他们的重要性。

This is, in a word, a transference – which is undoubtedly not to be taken in quite the sense that we usually mean, but it’s something of that order, bound up in a special way with those in whose care he had been.

总之,这是一种移情—无可置疑的,不要用我们通常的意思去理解这种移情,而是某件那种层次的东西,以特别的方式跟他所接受的照顾的方式息息相关。

Undoubtedly this is an adequate explanation of the choice of characters, but before we become too satisfied with this overall arrangement it needs to be observed that, in providing its motivation, the proof by the contrary is neglected. People fail to realize that both fear of the struggle and premature success are given the value of a sign with the same positive sense in each case.

无可置疑地,这是一种充分的解释,对于人物的选择。但是在我们成为太过于满足它所需要被观察到这个全面性的安排。当提供它的动机时,相反的一面的证据被忽略。人们无法体认到,奋斗与过早成功的双重恐惧被给予一种讯息的价值,在两个情况,都具有相同的正面的价值。

If by chance President Schreber had, between his two crises, become a father, this would be emphasized and much would be made of the fact that this paternal function would have been unbearable for him. In short, the notion of conflict is always played upon in an ambiguous manner – the source of conflict and, what is much less easy to see, the absence of conflict are placed on the same level. The conflict leaves an empty place, one might say, and it’s in the empty place of the conflict that a reaction, a
construction, a bringing into play of subjectivity, appears.

假如偶然地,苏瑞伯首席法官在他的两次危机之间,成为父亲,这将会被强调,这是事实将会被重视: 这个父亲的功用对于他而言,本来会上无可忍受的。总之,冲突的观念总是以一个模糊暧昧的方式被扮演。冲突的来源,更加不容易看出的,与冲突的欠缺,被放置在相同的层次。这种冲突留下一个空洞的位置,我们不妨说,这是在冲突的这个空洞的位置,一种反应,一种建构,一种主体性的运作会发生。

This suggestion is only designed to show you that the same ambiguity as the one our last lesson was about is at work, the ambiguity of the very meaning of a delusion, and which here is concerned with what is normally called the content and which I would prefer to call the psychotic statement [dire].

这种建议仅是被设计为了跟你们显示,这个相同的模糊,如同我们上一次研讨班讨论的相同模糊,正在运作。一种幻觉的这个意义的模糊,在此它关系到正常所谓的内容,我宁可称之为精神疾病的陈述。

You think you are dealing with someone who is communicating with you because he speaks the same language as you. And then, what he is saying is so understandable that you get the feeling, particularly if you are a psychoanalyst, that here is someone who has penetrated, in a more profound way than is given to the common lot of mortals, into the very mechanism of the system of the unconscious. Somewhere in the second chapter Schreber expresses it in passing – Enlightenment rarely given to mortals has been given to me}

你们认为你们正在处理某个正在跟你沟通的人,因为他谈论跟你相同的语言。然后,他所正在说的,是如此可了解,以致于你获得这种感觉,特别是假如你是一位精神分析家,在此是某个曾经贯彻的人,以一种更加深刻的方式,超越有限生命的众生的命运,进入无意识的系统的机制。在第二章的某个地方,苏瑞伯偶然这样表达: 我获得到天启,是一般众生难得一见的。

My discourse today is about this ambiguity whereby the very system of the
delusional is supposed to provide us with the elements of its own understanding.

我今天的论述是关于这个模糊,幻觉者的神经系统被认为提供给与我们,以它自己的理解的要素。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 10

January 23, 2012

The Psychoses 10
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

II

PRESIDENT SCHREBER
苏瑞伯庭长

On the other hand, an entire metabolic imagery is developed with extreme
precision regarding the nerves, according to which the impressions registered
by the nerves subsequenly become the primary material which, reincorporated
into the rays, nourishes divine action and may well be taken up again, reworked, and utilized in later creations.

在另一方面,一整个新陈代谢的意象极端正确地被发展,关于神秘。依照这个意象,印象被神经铭记,随后成为原初的材料。当这些材料被重新合并成为光辉时,滋养了神圣的行动,并且很有理由被重新从事,被重新建构及利用,作为后来的创造。

The details of these functions matter enormously and we shall come back to them. But already it appears to be characteristic of these rays that they talk – they are obliged to, they have to speak. The nerves’ soul intermingles with a certain fundamental language defined by the subject – 1 shall show you with what subtlety when I read out the appropriate passages. It’s akin to a highly vigorous German, with an extremely developed use of euphemism) that includes using the ambivalent power of words – next time I shall give you a condensed reading to greater effect.

这些功用的细节非常地重要。我们将回头谈论它们。但是它似乎是这些光辉的特色:它们谈话,他们不得不谈话,他们必须言说。这些神经的灵魂,跟主体所定义的某些的「基本的语言」,互相混合。我将跟你们显示它们的微妙之处,当我朗读这些适当的段落时。它类似一直非常严峻的德国人,对于委婉语运用得维妙维肖,这些委婉语包括使用文字具有可疑力量。下一次,我将给予你们一个关于那个意思的浓缩的朗读

It’s quite exciting to recognize a striking likeness here to Freud’s famous article on the double meaning of primitive words.14 You recall that Freud thought he had found an analogy between the language of the unconscious, which admits no contradiction, and primitive words that are characterized by their ability to designate the two poles of a property or quality, good and bad, young and old, long and short, etc.

这是相当令人興奋斗,体认到在此一个引人注意的相像,类似弗洛伊德的著名的文章,讨论原始文字的双重意义。你们回想一下,弗洛伊德梦想他曾经找到一个类比,在无意识的语言与原始的文字之间。前者比容许有任何的悖论,后者的特色则是它们能够指明一个特性或特质的两个极端,好与坏,年轻及衰老,长和段等等。

A lecture by M. Benveniste last year presented you with a convincing critique of that from the point of view of linguistics,15 but it remains no less true that Freud’s remark carries weight in our experience with neurotics, and if there were anything that guarantees its value it would be the emphasis that in passing Schreber confers on it.

边文尼斯特去年所做的演讲,呈现给与你们具有说服力的批判,从语言学的观点。但是这仍然是同样真实的,弗洛伊德的谈论具有相当的份量,有关我们精神分析对于神经症的经验。假如有任何东西保证它的价值,那将是苏瑞伯恰好给予它的这个强调。

This delusion, whose richness you will see, presents surprising analogies – not only through its content, the image’s symbolism, but also through its construction, its very structure – with certain schemas that we can ourselves be called upon to draw out of our own experience.

这个幻觉,你们将会看出它的丰富性,呈现令人惊奇的类似,不当通过它的内容,意象的象征,而且通过它的建构,它的结构,带有某些基模,我们自己会被要求根据我们自己的经验描绘这些基模。

You may, in this theory of divine nerves that talk and may be integrated by the subject while remaining radically separate from him, vaguely see something that isn’t totally different from what I teach about the way one has to describe the functioning 37 of the unconscious.

在神性神经的理论:神性神经可能会被主体合并,一方面又跟他强烈地隔开,你们可能模糊地看出某件东西。这个东西并不完全不同于我所教导,关于我们必须描述的无意识的功用。

The Schreber case objectifies certain structures supposed correct in theory – with the possibility of overturning that stems from this, which is in any case a question that arises concerning all species of emotional construction in these sensitive domains that we are habitually exploring.

苏瑞伯的个案让在理论上被认为是正确的某些的结构客观化,带有起源于这里的颠覆的可能性。无论如何,这是一个产生的问题,关于各种情感的建构,在我们正在习惯于探索的这些敏感的领域。

This remark was made by Freud himself, who in some ways authenticates the
homogeneity I’m claiming. At the end of his analysis of the Schreber case he notes that he has never yet seen anything that so much resembles his own libido theory, with its disinvestments, separation reactions, influence at a distance, as Schreber’s theory of divine rays, which doesn’t bother him, since the drift of his whole exposition is to reveal a surprising approximation between Schreber’s delusion and structures of both interindividual exchange and intrapsychical economy.17

弗洛伊德自己发表这个谈论。在某方面,他让我正在宣称的同质性成为真实。在他对于苏瑞伯的个案的精神分析结束,他注意到,他还没有看见过任何东西,如此类似他自己的力比多理论:力比多的错误投注,分开的反应,远距离的影响。这些像是苏瑞伯的神性光辉的理论。这个理论并没有让他感到困扰,因为他的整个的表述的漂浮,是要显示一个令人惊奇的靠近:处于苏瑞伯的幻觉与结构,对于个人之间的交换与内部心理的力量运作。

So, as you see, we are dealing with an advanced case of madness. His delusional introduction gives you an idea of the polished nature of Schreber’s lucubrations. And yet, owing to this exemplary case and to the intervention of such a penetrating mind as Freud’s, we find ourselves for the first time in a position to grasp structural notions which it’s possible to extrapolate to all cases – this vivid and at the same time illuminating novelty allows a classification of paranoia to be recast on completely new foundations.

所以,如你们所见,我们正在处理一个严重的疯狂案例。他的幻觉的介绍给与你们一个观念:苏瑞伯的精心钜作具有润色精炼的特性。由于这个典范的个案,与诸如弗洛伊德如此深刻心灵的介入,我们发现我们自己第一次处于理解结构性的观念。要获得所有个案的结构性的观念是可能的。这个生动而同时具有启发性的新奇,容许偏执狂的分类重新被塑造,根据完全新的基础。

We also find in the very text of the delusion a truth that isn’t hidden, as it is in the neuroses, but made well and truly explicit and virtually theorized. The delusion
presents it – one can’t even say from the moment one has the key to it, but as soon as one takes it for what it is, a double, perfectly legible, of what is explored by theoretical investigation.

就在幻觉的这个文本里,我们也发现一项没有被隐藏的真理,因为它发生在神经症患者身上,但是它被表达得非常明确,而且几乎被实现。这个幻觉呈现它—我们甚至不能够说,从这个时刻,我们拥有它的解答,但是当我们接受它,因为它本来的样子,一个双重,而且非常请楚地,对于理论的研究所探索的东西。

This is where the exemplary character of the field of the psychoses, for which I have recommended that you reserve the greatest extension and the greatest suppleness, is located, and this is what justifies our giving special attention to it this year.
23 November 1955

这就是精神疾病的领域作为典范的特性。我曾经推荐,对于这个特性,你们应该保留这个最大的延伸及最大的弹性。这个特性被定位,这就是我们今年要给予特别注意的地方。

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 09

January 22, 2012

The Psychoses 09
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

II

DIALECTICAL INERTIA
辩证法的惰性

SEGLAS AND PSYCHOMOTOR HALLUCINATION
歇格勒斯与心理动力的幻觉

PRESIDENT SCHREBER
苏瑞伯庭长

3

After a short illness between 1884 and 1885, a mental illness consisting of a hypochondriacal delusion, Schreber, who then occupied quite an important place in the German judiciary, left Professor Flechsig’s Psychiatric Clinic completely cured, it would seem, with no apparent aftereffects.

在1884年与1885年之间,一场短期的疾病,一场精神的疾病, 内容是忧郁症的幻觉,苏瑞伯,当时在德国的司法界居有举足轻重的地位。他离开弗列思格教授的精神分裂的诊所,似乎完全痊愈,没有明显的后余症。

For the next eight years or so he led an apparently normal life and he himself points out that the only shadow over his domestic happiness was the regret at not having had children.

以后八年左右,他过著明显的正常生活,他自己指出,笼罩在他的家庭幸福的唯一的阴影,是遗憾没有儿女。

At the end of these eight years he was named Presiding Judge to the Court of Appeal in the city of Leipzig. Having received the announcement of this extremely important promotion before the vacation period, he took up office in October. He was, it seems, as so often happens in many mental crises, a bit overwhelmed by his functions. At fifty one he was young to be presiding over a court of appeal of this importance
and the promotion unhinged him slightly.

在这八年结束时,他被提名为雷普兹格市的上诉法庭的首席法官。在暑假之前,当他接到这个极端重要的升官的公告之后,他在十月就职。似乎,如同许多精神危机时常发生的事情一样,他被他的所作所为冲昏了头。在五十一岁,他成为如此重要的上诉法庭的首席法官,算是年轻。这种升官,稍微让他不知所措。

He found himself among men far more experienced, more accustomed to dealing with such difficult matters, and for a month he overworked, as he himself says, and began to become disturbed again – insomnia, flight of ideas, the appearance of more and more disturbing themes in his thoughts, which led him to further consultations.

他发现他自己跟那些老经验的法官平起平坐,更加习惯于处理如此棘手的事情。一个月来,他操劳过度,如他自己所说的,并且开始再一次受到困扰,有失眠症,逃避各种观念,在他的思想里,越来越多的困扰的主题出现。这些症状导致他寻求更多的谘商。

And once again he was confined. First in the same Psychiatric Clinic, Professor
Flechsig’s, then, after a short stay in the mental home of Dr. Pierson in Dresden, in the Sonnenstein Asylum, where he was to remain until 1901.

再一次,他进入医院。首先,在相同的精神分裂的诊所,弗列西格教授,当时,短期停留在德瑞顿的皮尔森医生的精神医院,在孙嫩斯坦的疗养所,他预定留在那儿,直到1901年。

It was there that his delusion went through an entire series of phases of which he gives us an account that is, it seems, extremely trustworthy and extraordinarily composed, written during the last months of his confinement.

就在那里,他的幻觉经历一个整系列的发作,他跟我们描述那场发作。似乎,那个描述是极端可信任,而且特别地镇定,那是在他住院的最后几个月被写成。

The book was to be published immediately upon his release. Therefore, at the time he claimed the right to leave he hid from no one that he would make his experience known to all humanity, with the view of informing everybody of the most important revelations for them that his experience contained.

这本书应该在他公布之后马上被出版。因此,在他宣称离开的这个权利,他隐藏不让任何人知道,他将会让他的经验让全人类所周知,为了要告诉每一个人,有关他的经验所包含的对于全人类的最重要的启示。

This book, published in 1903, is the one Freud picked up in 1909. He spoke of it on his holidays with Ferenczi and it was in December 1910 that he wrote his “Psycho-Analytic Notes upon an Autobiographical Account of a Case of Paranoia.”15

这本书,在1903年被出版,是弗洛伊德在1909年获得的这一本。当他跟费冷西去度假时,他谈论到它。那是在1910年的十二月,他书写「精神分析笔记:论偏执狂个案的自传描述。」

We shall quite simply open Schreber’s book, Memoirs of My Nervous Illness.
The letter preceding the body of the work, which is addressed to Professor
Flechsig, private consultant, clearly shows the medium by which a
delusional’s critique of the terms he holds to most can be established.

我们将仅是打开苏瑞伯的书,「我的精神疾病回忆录」。在这本著作的本体之前的这封信,是针对弗列西格教师,他的私人的谘商师。它清楚地显示这个媒介,凭借这个媒介,他最为坚持的术语的幻觉的批判,能够被证实。

This, at least for those of you who have no experience of these cases, is of a value
that deserves to be highlighted. You will observe that Dr. Flechsig occupies a central place in the construction of the delusion.

至少,对于你们没有这些个案的经验的人,这是非常有价值,应该获得强调。你们将会观察到,弗列西格医生在幻觉病症的建构,具有举足轻重的地位。

Lacan reads the letter, pp. vii-xii.

拉康阅读这封信,p411-511.

You will appreciate the courteous tone, the clarity and order. The first chapter is taken up with a whole theory concerning, at least in appearance, God and immortality. The terms at the centre of Schreber’s delusion consist in an admission of the prime function of nerves.

你们将会欣赏这个客气的语调,清晰而有条理。第一章被从事,关系到一整个理论,至少在外表上,上帝跟永恒。在苏瑞伯的幻觉的中心的这些术语,在于承认神经的主要功用。

Lacan reads the first paragraph, pp. 6-7.

拉康阅读第一段 p6-7.

Everything is there. These rays, which exceed the bounds of recognized
human individuality, which are unlimited, form the explanatory network,
but which he also experiences, on which our patient spins his entire delusion
like a web.

每一件东西都在那里。这些光辉,超越可体认的人类的个别性的限制。这些光辉是无限的,形成解释性的网络,但是他也经验到,我们的病人编织他的整个的幻觉,就像一个网络。

The essential point stems from the relation between the nerves, principally
between the subject’s nerves and the divine nerves, which comprises an entire
series of vicissitudes, among which there is the Nervenanhang, or nerve-contact,
a form of attraction apt to put the subject in a state of dependence upon several characters, on whose intentions he decides in different ways over the course
of his delusion.

这个基本的要点起自于神经之间的关系,原则上处于主体的神经及神的神经之间。这组成一整个系列的起伏变化。在这些起伏变化当中,有这个神经的接触,一种吸引的形式,倾向于将主体摆放于依赖好几个人物的状态。他以不同的方式决定那些人物的意图,在他的幻觉的过程。

Initially these intentions are far from benevolent, if only because of their catastrophic effects upon him, but are found over the course of the delusion to be transformed, integrated, into a real progressiveness, like the one you see dominating the personality of Dr. Flechsig at the beginning of the delusion and, at the end, the structure of God. There is examination and even progress characteristic of the divine rays, which are the foundation of souls.

最初,这些意图根本不是善意,假如仅是因为它们对于他的灾难性的影响,但是它们被发现,在这个幻觉被转移,被合并,成为一种真实的进步的过程,就像你们看到这个幻觉支配着弗列西格医生的人格,在幻觉的开始。追根究底,那是上帝的结构。对于神的光辉的这个特色,有关省察跟进展,那就是灵魂的基础。

This is not to be confused with the identity of the said souls – Schreber strongly emphasizes that the immortality of these souls must not be reduced to the level of the person. The preservation of the ego’s identity doesn’t seem to him to require justification. All this is said with an air of likelihood that doesn’t render the theory unacceptable.

这不应该跟所谓的灵魂的认同混淆—苏瑞伯强烈强调,这些灵魂的永恒一定不要被还原到这个人的层次。对于他而言,自我认同的保留似乎并没有要求充分理由。所有这一切被说时,带着可能性的神情,使的理由不会难以接受。

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 08

January 22, 2012

The Psychoses 08
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

II

DIALECTICAL INERTIA
辩证法的惰性

SEGLAS AND PSYCHOMOTOR HALLUCINATION
歇格勒斯与心理动力的幻觉

PRESIDENT SCHREBER
苏瑞伯庭长

2

In short, it’s precisely because there has always been a radical misrecognition of the dialectical dimension in the phenomenology of pathological experience that the clinical has gone astray. This misrecognition, it may be said, characterizes a class of mind.

总之,确实是因为对于病理经验的现象,辩证维度总是有一个极端的误认,临床治疗总是迷失。可以这样说,这个误认表现心灵阶层的特色。

It seems that from the entry into the field of human clinical observation a century and a half ago when, with the beginnings of psychiatry, this field as such was formed, from the moment we became concerned with man, we have radically misrecognized that dimension which everywhere else nevertheless seems to be alive, accepted, handled with ease in the sense of the human sciences, namely, that of die autonomy as such of the dialectical dimension.

似乎,一个半世纪之前,从进入人类的临床观察到领域,随着精神分裂的开始,这个领域的本身就被形成,从我们变得关心人的时刻开始。我们强烈地误认那个维度,可是,在每个其他地方,那个维度似乎很热络,容易地被接纳,处理,以人文科学的意义来说。换句话说,辩证维度的自主权本身。

Authors point to the integrity of the paranoid subject’s faculties. Will and action, as Mr. Kraepelin was saying just before, seem to us to be homogeneous in him with what we expect from normal beings.

作者指向偏执狂主体的能够的尊严。如同克拉普林以前所说的,我们觉得,在他身上,意志及行动似乎跟我们从正常人所期望的,具有同质性。

There is no deficiency anywhere, no fault; there are no functional disorders. One forgets that the dialectical changeability of actions, desires, and values is characteristic of human behavior and that it makes them liable to change not only from one moment to the next but constantly and even that it makes them pass over to
strictly opposite values as a function of a change of direction in the dialogue.

任何都没有欠缺,没有错误,没有功用性的疾病。我们忘记,行动,欲望,与价值的这个辩证的可变性,是人类行为的特征。这个可变现性让他们容易受到改变,不但从一个时刻到下一个时刻,而且不断地,甚至是,它让他们传递到绝对相反的价值,作为一种对话的方向的改变的功用。

This absolutely fundamental truth is present in the most popular of fables
that show what was loss and disadvantage at one instant becoming happiness
bestowed by the gods a moment later.

这个绝对基本的真理呈现在寓言的最受欢迎的部分。这些寓言显示在一个瞬间的损失与不利,过一个时刻之后,会变成众神所赐予的快乐。

The ever-present possibility of bringing desire, attachment, or even the most enduring meaning of human activity back into question, the constant possibility of a sign’s being reversed as a function of the dialectical totality of the individual’s position, is such a common experience that it’s stupefying to see this dimension forgotten as soon as one’s fellow whom one wants to objectify is concerned.

质疑欲望,亲密,或甚至人类活动的永久的意义,是否具有永久存在的可能性,一个符号象征不断地被倒转的可能性,作为一种个人立场的辩证的整体性的功用。这是一个如此普遍的经验,以致于令人惊奇地看到这个维度被遗忘,就我们想要客观化的的同伴而言。

It’s never completely forgotten, though. We find a trace of it whenever the observer allows himself to be guided by his feeling for what is going on. The term interpretation lends itself to all sorts of ambiguities in the context of this reasonable madness into which it’s inserted. Authors speak of combinatory paranoia – how fertile this term could have been had they been aware of what they were saying, that the secret effectively resides in the way the phenomena are combined.

尽管如此,它永远不会被忘记。我们找到它的一个痕迹,每当这个观察者容许他自己被他的感觉引导,对于正在进行的东西。「解释」这个术语有助于各种的模糊暧昧,在它被插入的这个合理的疯狂的上下文。作者谈论到综合性的偏执狂—这个术语本来会上多么的丰饒,假如他们当时知道他们正在说些什么。这个秘密有效地在于现象被组合的方式。

The question that has been advocated frequently enough here to be of full value, that of Who speaks?, must dominate the whole subject of paranoia. I already pointed this out to you last time when I reminded you that verbal hallucination plays a central role in paranoia. You know how long it took to perceive what is nevertheless sometimes quite visible, which is that the subject himself utters what he says he hears – it took M. Seglas and his book Legons climques.12

这个问题在此曾经时常地被提出,足够具有充分的价值,是「谁在言说」的价值?它必须支配偏执狂的整个主体。我上一次已经指出这一点,当我提醒你们,文词的幻觉扮演一个中央的角色在偏执狂。你们知道,这需要多久的时间才能感觉到,有时完全可见的是什么。那就是主体本身表达他听到的他所说的话。请看一下西格拉斯及他的书「Legons climques」

By a sort of brilliant stroke at the beginning of his career he pointed out that there were people having verbal hallucinations who could be observed, by quite obvious signs in some cases and by looking slightly more closely in others, to be uttering the words they accused their voices of having spoken to them, whether or not they were aware of it, or did not want to know. It constituted a small revolution to observe that the source of auditory hallucination was not external.

凭借在他的事业的开始,某种杰出的表现,他指出有些人拥有能够被观察到的文辞的幻觉,由于在某些个案的某种明显的符号象征,并且在其他个案,更加仔细所观察,为了表达他们控诉声音曾经对他们言说的字词,无论他们是否知道这个声音,或是不想知道。它形成一种小个革命,当他观察到听力的幻觉来源并不是外在的。

This is because, or so it was thought, the source is internal, and what is more tempting than to think that this corresponds to the tingling of a zone itself called sensory? It remains to be known whether this can be applied to the domain of language. Are there verbal psychical hallucinations properly so-called? Are they not always more or less psychomotor hallucinations? Can the phenomenon of speech, in both its pathological forms and its normal form, be dissociated from the fact, which is nonetheless perceptible, that when the subject speaks he hears himself?

这是因为,或者它被认为,这个来源是内在的。更加令人诱惑的是,有什么会比这样认为更诱惑人?认为这是对应于被称为的感官的地区本身的玎玎声?有待知道的是否这个声音能够被应用到语言的领域。适当来说,文词的心理的幻觉存在吗?他们难道不总是心理动力的幻觉吗?言说的这个现象,在它的病态的形式跟它的正常的形式,能够跟这个事实相脱离吗?这仍然是可以感觉的到的,当主体言说他听到他自己的声音?

One of the essential dimensions of the phenomenon of speech is that the other isn’t the only person who hears you. The phenomenon of speech can’t be schematized by the image that serves a number of what are called communication theories – sender, receiver, and something that takes place in between. It seems to have been forgotten
that among many other things in human speech the sender is always a receiver
at the same time, that one hears the sound of one’s own words. It’s possible
not to pay attention to it, but it’s certain that one hears it.

言说的现象的基本维度之一,是他者并不是唯一听到你的人。言说的现象无法被基模化,由于这个意象充当许多所谓的沟通的理论—送出,接收,及某件发生在中间的东西。它似乎曾经被遗忘。在人类言说的诸多事情当中,送出者同时总是一个接收者,我们听到我们自己话语的声音。不去注意它,这是可能的,确实为们听到这个声音。

Such a simple remark dominates the entire question of what is known as verbal psychomotor hallucination, and it’s perhaps because it’s too self-evident that in the analysis of these phenomena it has moved into the background.

如此一个简单的谈论支配着整个的问题,对于众所周知的文词的心理动力的幻觉。或许因为它是自明的,在这些现象的精神分析,它已经移动到背景。

Of course the little Seglasian revolution is far from having brought us a solution to the enigma. S6glas remained with the phenomenal exploration of hallucination, and he had to retract what was too absolute in his initial theory.

当然,西格拉斯的这个革命,根本没有带给我们对于迷团的解答。西格拉斯对于幻觉始终从事现象的探索。他必须放弃他早期理论太过于绝对的东西。

He restored their place to certain hallucinations that are untheorizable in this register, and he threw some new clinical light and contributed a subtlety of description, neither of which can be ignored – I advise you to have a look at him.

他恢复他们的位置到某种的幻觉,那些幻觉在这个铭记里是无法被理论化,他让我们看到临床的真相,并且贡献许多微妙的描述。其中没有一个描述被忽略—我劝告你们阅读他的东西。

If many of these episodes in the history of psychiatry are instructive, it’s perhaps more by virtue of the errors they bring into focus than by the positive contributions that supposedly result from them. But it’s not possible simply to devote oneself to negative experiences of the field concerned and construct solely on the basis of errors. Errors are in any case so abundant as to be almost inexhaustible. We shall just have to take a few shortcuts to try to get to the heart of the matter.

假如许多这些轶事在精神分裂学的历史上,是具有教育性质。或许凭借着这些错误,它们更加引人注目,比起被认为凭借从它们获得的积极的贡献。但是这并不可能仅是专注于相关领域的负面的经验,及仅是根据错误的基础来建设。无论如何,错误是如此之多,以致于无法穷尽。我们仅是必须採取一些短路,为了尝试探究问题的核心。

We shall do this by following Freud’s advice and, with him, enter into the analysis of the Schreber case.

我们将凭借遵循弗洛伊德的劝告来完成。我们跟随他从事对于苏瑞伯个案的精神分析。

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 07

January 20, 2012

The Psychoses 07
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

II

DIALECTICAL INERTIA
辩证法的惰性

SEGLAS AND PSYCHOMOTOR HALLUCINATION
歇格勒斯与心理动力的幻觉

PRESIDENT SCHREBER
苏瑞伯庭长

2
Let’s return to the example we took last time.

让我们回到我们上一次採用的例子。

We have, then, a subject for whom the world has begun to take on a meaning.
What does this mean? For some time he has been prey to strange phenomena
that consist in his noticing things going on in the street. But what things? If you question him you will see that some points remain mysterious to him while he will express himself about others. In other words, he symbolizes what is happening in terms of meaning.

我们因此有一个主体,对于他,这个世界已经开始具有一种意义。那是什么意思呢?有段时间,他曾经是奇怪现象的猎物。这些奇怪的现象在于他注意到在街上进行的事情。但是什么事情?假如你们询问他,你们将会发现,某些要点对他始终保持神秘,当他愿意表达他自己关于别人。换句话说,他象征着用意义的术语,所正在发生的事情。

Very often he doesn’t know, if you look closely, whether things are favorable or unfavorable towards him, but he looks for what is revealed by the way his counterparts act, or by some observed feature in the world, in this world which is never purely and simply inhuman since it’s man-made. In discussing the red car I was attempting, with respect to this, to show you the different import the color red can have, according as its perceptive, imaginary, or symbolic value is considered. In
normal behavior, too, features that have until then been neutral can take on value.

往往他并不知道,假如你们仔细观看,是否事情对他是有利或是不利。但是他寻找他的对应之人的行为的方式,所显示的东西。或是凭借世界上某种被观察到的特征,那永远不会是纯粹是非人类的东西,因为那是人为的。当我在讨论这个红色汽车时,关于这一点,我正在企图跟你们显示红色能够拥有的这个不同的意义,依照它的感觉,想象,或符号的价值所被考虑。在正常的行为里,直到当时始终很中立的东西,会具有价值。

What is the subject ultimately saying, specially at a certain period of his delusion? That there is meaning. What meaning he doesn’t know, but it comes to the foreground, it asserts itself, and for him it’s perfectly understandable.

这个主体最后正在说些什么?特别是在他的幻觉的某个时期?有意义存在。他并不知道的这个意义,但是来到前景,这个意义主张它自己,对于他,这个意义是相当可以了解的。

And it’s precisely because it’s situated at the level of understanding as an incomprehensible phenomenon, as it were, that paranoia is so difficult for us to grasp and, also, of such great interest.

确实是因为它位在了解的层次,作为一种所谓无法理解的现象。偏执狂是如此困难,让我们无法理解,却有如此引人興趣。

What has made it possible here to speak of reasonable madness, of the preservation of clarity, order, and will, is the feeling that, however far into the phenomenon we go, we remain in the realm of the understandable.

在此是什么让我们可能谈到合理的疯狂,澄清,秩序及意志的保留。这种感觉,无论我们多么深入这个现象,我们始终是在可了解到领域。

Even when what one understands can’t even be articulated, named, or inserted by the subject into a context that makes it clear, it’s already situated at the level of understanding. It’s a question of things that in themselves already make themselves understood. And by virtue of this fact we ourselves feel that we are within reach of understanding. This is where the illusion starts to emerge 31 – since it’s a question of understanding, we understand. Well, no, precisely not.

甚至当我们了解甚至无法被主体了解,命名,及插入到内涵里的东西,这个内涵让它清楚起来。那已经是被定位在了解的层次。事情的问题是,在它们本身,事情已经让它们被人了解。凭借着这个事实,我们自己感觉到,我们是在了解到范围之内。这是幻觉开始出现的地方。因为它是了解的问题。我们了解。呵呵,不,我们确实并不了解。

Someone once pointed this out, but he didn’t go beyond this basic remark. It was Charles Blondel, who in his book on the troubled conscience observed that psychopathologies characteristically deceive the understanding.11

某个人有一次指出这一点,但是他并没有超越这个基本的谈论。那是查理斯、布朗德,在他讨论受到观察到困扰的良心的书里,心理病理学家的特色就是欺骗这个了解。

It’s a valuable work, even though Blondel has obstinately refused to understand anything of the subsequent development of ideas.

这是一本有价值的著作,即使布朗德曾经固执地拒绝了解观念的随后的发展。

This is nevertheless an appropriate point at which to take the problem up again – it’s always understandable.

可是这是一个适当的点,在那里,我们再一次处理那个问题。那个问题总是可以了解的。

You will observe in the training we give to our students that this is always a good place to stop them. It’s always at the point where they have understood, where they have rushed in to fill the case in with understanding, that they have missed the interpretation that it’s appropriate to make or not to make.

在我们给予学生的这个训练里,你们将会观察到,这总是一种良好的地方阻止它们。总是在他们了解的这点,他们匆促过来以了解填上这个案例,他们曾经错过这个解释,无论有无解释都是适当的。

This is generally naively expressed in the expression – This is what the subject meant. How do you know? What is certain is that he didn’t say it. And in most cases, on hearing what he did say, it appears that at the very least a question mark could have been raised which alone would have been sufficient for the valid interpretation, or at least for the beginnings of it.

通常这天真地被表达在这个表达里:「这就是主体的意思」。你们如何知道?所能确定的是,他并没有说它。在大部分的情况,当一听到他的所说的,至少一个问号本来会被提出。光是这个问号本来就足够作为充分的解释,或至少作为解释的开始。

Let me now give you an idea of the point on which this discourse is converging.
Whether some moment in the subject’s perception, in his delusional deduction, in his explanation of himself, or in his dialogue with you is more or less understandable isn’t what is important.

让我们现在给予你们一个这个论述汇集到要点的观念。无论在主体的感觉的某个点,在他的幻觉的推论,在他作为他自己的解释,或在他跟你的对话,是相当可了解的。这并不重要。

At some of these places something may occur that appears to be characterized by the fact that there is indeed a completely understandable kernel, if you really want to hold to this.

在某些这样的地方,某件东西可能发生,似乎由这个事实表现特色:一个完全可了解的核心确实存在,假如你们真的想要坚持这一点。

Whether there is or not, is of absolutely no interest at all. What, on the contrary, is altogether striking is that it’s inaccessible, inert, and stagnant with respect to any dialectic.

无论是否存在,这根本不是引人興趣的地方。相反地,最耐人寻味的是,关于任何的辩证法,它无法被接近,它是惰性的,停滞的。

Take elementary interpretation. To be sure, this comprises an element of meaning, but it’s a repetitive one, it proceeds by reiteration. Sometimes the subject does elaborate on this element, but what is certain is that it will remain, at least for a while, being constantly repeated with the one interrogative sign that is always involved, without any answer, any attempt to integrate it into a dialogue, ever being made. The phenomenon is closed to all dialectical composition.

拿这个基本的解释。的确,这个组成一个意义的元素,但是这总是一个重复的意义的元素,这个意义以重复进行。有时,主体确实建构这个元素,但是确定的是,它会保留,至少有一阵子,不断地被重复,以这个总是牵涉到,没有答案的受置疑的符号象征。任何企图要将它合并到一个对话,曾经被从事过。这个现象被封闭,无法从事辩证法的形成。

Take what is known as passional psychosis, which seems so much closer to what is called normal. If in this case the prevalence of litigiousness is stressed, it’s because the subject can’t come to terms with a certain loss or injury and because his entire life appears to be centred around compensation for the injury suffered and the claim it entails. Litigation moves into the foreground so much that sometimes it seems completely to dominate his interest in what is at stake. Here also the dialectic comes to a halt, centered of course in a totally different way from the preceding case.

拿众所周知的激情的精神疾病为例。它似乎更加靠近所谓的正常。假如在这个个案,好争吵的倾向被强调,那是因为主体无法跟某种的丧失与伤害妥协,因为他的整个的生命似乎被集中在环绕着补偿遭受的伤害及伤害包含的宣称。好争辩移动到前景,以致于有时它完全支配他的興趣,在岌岌可危的地方。在此,这个辩证过程停止,当然是以一种跟前一个个案完全不同的方式集中。

I pointed out to you last time what the phenomenon of interpretation hinges on – it’s linked to the relation between the ego and the other, inasmuch as analytic theory defines the ego as always being relative. In passional psychosis what is known as the understandable kernel, which is in fact a kernel of dialectical inertia, is situated obviously much closer to the I, the subject.

我上一次跟你们指出,解释的现象相关的地方。它跟自我与大他者之间的关系连接,因为精神分析的理论定义自我,总是作为相对性。在激情的精神疾病,众所周知作为可了解的核心,事实上,是一种辩证惰性的核心,它被定位显而易见更加靠近这个「我」,这个主体。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchom.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 06

January 19, 2012

The Psychoses 06
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

II

DIALECTICAL INERTIA
辩证法的惰性

SEGLAS AND PSYCHOMOTOR HALLUCINATION
歇格勒斯与心理动力的幻觉

PRESIDENT SCHREBER
苏瑞伯庭长

What is the ambiguity that surrounds the notion of paranoia due to? To many things, and perhaps to an inadequate clinical subdivision. I think that the psychiatrists among you have enough knowledge of the different clinical types to know for example that an interpretation delusion [dilire d’interpritation] isn’t at all the same thing as a litigious delusion [dilire de revendication].

环绕偏执狂的观念的模糊暧昧,是什么原因?由于很多事情,或许,由于一个不足够的临床次级分类。我认为你们当中的精神分裂医师,拥有足够的不同临床种类的知识,譬如,一个解释的幻觉跟争议的幻觉,根本不是相同的事情。

Equally there is every reason to distinguish between paranoid psychoses and
passional psychoses, a difference that has been admirably emphasized by the
work of my master, de Clerambault, whose function, role, personality, and
doctrine I began pointing out to you last time.8 It’s precisely at the level of
psychological distinctions that his work is the most significant. Does this
mean that the clinical types have to be distributed more widely, that we have
in some way to break them up? I do not believe so. The problem that arises
for us bears on the framework of paranoia as a whole.

同样地,我们有充分的理由来区别偏执狂的精神疾病,跟激情的精神疾病。这种差异曾经令人崇拜地被强调,由我的老师,克勒蓝伯特的著作。我上一次跟你们开始指出他的功能,角色,人格,及信条。确实就是在心理区别的层次,他的著作是最重要的。这难道意味着,临床的种类必须更广泛地分配?我们在某方面必须将它们分散?我并这样认为。对于我们而言,产生的问题,跟偏执狂的架构的整体有关系。

A century of clinical work has always just drifted around the problem. Every time psychiatry has made a bit of progress, advanced slightly, it has also lost the ground it has won through its very manner of conceptualizing what is immediately accessible to observation.

一世纪的临床研究总是环绕着这个问题漂浮。每一次精神分裂学稍微有点进步,稍微进展,它也丧失它曾经赢得的立场,通过它的方法,概念化观察可立即获得的东西。

Nowhere is the contradiction between observation and theorization more apparent. It can almost be said that there is no more apparent and visible discourse of madness than the psychiatrist’s – and precisely on the subject of paranoia.

观察与理论之间的悖论,在这个地方是最显而易见。我们几乎能够说,除了精神分裂学医生对疯狂的论述之外,不再有明显而可见的对于疯狂的论述,他们确实探究到偏执狂的这个主体。

There is something here that, it seems to me, goes straight to the heart of the problem. If you read for example the work I wrote on paranoid psychosis, you will see that I emphasize what I call, borrowing the term from my master de Clerambault, the elementary phenomena and that I try to show how radically different these phenomena are in relation to what can be drawn from what he calls ideational deduction, that is, from what is understandable by everybody.9

在此,我觉得有某件东西直接探究到问题的核心。譬如,假如你们阅的我书写的轮毂偏执狂精神疾病的著作,你们将会看出,我强调我所谓的基本的现象,容我借用我的老师,克勒蓝伯特。我尝试显示,这些现象是多么强烈地不同,相关于他所谓的理念的推理,所获得的东西。也就是说,让每个人能够了解的东西。

Ever since that period I have strongly emphasized that the elementary phenomena
are no more elementary than what underlies the entire construction of a delusion.

自从那个时期,我曾经强烈地强调,这些基本的现象,并不是基本,正如作为幻觉的整个结构并非是基础。

They are as elementary as a leaf is in relation to the plant, in which a certain detail can be seen of the way in which the veins overlap and insert into one another – there is something common to the whole plant that is reproduced in certain of the forms that make it up.

它们作为基本的关系,就如同树叶跟植物的关系。在那里,某种的细节能够被看见,根据叶脉以及昆虫互相重叠的方式。这里跟这整个植物有某件共通的地方。这种植物以组成它的某些形态来繁殖。

Similarly, analogous structures can be found at the level of the composition, motivation, and thematization of a delusion and at the level of the elementary phenomenon.

同样地,类同的结构能够被找到,在幻觉的形成,动机,与主题化的这个层次,以及在基本现象的层次。

In other words, it’s always the same structuring force, as it were, at work in a
delusion, whether it’s the whole or one of its parts that is under consideration.

换句话说,在幻觉的运作里,这总是所谓的相同的结构力量,无论它是整体或是其中一个部分受到考虑。

What is important isn’t that the elementary phenomenon should be an initial nucleus, a parasitic point as de Cllrambault used to say, inside the personality, around which the subject supposedly constructs something, a fibrous reaction destined to envelop and enclose it in a cyst, and at the same time to integrate it, that is to explain it, as is often said.

重要的并不是,这个基本的现象应该是一种最初的核心,一种寄生点,如同克勒蓝伯特过去常说,在人格里面,环绕着人格,主体应该建构某件东西,一种组织的反应,注定会涵盖及封闭它在一个囊包里,而同时又合并它,那就是要解释它,如通俗所说的。

A delusion isn’t deduced. It reproduces its same constitutive force. It, too, is an elementary phenomenon. This means that here the notion of element is to be taken in
no other way than as structure, differentiated structure, irreducible to anything
other than itself.

幻觉并不是被推论出来。它复制它的相同的形成的力量。它也是一种基本的现象。这意味着,在此,要素的观念应该被接纳,实实在在就是作为一个结构,无法还原到不是它的本身的东西。

The source of this structure has been so profoundly misrecognized that the whole discourse on paranoia I was talking about before bears the mark of that misrecognition. You can test this while reading Freud, or almost any author – you will find pages, sometimes entire chapters, on paranoia.

这个结构的来源曾经如此深深地被误认,以致于我先前正在谈论的有关偏执狂的整个论述,都具有误认的标示。你们能够测试这个,当你们阅读弗洛伊德,或几乎任何其他作者。你们将会发现好几页,有时整个章节,讨论偏执狂。

Take them out of their context, read them out loud, and you will see the most wonderful descriptions of the behavior of everyone. It was touch and go whether what
I read out loud before from Kraepelin’s definition of paranoia defined normal
behavior.

带他们离开他们的文本,大声跟他们朗读出来,你们就会看出最神奇的描述,对于每个人的行为。那是非常冒险而不确定的事,是否我以前大声朗读的,根据克莱培林对偏执狂的定义,来定义正常的行为。

You will find this paradox time and again, and even among analyst authors, precisely when they put themselves on the level of what a while ago I called the pattern – a term whose domination of analytic theory is recent, but which has nonetheless been there potentially for a very long time.

你们将会一再地发现这个悖论,即使是在精神分析家的作者中,确实是当他们将他们自己摆放在我不久之前所谓的模式的层次。这一个术语,它在精神分析理论里佔优势,是最近的事。但是它潜在地存在那里,是很久的事。

To prepare for today’s meeting I was re-reading an already old article, from 1908, in which Abraham describes the behavior of a case of dementia praecox and his so-called lack of affectivity, starting with his relationship to objects.10

为了准备今天的研讨会,我重新阅读一篇1908年的已经是过时的文章。在这篇文章里,阿伯拉罕描述一个精神痴呆症的个案的行为,以及他所谓的情感的欠缺,从他跟客体的关系开始。

There he was for months on end, heaping up, stone by stone, the crude rocks
that for him were affected with the greatest good. Now, because he has stacked
them up on a plank, the plank breaks, there’s a great din in the room, everything
is swept out, and the character who seemed to attach such importance
to these rocks doesn’t pay the slightest bit of attention to what is going on,
doesn’t raise the slightest protest before the general evacuation of the objects
of his desires. He simply starts again, accumulating others. And that is dementia
praecox.

在那里,他连续好几个月,堆积,一块石头又一块石头地。对于他而言,这些粗糙的石头,受的非常细心的保护。现在,因为他将它们堆积在木板上,这块木板断裂,房间有巨大的响声,每一样东西都被震扫出来。似乎很重视这些石头的那个人,丝毫并没有注意正在发生的事情。他丝毫没有抗议,在他的欲望的这些客体被一般撤离之前。他仅是重新开始,累积它们。这就是精神痴呆症。

It is tempting to make a fable of this little apologue, one that would show that this is what we all do all the time. I should go even further – to accumulate a stack of things without value, to have to consider them lost at a moment’s notice and start again is a good sign. Indeed, if the subject were to remain attached to what he loses, not being able to bear being deprived of it, it could be said that here you have a case of the overvaluation of objects.

将这个小的寓意充当一种寓言,是迷人的。这个寓言将会显示:这是我一直在做的东西。我甚至应该再深入探讨。累积一大堆没有价值的东西,为了必须认为它们迷失在随时的注意,然后重新开始,这是一个好的迹象。的确,假如主体想要保持连繫跟他丧失的东西,不能够忍受被剥夺这个东西,我们能够说,在此,你拥有过分高估客体的案例。

These supposedly conclusive cases are so completely ambiguous that one wonders how it’s possible to maintain the illusion for one second, unless through a sort of eclipse of the critical sense that seems to seize all readers as soon as they open a technical work, specially where our experience and profession are concerned.

这些应该是作为结论的案例,是如此地模糊暧昧,以致我们想要知道,我们如何可能维持暂时这个幻觉,除非通过某种的批判的感觉的衰退。这种感觉似乎吸引所有的读者,当它们打开一本技术性的著作,特别是就我们的精神分析经验及专业而言。

It’s surprising that the remark I made last time, that the understandable is an ever-fleeting and elusive term, is never assessed as being a lesson of prime
importance, as an obligatory formulation at the threshold of the clinical. Begin
by thinking you don’t understand. Start from the idea of a fundamental misunderstanding.

非常令人吃惊地,我上一次所做的谈论,这个可理解的东西,是一个瞬间的闪烁不定的术语。它永远没有被获得,作为一种最重要的教训。作为一种义务性的说明,在临床的门槛。就请从认为你们不了解开始。请从一个基本的误解的观念开始。

This is an initial attitude, failing which there is really no reason why you should not understand anything and everything. One author presents certain behavior as indicating a lack of affectivity in a certain context; for another it will be the contrary. Starting one’s work again after having acknowledged its loss may be understood in completely opposite senses.

这就是最初的态度,除了这个态度,没有理由为什么你们无法了解任何事情及一切事情。有一位作者呈现某种的行为,作为指示一种情意的欠缺,在某种的文本里。对于另外一位作者,则是相反。再一次从一个人的著作开始,在承认它的丧失之后,可能从完全相反的意义来理解。

Appeal is constantly made to notions that are thought to be commonly accepted,
while they are not commonly accepted at all.

我们不断地诉诸于被认为是共同被接受的东西,而事实上它们根本就没有被共同接受。

This is the point I wanted to get to – the difficulty of addressing the problem of paranoia arises precisely because it’s situated on the plane of understanding.

这就是我想要到达的要点—处理偏执狂的问题的困难,确实是因为它被定位在了解的层次。

The irreducible elementary phenomenon here is at the level of interpretation.

这个无法还原的基本现象,在此处有解释的层次。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 05

January 19, 2012

The Psychoses 05
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

II
The meaning of delusion
幻觉的意义

CRITIQUE OF KRAEPELIN
对于克莱培林的批判

DIALECTICAL INERTIA
辩证法的惰性

SEGLAS AND PSYCHOMOTOR HALLUCINATION
歇格勒斯与心理动力的幻觉

PRESIDENT SCHREBER
苏瑞伯庭长

The more one studies the history of the notion of paranoia, the more significant it seems and the more one appreciates the lesson that can be drawn from the progress, or lack of progress – whichever you like – that characterizes the psychiatric movement.

我们研究偏执狂的观念的历史越多,它似乎就越是重要,我们越会赏识从这个进步,或欠缺进步当中获得的这个教训,不论你喜欢哪一种,它都表现精神分裂的运动。

1
No notion is in the end more paradoxical. If I took care last time to put madness in the foreground, it was because it’s quite possible to say that with the word paranoia authors have displayed all the ambiguity present in the use of the old term madness, which is the fundamental, common term.

最后,你会发现这个观念再悖论不过。假如我上次小心翼翼地将疯狂摆放在前景,那是因为我们完全可能这样说:就「偏执狂」这个字词而言,作者们曾经展示所有存在于旧的「疯狂」这个术语具有的模糊暧昧。那是基本的共同术语。

The term doesn’t date from yesterday, nor even from the birth of psychiatry. Without giving way to a facile deployment of erudition, I shall simply remind you that reference to madness has always been part of the so-called language of conventional wisdom. In this respect, the celebrated Praise of Folly1 retains all its value for having identified it with normal human behavior – although this latter expression was not in use at that time.

这个术语日期并不是从昨天开始,甚至也不是从精神分裂学的诞生开始。我在此并不耽溺于炫耀博学,我仅是要提醒你们,疯狂的指称总是所谓的传统的智慧的语言的一部分。在这一方面,这本著名的「愚蠢颂」保留它的所有价值,因为它将愚蠢认同为正常的人类的行为—虽然这个后者的表达,在当时并没有被使用。

What was then said in the language of philosophers, between philosophers, eventually
ended up being taken seriously and literally – a turning point that took place with Pascal, who formulated, with grave and meditative emphasis, that there is undoubtedly a necessary madness, that it would be another form of madness not to be mad with the madness of everybody.2

当时所被说的事情,在哲学家及哲学家之间的语言,最后的结果会被认真而且实质地看待。这是一个发生在巴斯卡的转捩点,他以莊严而沉思的强调诠释: 无可置疑地,有一种必要的疯狂,那就是,假如对于每一个人的疯狂,你淡定不疯狂,那将也是另外一种疯狂。

These reminders aren’t useless, when you look at the paradoxes implicit in the premises of the theorists. It might be said that until Freud madness had been reduced to a number of modes of behavior, of patterns,3 while others thought of judging everybody’s behavior in this way. In the end the difference, pattern for pattern, isn’t obvious.

这些提醒的话语并非无用,当你观看那些理论家的假设公理隐藏的悖论。我们可以说,直到弗洛伊德,疯狂一直被还原到许多行为的模式及样式,而还有些理论家则是想到要以这种方式判断每个人的行为。最后,这个差距,样式替代样式,就不是显而易见。

The emphasis has never been fully placed where it would enable an image to be formed of what normal, or even understandable, conduct is and how properly paranoid conduct may be distinguished from it.

这种强调从来没有完整地被置放在意象能够被形成的地方,正常,甚至可了解的行为的内涵,及合宜的偏执狂的行为,跟它的区别所在。

Let us remain at the level of definitions. The dissection of paranoia was incontestably much more extensive during the whole nineteenth century than it has been since the end of the last century, that is around 1899, at the time of the fourth or fifth edition of Kraepelin.4

让我们保持着这些定义的层次。无可争议地,偏执狂的解析在整个十九世纪期间,是更加的广泛,比起自从前一个世纪以来。也就是在1899年左右,在克莱培林的「精神分裂学」第四版或第五版的时代。

For a very long time Kraepelin remained attached to the vague notion that on the whole the man of experience knows, by a sort of sense, how to recognize natural signs.

长久以来,克莱培林始终是跟这个模糊的观念联想在一块。大体上来说,具有精神分析经验的人都知道如何凭借某种感觉辩认出自然发作的迹象。

The true medical gift is to be able to perceive the signs that correctly dissect reality. It
was only in 1899 that he introduced a finer subdivision. He brings the old paranoias back within the framework of dementia praecox by creating the paranoid sector and he puts forward quite an interesting definition of paranoia, distinguishing it from other modes of paranoid delusions with which it had until then been confused.

这位真实的医学天才,应该能够知道正确解析现实的这些迹象。直到1899年,他才介绍一种更加精细的次级分类。他创造者个偏执狂的区块,将旧的偏执狂带回到「精神痴呆症」的架构。他提出一个相当有趣的偏执狂的定义,区别它跟其他的偏执狂的幻觉的模式不同。直到当时,这两者始终被混淆。

Paranoia is distinguished from the others because it is characterized by the gradual
development of internal causes and according to a progressive evolution of a
stable delusional system that is impossible to disturb and establishes itself with total
preservation of clarity and order in thought, will, and action,5

偏执狂跟其他的疯狂不同,因为它的特征是由于原因的缓慢发展。依照一个稳定的幻觉的系统的逐渐进化,那是不可能用完全清楚及条理的思想,意志及行动的保存,来扰乱及用建立它自己。

This definition, coming as it does from the hand of an eminent clinician, is remarkable in that point by point it contradicts all clinical material. There isn’t a word of truth in it.

这个定义,因为来自一位杰出的临床医生之手,非常引人注意,在于它的每一点都跟所有的临床的资料相牴触。在里面没有一个字具有真理。

Its development isn’t gradual, there are always surges and phases. It seems to me, but I’m not absolutely sure of this, that it was I who introduced the notion of fertile moment. This fertile moment is always visible at the beginning of a paranoia. There is always a break in what Kraepelin goes on to call the progressive evolution of a delusion dependent on internal causes.

它的发展并不是缓慢地,总是有突然发作及间歇时期。我觉得,但是我并没有绝对确定这一点。那是我在介绍这个丰富时刻的观念。这个丰富时刻在偏执狂的开始时,总是被看得见。在克莱培林继续称为是依赖内在原因的幻觉的逐渐进化过程,总是有一个中断。

It’s obvious that the evolution of a paranoia can’t be limited to internal causes. To be convinced of this one only has to go to the chapter “Aetiology” of his textbook and also read the contemporary authors, Serieux and Capgras, whose work dates from five years later.6 When one looks for the triggering causes of a paranoia, one always observes, with the required question mark, an emotional element in the subject’s life, a life crisis that in fact does involve his external relationships, and it would be astonishing were one not led to do this with respect to a delusion that is essentially characterized as a delusion of reference [ddlire de relation] – the term isn’t Kretschmer’s but Wernicke’s.7

显而易见地,一位偏执狂的进化不能仅限制于内部的原因。为了要相信这一点,我们仅必须阅读「病因学」这一章,他的这个教科书。也阅的当代的作者,谢瑞克及卡普格拉斯,他们的著作从五年后开始。当我们寻找一位偏执狂的触发原因,我们总是观察,带着必然的问号,在主体的生命,有一个情感的要素,一种生命的危机,事实上并没有牵涉到他的外在的关系。假如我们没有被引导这样做,那才是令人吃惊。因为这个幻觉的基本上的特征,是符号指称的幻觉。这个术语并不克瑞奇马的术语,而是维尼克的术语。

I read – . . . progressive evolution of a stable delusional system that is impossible
to disturb . . . Nothing could be more false – the delusional system varies,
whether it has been disturbed or not. As a matter of fact this question
seems secondary to me. The variation comes from interpsychology, from
external interventions, from the preservation or disruption of a certain orderliness
in the world around the patient. He is very far indeed from not taking
this into account and seeks, over the course of his delusion’s evolution, to
incorporate these elements into the composition of his delusion.

我阅读:「一个稳定的幻觉系统的逐渐进化,是不可能扰乱的。」这句话说得再错误不过。幻觉的系统种类很多,无论它曾经被扰乱与否。事实上,对于我而言,这个问题是次要的。这个不同的种类来自内部心理学,来自外部的介入,来自环绕病人的世界的某种秩序的保留或中断。他确实并非没有考虑到这一点,在他幻觉的进化的过程,他尝试合并这些要素进入他的幻觉的组成。

. . . which establishes itself with total preservation of clarity and order in thought,
will, and action. Sure. But it’s a question of knowing what clarity and order
are. While something meriting these names can be discovered in the account
the subject gives of his delusion, it still needs to be stated what this means,
and this will by its very nature call into question the notions concerned. As
for thought, will, and action, we are here to attempt to define them in terms
of a number of specific forms of behavior, one of which is madness, rather
than treat them as acquired notions at the outset. To us it seems that academic
psychology has to be recast before it’s capable of yielding concepts
rigorous enough to be exchanged, at least at the level of our experience.

「一个稳定的幻觉系统的逐渐进化,那是不可能用完全清楚及条理的思想,意志及行动的保存,来扰乱及用建立它自己。」没错。但是问题是要知道完全清楚及条理是什么。虽然某件获得这些名称的东西,能够被发现,在主体给予他的幻觉的描述里,依旧需要被陈述的是,这是什么意思。根据它自己的特性,这将置疑到牵涉到的一些观念。至于思想,意志,及行动,我们在此企图要定义它们,使用许多明确的行为形态,其中有一种就是疯狂,而不是对待它们,当著是从开始就获得的观念。对于我们而言,学院的心理学似乎必须重新被塑造,它才能够产生足够严谨的观念来交流,至少在我们精神分析的经验。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 04

January 19, 2012

The Psychoses 04
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

There is a close relation between, on the one hand, negation and the reappearance in the purely intellectual order of what has not been integrated by the subject and, on the other, Verwerfung and hallucination, that is, the reappearance in the real of what the subject has refused. Here we have a range, a series, of relations.

有一个紧密的关系,一方面处于否定与重新出现之间,在这个纯粹知识的层次,曾经被主体所合并的。在另一方面,拒绝与幻觉,换句话说,在实在界的重新出现在实在界,那是主体所拒绝的。在此,我们有一个范围,一个系列的关系。

What is involved in a hallucinatory phenomenon? This phenomenon has its own source in what we shall provisionally call the subject’s history in the symbolic. I don’t know whether I shall retain this combination of terms, because all history is by definition symbolic, but let’s keep to this formula for the moment.

在幻觉的现象,牵涉到的是什么?这个现象有它自己的来源,在我们暂时所谓的主体在符号象征界的历史。我并不知道是否我将保留术语的这个组合,因为所有的历史在定义上,都是符号象征,但是让我们暂时遵守这个公式。

The essential distinction is this – the origin of the neurotic repressed is not situated at the same level of history in the symbolic as that of the repressed involved in psychosis, even if there exists the closest of relations between their contents. This distinction alone provides a key that allows the problem to be raised in a much simpler fashion than up till now.

这个基本的公式是这个—受到潜抑的神经症的起源,并没有被定位在历史的相同层次,在符号界,如同在精神疾病所牵涉到受到潜抑的起源,即使在它们的内容之间,存在着最亲密的关系。仅是这个区别供应一个解答,容许问题被提出,以一个直到现在更加简单的方式。

The same thing goes for the diagram from last year concerning verbal hallucination:

相同的事情可以应用到去年的这个图形,关于文辞的幻觉。

23 Our schema, I remind you, represents the interruption of full speech between
the subject and the Other and its detour through the two egos, o and o’y and
their imaginary relations.

我们的基模,我提醒你们,代表主体与大他者之间的充分言说的被中断,及它的迂回通过两个自我,0 及0’Y ,以及它们的想象的关系。

Here it indicates triplicity in the subject, which overlaps the fact that it’s the subject’s ego that normally speaks to another, and of the subject, the subject S in the third person. Aristotle pointed out that one must not say that man thinks, but that he thinks with his soul. Similarly, I say that the subject speaks to himself with his ego.

在此,它指示著主体的三重性,跟这个事实重叠: 主体的自我,正常而言,是针对另外一个主体言说,属于主体的三重性,在第三人称的主体。亚里斯多德指出,我们一定不要说,人在思想,而是要是,人用他的灵魂思想。同样地,我说,主体用他的自我,跟他自己言说。

However, in the normal subject, speaking to oneself with one’s ego can never be made fully explicit. One’s relationship to the ego is fundamentally ambiguous, one’s assumption of the ego always revocable. In the psychotic subject on the other hand certain elementary phenomena, and in particular hallucinations, which are their most characteristic form, show us the subject completely identified either with his ego, with which he speaks, or with the ego assumed entirely along instrumental lines.

可是,在正常的主体,用他的自我跟他自己言说,永远无法被弄的充分明确。一个人跟自我的关系,基本上是模糊暧昧的,一个人对于自我的假定总是会被撤销。另一方面,在这个精神疾病的主体,某些基本的现象,特别是幻觉,是他们最具有特色的形式,它们跟我们显示这个主体,不是完全认同与他的自我,他用来言说的自我,要不然就是完全认同这个自我,完全沿着工具形的脉络假定的自我。

It’s he who speaks of him, the subject, the S, in the two equivocal senses of the term, the initial S and the German Es.n This is what presents itself in the phenomenon of verbal hallucination.

是他在谈论他,这个主体,这个S的主体,用这个术语的两个多重意涵,这个最初的S主体,及这个德文的「本我」。这是在文词的幻觉的现象,所呈现它自己的东西。

The moment the hallucination appears in the real, that is, accompanied by the sense of reality, which is the elementary phenomenon’s basic feature, the subject literally speaks with his ego, and it’s as if a third party, his lining, were speaking and commenting on his activity.

幻觉一出现在实在界,换句话说,由现实界的感觉伴随着,这个现实界是基本的现象的基本特征,主体实质上是用他的自我在言说。好像有一个第三者,他的内里,正在言说而且评论他的活动。

This is where our attempt to situate the diverse forms of psychosis in relation
to the three registers of the symbolic, the imaginary, and the real will lead this year. It will enable us to get to the ultimate source of the function to give to the ego in the cure. The question of the object relation lies on the horizon.

这就是我们的企图,要定位精神疾病的这些多样性的形态,跟符号界,想象界,及实在界的三个铭记,今年要探讨的地方。这个企图将会使我们能够到达这个功用的最后来源,为了要在治疗中给予这个自我。客体关系的问题就位于这个展望。

The current handling of the object relation in the context of an analytic relation conceived as dual is founded on a misrecognition of the autonomy of the symbolic order.

在精神分析的关系的文本里,目前对于这个客体关系的处理,被构想为双重性。它的基础是对于符号象征秩序的自主权的误认。

This automatically introduces a confusion between the imaginary and real levels. But it doesn’t eliminate the symbolic relation however, since we continue talking and, indeed, do nothing else.

这样会自动地介绍一种混淆,存在于想象界与实在界的层次。但是它并没有减少符号象征关系,因我们继续谈论,而且的确仅是谈论。

But it results from this misrecognition that what in the subject calls for recognition on the appropriate level of authentic symbolic exchange – which is not so easy to
attain since it’s always interfered with – is replaced by a recognition of the
imaginary, of fantasy.

但是从这个误认获得的结果,在主体身上,要求真诚的符号交换的适当的层次,获的承认。这种承认并不那么容易获得,因为它总是受到干扰—它被想象界的承认,幻见的承认所取代。

Thus to authenticate everything of the order of the imaginary in the subject is properly speaking to make analysis the anteroom of madness, and we can only admire the fact that this doesn’t lead to a deeper alienation – no doubt this indicates sufficiently that to be mad some predisposition, if not some precondition, is necessary.

因此,让主体的想象界的秩序的一切成为真诚,适当来说,就是使精神分析成为疯狂的接待室,我们仅能崇拜这个事实:这样并没有导致更深一层的异化。无可置疑,这充分指示著:为了要成为疯狂,某些先天的性情,甚至是先决条件,是需要的。

In Vienna a charming young man to whom I was trying to explain a few minor details asked me whether or not I believed that the psychoses were organic, so I said to him that the question was totally out of date, that for a very long time I had been making no distinction between psychology and physiology, and that, surely, nobody goes mad through wanting to, as I had stuck up on the wall of my medical quarters in those former, slightly archaic times.12

在维也纳,一位迷人的年轻人,我当时正在尝试跟他解释一下细微末节,他询问我,是否我相信,精神疾病是器官引起的,所以我跟他说,这个问题是完全过时。长久以来,我一直没有区别心理学与生理学的差别。确实地,没有人是因为想要发疯而发疯。因为在那些先前的稍微过时的时候,我在我的医学的环境的限制所困陷。

It remains true though that we must attribute the well-known cases of fairly rapid onset of more or less persistent and sometimes lasting delusion to a certain way of handling the analytic relation, which consists in authenticating the imaginary, in substituting recognition on the imaginary level for recognition on the symbolic level.

尽管如此,这依旧是真实的,我们必须将那些著名的个案,非常迅速地触发,持续,有时是长久的幻觉,归属于是某种的处理的精神分析的关系。这个关系在于将想象界成为真诚,在于以想象界的承认,取代符号象征层次的承认。

The fact that an analysis can, right from its first stages, trigger a psychosis is well known, but no one has ever explained why. It’s obviously a function of the subject’s disposition, but also of an imprudent handling of the object relation.

精神分析,从它的早期的阶段开始,就会触发精神疾病,这个事实是众所周知。但是没有人曾经解释为什么。显而易见,这不但是主体性情的一种功用,而且是客体关系的处理不谨慎的功用。

I believe that today I have done nothing but put before you the interest there is in what we are going to study.

我相信,今天我仅仅是把这个興趣摊开在你们面前,对于我们将要探讨的问题。

We shall find it useful to investigate paranoia. However thankless and arid this may be for us, it involves purifying, elaborating, and applying Freudian notions, and therefore also involves our training in analysis. I hope I have made you feel how it is that this conceptual elaboration can have the most direct effect on the ways we shall think, or be careful not to think, what our daily experience is and must be.
16 November 1955

我们将会发现,研究偏执狂是有用的。对于我们,虽然回报及所得是多么的贫瘠,它牵涉到纯净化,建构,及运用弗洛伊德的观念。因此,它也牵涉到我们在精神分析的训练。我希望我已经让你们感觉到,这个观念的建构是如何地具有最直接的影响,对于我们将会思维的方式,或是要小心不要思维,关于我们的日常经验是什么及必须是什么。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

The Psychoses 03

January 19, 2012

The Psychoses 03
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
I
Introduction to the question of the psychoses
精神疾病的问题导言

3
The questions that arise touch upon exactly all the categories effective in our
field of operation.

这个产生的问题确实触及到我们精神分析运作的领域,所有实践的范围。

It’s classically said that in psychosis the unconscious is at the surface, conscious.
This is even why articulating it doesn’t seem to have much effect.

按照传统的说法,在精神疾病,无意识处于表面,成为意识。这甚至就是为什么表达它似乎很有效率。,

Within this perspective, quite instructive in itself, we can observe first of all
that it’s not purely and simply, as Freud always emphasized, from the negative
trait of being an Unbezvusst, a nonconscious, that the unconscious derives
its efficacity.

在这个观点之内,它本身具有启发性,我们首先能够观察到,依照弗洛伊德总是强调的,它不单纯仅是从负面的特征,成为一种无意识。无意识获得它的效率。

Translating Freud, we say – the unconscious is a language. Its being articulated doesn’t imply its recognition, though. The proof of this is that everything proceeds as if Freud were translating a foreign language, even carving it up and reassembling it.

翻译弗洛伊德,我们说—无意识是一种语言。虽然这样,无意识被表达并没有意味著它受到承认。没有受到承认的证据是,一切事情都照常进行,好像弗洛伊德是在翻译一种外国语言,甚至是分解它,然后重新组装它。

The subject is, with respect to his own language, quite simply in the same position as Freud. If it’s ever possible for someone to speak in a language that he is totally ignorant of, we can say that the psychotic subject is ignorant of the language he speaks.

主体是,关于他自己的语言,单纯地就是处于跟弗洛伊德的相同的立场。假如某个人可能以一个他完全无知的语言谈论,我们能够说,精神疾病的主体是无知于他言说的语言。

Is this a satisfactory metaphor? Certainly not. The question is not so much
why this unconscious, which is articulated at ground level, remains excluded
for the subject, not adopted by him – but why it appears in the real.

这是一种令人满意的比喻吗?当然不是。 问题与其说是为什么这个无意识始终被排除不让主体知道,虽然它被表达属于基本的层次,不如说是,为什么无意识出现在实在界。

I hope that there are enough of you who remember the commentary that
M. Jean Hyppolite made for us here on Die Verneinung,9 and I regret his
absence this morning, which prevents me from being certain I’m not distorting
the terms he uncovered in it.

我希望,你们有足够的人记得海波莱特论「否认」时,跟我们所做的这个评论。很可惜他今天早上不在现场,这让我无法确定,我有没有扭曲他在那个评论里揭发的这些术语。

21 What emerged clearly from his analysis of this striking text is that in what
is unconscious not only is everything repressed, that is, misrecognized by the
subject after having been verbalized, but that behind the process of verbalization
there must be admitted a primordial Bejahung, an admission in the sense of the symbolic, which can itself be wanting.

从他分析这个引人注意的文本,清楚显现的是,在无意识的内涵里,每一样东西不但被压抑,换句话说,在它被文辞表达后,它被主体所误认。而且在文词表达的过程背后,有一个原初的 「肯定」必须被承认,从符号象征的意义被承认。它的本身是欠缺。

This point is borne out by other texts, and especially by a passage that is as explicit as can be where Freud admits a phenomenon of exclusion for which the term Verwerfung appears valid and from which Verneinung, produced at a much later stage, is distinguished.

这一点在其他的文本获的证实,特别是有一段落非常明确,在那里,弗洛伊德承认有一种排除的现象,「拒绝」这个术语似乎是正确,从那里,在晚期阶段被产生的「肯定」,被区别出来。

It can happen that a subject refuses access to his symbolic world to something that he has nevertheless experienced, which in this case is nothing other than the threat of castration.

恰巧的是,主体拒绝某件东西接近他的符号象征的世界,可是这个东西,他曾经经验到。在这种情况,这实实在在是阉割的威胁。

The subject’s entire subsequent development shows that he wants to know nothing about it, Freud literally says, in the sense of the repressed.10

主体的整个随后的发展显示,他想要对它一无所知。弗洛伊德实质上是说,从受到潜抑的意义而言。

What comes under the effect of repression returns, for repression and the return of the repressed are just the two sides of the same coin. The repressed is always there, expressed in a perfectly articulate manner in symptoms and a host of other phenomena. By contrast, what falls under the effect of Verwerfung has a completely different destiny.

在潜抑的效应之下来临的东西会回转,因为潜抑与受到潜抑的东西的回转,是相同钱币的两面。受到潜抑的东西总是在那里,以一个非常清楚的方被表达,以病症及许多其他的现象被表达。比较起来,在「拒绝」的效应之下,所掉落的东西,拥有绝对不同的命运。

It’s not pointless in this respect for me to remind you of the comparison I made last year between certain symbolic order phenomena and what happens in those machines, in the modern sense of the word, that do not quite talk yet but any day now will. One feeds figures into them and waits for them to give what would perhaps take us 100,000 years to calculate.

在这方面,我提醒你们去年我做的比较,对于某些符号象征秩序与那些机器所发生的事情,并非没有意义。用机器一词的现代意义来说,机器并不会说话,但是有一天他将会。我们将一些数字餵进它们,然后等待它们给予我们可能要花1 万年才算得出来的东西。

But we can only introduce things into the circuit if we respect the machine’s own rhythm – otherwise they won’t go in and can’t enter the circuit. We can re-use the
same image. Only it also happens that whatever is refused in the symbolic
order, in the sense of Verwerfung, reappears in the real.

但是我们仅能介绍事情进入这个迴圈,假如我们尊敬机器自己的节奏。否则它们无法进入,无法进入这个迴圈。我们能够重新使用这个相同的意象。只是它也发生,任何在符号象征秩序被拒绝的东西,以「拒绝」的意义来说,它在实在界重新出现。

Freud’s text is free of ambiguity on this point. It concerns the Wolf Man, as you know, who gives evidence of psychotic tendencies and qualities, as is demonstrated by the brief paranoia he enters between the end of Freud’s treatment and when he is taken under observation again.

弗洛伊德的文本对于这一点,没有任何的模糊暧昧。它跟「狼人」息息相关。你们知道,「狼人」给予精神疾病与特质的证明。这从这个简短的偏执狂获的证实,从他进入弗洛伊德治疗的结果与他再一次受到观察之间发作。

Well, the fact that he has rejected all means of access to castration, which is nevertheless apparent in his conduct, all access to the register of the symbolic function, the fact that any assumption of castration by an / has become impossible for him, has
the closest of links with his having had a brief hallucination in childhood, of
which he recounts extremely precise details.

呵呵,狼人曾经拒绝各种接近阉割的方法。可是在他的行为上,这种阉割是很明显的,它们进入符号象征功用的铭记。任何具有阉割的假定,对他而言已经变成不可能。这个事实具有最密切的关联,因为他在童年阶段拥有一段简短的幻觉。他描述极端明确的细节,对于童年。

The scene is as follows. While playing with his knife he cut his finger, which was left hanging on by only a small piece of skin. The subject recounted this episode in a style traced from lived experience. All temporal reference points seem to have disappeared.

这个场景如下: 当他在玩弄小刀时,他割伤他的手指。手指垂挂著,仅剩一层皮。主体描述这个轶事,从活生生的经验被追踪的风格。所有的时间的指称点似乎已经都消失。

Then he sat on a bench, beside his nurse, who was precisely the confidant of his early experiences, and he didn’t dare mention it to her. How significant is that suspension of all possible speech! – and precisely with the person he used to recount everything to, and especially things of that order!

然后,他端坐在长椅上,在他的护士旁边。他的护士确实是他早年经验的信任者。他不敢跟她提到这件事。所有的可能的言说被悬置起来,这是多么的重要!的确,对于他过去跟他详述一切的人而言,特别是属于那个层次的事情。

There is an abyss here, a temporal submersion, a rupture in experience, following which it turns out that he has nothing at all wrong with him, it’s all over, let’s drop the subject.

在此有一个深渊,一个时间的沉没,一个经验的断裂。跟随它,结果是,他根本没有做错什么事。一切都过去,让我们不要再谈这个主体。

The relation that Freud establishes between this phenomenon and this very special knowing nothing of the thing, even in the sense of the repressed expressed in this text translates as this – what is refused in the symbolic order re-emerges in the real.

弗洛伊德建立的关系,在这个现象与这个非常特别的「什么都不知道」,甚至从受到潜抑的意义来说,它在这个文本里被表达,像这样被翻译—在符号象征秩序被拒绝的,在实在界重新出现。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com