Ethic 95

Ethic 95

The Ethics of Psychoanlysis
精神分析伦理学

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

VII
第七章

Drives and lures
冲动与诱惑

LUTHER
路德

3
In this text that our friend Jean Laplanche has translated for the Society and
that you should look up in the Gesammelte Werke, Volume X, pages 161—
1623, you will find the following comment: “What we have to seek is that
which now presents itself to us concerning the relations of this formulation
of the ideal to sublimation. Sublimation is a process that concerns object
libido.”

在这个文本,我们的朋友拉普兰奇曾经替「社会」杂志翻译,你们应该在
1923年的Gesammelte Werke, 第六册,161页查阅。你们将会找到以下的评论:「你们所必需寻找到东西是,你们现在呈现给我们的东西,关于这个升华的理想的阐释。升华是一种跟客体力比多有关的过程。

I would just point out that the opposition Ichlibido I Objektlibido only begins
to be articulated as such on an analytical level with the Einfuhrung. This text
complements the articulation first given by Freud of the fundamentally conflictual
position of man relative to his satisfaction as such. That is why it is essential to introduce das Ding at the beginning.

我仅是要指出,客体力比多的对立,仅有在具有性器官的精神分析的层次,本身才开始被表达。这个文本补充弗洛依德首先给予的这个表达:人相对应他的满足的本身的冲突的立场。那就是为什么这是重要的,在开始时介绍「物象」。

That is Das Ding insofar as, if he is to follow the path of his pleasure, man
must go around it. One must take one’s time to recognize, to find out for
oneself, to take one’s time to see that Freud is telling us the same thing as
Saint Paul, namely, that what governs us on the path of our pleasure is no
Sovereign Good, and that moreover, beyond a certain limit, we are in a thoroughly
enigmatic position relative to that which lies within das Ding, because
there is no ethical rule which acts as a mediator between our pleasure and its
real rule.

那就是「物象」,因为人必须环绕它旋转,假如他想要遵循他的快乐的途径。我们必须花点时间,才能够体会到,为了替我们自己找出,必须花点时间,才能够看出,弗洛依德正在告诉我们跟圣保罗所说的相同的事情。换句话说,在我们快乐的途中,统治我们的东西,并不是统辖的善。而且,超越某个限制,我们处于完全谜团一般的立场,相对于「物象」之内所在的东西。因为没有伦理的规则充当一种仲介,处于我们的快乐与它的真实的规则之间。

And behind Saint Paul, you fond the teaching of Christ when he is questioned
just before the final Easter [la dermiere Piques]. There are two versions,
that of the Gospel according to Saint Mathew and that of the Gospels
of Mark and Luke. In Saint Mathew’s Gospel, where it is clearest, he is
asked, “What good must we do to achieve life eternal?” In the Greek version,
he answers, “Why do you speak to me of good? Who knows what is good?
Only He, He who is beyond, our Father, knows what is good. And He told
you, Do this, Do that, Don’t go any further.” One just has to follow his
commandments. Then after that there is the statement, “Thou shalt love thy
neighbor as thyself.” That’s the commandment that appropriately enough,
given its obvious relevance, is the terminal point of Civilization and Its Discontents;
it is the ideal end to which his investigation by necessity leads him
– Freud never held back from anything that offered itself to his examination.

在圣保罗背后,你们发现耶稣基督的教导,当他被询问,就在最后的复活节之前。有两种说法,一是福音书的说法,依照圣马修;另一手马可与路加的福音书。在圣马修的福音,最显而易见,耶稣被询问:「为了获得永生生命,我们必须做什么善行?」在这个希腊文的版本,他回答说:「你为什么跟我谈论善行?谁知道什么是善行?」仅有他,超越的他,我们的天父,知道什么是善行。他告诉你,做这个,做那个,不要逾越过去。」我们只需要遵循他的命令。因此,在那个之后,有这个陈述:「我要你们爱你们的邻居如你自己。」那是足够适当的命令,考虑到它的明显的相关性。这个命令是「文明及其不满」的终点结论。弗洛依德的研究必然引导他到这个理想的目的—对于任何提供自己给他检视的东西,弗洛依德从来不退缩。

I cannot urge you too strongly to appreciate, if you are able, what in Christ’s
answer has for so long been closed to aural apprehension, apart from that of
knowing ears – “They have ears but they hear not,” the Gospel tells us. Try
to read the words of the man who, it is claimed, never laughed; read them
for what they are. From time to time, you will be struck by a form of humor
that surpasses all others.

我不厌其烦地建议你们要赏识,假如你们能够的话,在耶稣基督的回答中,长久以来被大家听而不闻的东西,除了那些用心知晓的耳朵。「他们有耳朵,但是他们没有听见」,福音书告诉我们。请你们尝试阅读这个人的这些字词,据宣称,这个从来没有笑。请你们阅读它们,就它们实质的意义。有时,你们将会为之动容,因为它的幽默的形式超越过所有其它的形式。

The parable of the unfaithful steward, for example. No matter how seldom
one has been to church, one is nevertheless used to having that parable trotted
out. And it occurs to no one to be surprised by the fact that the Son of
Man, the purest of the pure, tells us that the best way to achieve salvation
for one’s soul is to embezzle the funds one is in charge of, since that, too,
may lead the children of light to grant you, if not a reward, then at least a
certain gratitude. From the point of view of a homogeneous, uniform, and
stable morality, there is some contradiction there, but perhaps one could
confirm it with other insights of a similar kind – such as, for example, the
terrific “joke,”4 “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s” – and after that
get on with it! It is a form of paradox that may lead to all kinds of evasions
or ruptures, to all the gaps opened up by nonsense – those insidious dialogues,
for example, in which the interlocutor always manages to slip out of
the traps that are set for him.

譬如,不忠实的管家的寓言。无论我们多么罕见去教堂,我们仍然习惯于让这个寓言被提出了。没有人会想到对这个事实大吃一惊:人之子,最为纯洁的人,告诉我们,获得自己灵魂的救赎的最好方法,是窃用我们负责的基金。因为那也可能引导光明的小孩承诺给你们,即使不是酬劳,至少是某种感激。从同质性的,一致而且稳定的道德的观点,那里是有些矛盾。但是或许我们能够证实它,用类似的其他洞察。譬如,那个巨大的笑话,「将凯撒的归因凯撒」。然后,继续用它!这是一种悖论的形式,导致各种的逃避或断裂,导致这种无意义展开的各种的差距。譬如,那些具有隐患的对话。对谈者总是成功地逃避为他设计的陷阱。

To come back to our subject for the moment, the good as such – something
that has been the eternal object of the philosophical quest in the sphere of
ethics, the philosopher’s stone of all the moralists – the good is radically
denied by Freud. It is rejected at the beginning of his thought in the very
notion of the pleasure principle as the rule of the deepest instinct, of the
realm of the drives. This is confirmed in a thousand different ways, and is
for example consistent with Freud’s central question, which concerns, as you
know, the Father.

回到我们目前的主题,善行的本身。某件东西曾经是哲学追寻的永恒目标,在伦理学的领域,所有道德家的哲学家电宝石。善行被弗洛依德强烈地拒绝。它在他的快乐原则的观念的思想的开始就被拒绝,作为是最深处本能够规则,作为是各种冲动的领域。他用一千个不同的方法来证实。譬如,它跟弗洛依德的中心的问题相一致。如你们所知,这个中心问题是父亲。

To understand Freud’s position relative to the Father, you have to go and
look up the form it is given in Luther’s thought, when he had his nostrils
tickled by Erasmus. Reluctandy, after a great many years, Erasmus had finally
published his De Libero Arbitrio, so as to remind the excitable mad man from
Wittenberg that the authoritative Christian tradition, from the words of Christ
to Saint Paul, Saint Augustine and the Church Fathers, led one to believe
that works, good works, were not nothing, and that to be sure the tradition
of the philosophers on the subject of the Sovereign Good was not to be just
thrown out.

为了理解弗洛依德相对于父亲的立场,你们必须前去查阅在路德思想被给予的形式,当他让阿拉斯莫斯引发好奇心。很不情愿地,好几年以后,阿拉斯莫斯最后出版他的De Libero Arbitrio,为了提醒这位出身维腾堡的激动的疯子:具有权威的基督教的传统,从耶稣基督到圣保罗,圣奥古斯丁与教堂的神父们,他们都引导我们相信:著作,好的著作并非毫无意义,的确,哲学家的传统,探讨统辖的善的主题,不应该被抛弃。

Luther, who up to that point had remained reserved in his relations with
the figure of Erasmus – although he did privately indulge in a little irony on
the subject – then published his De Servo Arbitrio in order to emphasize both
the fundamentally bad character of the relations between men and the fact
that at the heart of man’s destiny is the Ding, the causa, which I described
the other day as analogous to that which is designated by Kant as at the
horizon of his Practical Reason – except that it is a pendant to it. To coin a
phrase whose approximate Greekness I will ask you to forgive, it is the causa
pathomenon, the cause of the most fundamental human passion.

直到当时,路德始终是有所保留,在他跟阿拉斯莫斯这个人物的关系。虽然他私下自我陶醉于对于这个主题的反讽,然后出版他的De Servo Arbitrio ,为了强调,人与这个实之间的关系,基本上是不好的特性。因为「物象」的人的命运的核心,我前天将它描述作为类似于康德所指定的东西,当作是他的「实践理性」的地平线。除了作为它的附属。为了铸造一个词语,它的近似的希腊文,我要求你们忘记。那就是causa pathomenon, 人类最基本的激情的原因。

Luther writes of the following – God’s eternal hatred of men, not simply
of their failures and the works of their free will, but a hatred that existed even
before the world was created. You see that there are reasons why I advise you
to read religious authors from time to time; I mean good ones, of course, not
those who are all sweetness and light, although even they are sometimes
rewarding. Saint Francois de Sales on marriage is, I assure you, better than
Van de Velde on ideal marriage. But in my opinion Luther is much more
interesting. That hatred which existed even before the world was created is
the correlative of the relationship that exists between a certain influence of
the law as such and a certain conception of das Ding as the fundamental
problem and, in a word, as the problem of evil. I assume that it hasn’t escaped
your attention that it is exactly what Freud deals with when the question he
asks concerning the Father leads him to point out that the latter is the tyrant
of the primitive horde, the one against whom the original crime was committed,
and who for that very reason introduced the order, essence, and foundation
of the domain of law.

路德写到以下的内容:上帝对人的仇恨,不仅因为他们的失败,与拥有他们的自由意志的工作,而是这一种仇恨甚至在世界在被创造之前,就已经存在。你们看出,我为什么会有些理由,要劝告你们有时要阅读宗教的作者。当然,我指的是好的作者,不是那些轻浮的夸夸之谈的那些作者,虽然他们有时也有他的价值。容我告诉你们,圣法兰西斯、薛勒斯的论婚姻,就比范、维德的论理想婚姻好很多。但是依我之见,路德是更加有趣。在世界被创造之前就存在的仇恨,跟这个关系息息相关,存在于法则本身的某些影响,与「物象」的某个观念,作为基本的问题之间的关系。总之,作为是邪恶的问题。我认为它并没有讨避你们的注意。那确实是弗洛依的处理的东西,当他询问关于父亲的这个问题。这个问题引导他指出,后者是原始部落的暴君。原初的罪被犯,是为了对抗这个暴君。因为那个理由,那个暴君介绍法律的领域的秩序,本质与基础。

Not to recognize the filiation or cultural paternity that exists between Freud
and a new direction of thought – one that is apparent at the break which
occurred toward the beginning of the sixteenth century, but whose repercussions
are felt up to the end of the seventeenth century – constitutes a fundamental
misunderstanding of the kind of problems Freud’s intellectual project
addresses.

假如没有体认出,存在于弗洛依德与新的思潮方向之间的这种传承与文化父系,会形成一个基本的误解,对于弗洛依的的知识点计划所处理的那些问题。将近十六世纪的开始,发生的一个断裂是显而易见,直到十七世纪的末业,这种断裂的迴响还依旧被感觉到。

I have just finished a digression of some twenty-five minutes. And it was
designed to tell you that, just after 1914 with the Einfuhrung, Freud introduces
us to something that dodges the issue again by articulating things that are, of course, essential, but of which one must know the context, namely, the problem of the object relation.

我刚刚结束大约二十五分钟的离题谈论。它被设计来告诉你们,就在1914年后,使用这个导引,弗洛依德跟我们介绍再次逃避这个问题的某件东西,凭借表达当然是基本的事情,但是我们必须知道这个事情的内容。换句话说,客体关系的问题。

This problem of the object relation has to be read “Freudianly.” You can,
in fact, see it emerge in a narcissistic relation, an imaginary relation. At this
level the object introduces itself only insofar as it is perpetually interchangeable
with the love that the subject has for its own image. Ichlibido and Objektlibido
are introduced by Freud in relation to the difference between Ich-ideal
and Ideal-ich, between the mirage of the ego and the formation of an ideal.
This ideal makes room for itself alone; within the subject it gives form to
something which is preferred and to which it will henceforth submit. The
problem of identification is linked to this psychological splitting, which places
the subject in a state of dependence relative to an idealized, forced image of
itself – something that Freud will emphasize subsequently.

客体关系的这个问题必须被阅读为「弗洛依德的方式」。事实上,你们能够看见它出现,处于一种自恋的关系,一种想象的关系。在这个层次,这个客体介绍它自己,因为它跟主体拥有对它自己的爱,可以永久地互相交换。弗洛依德介绍力比多与力比多客体,类似自我理想与理想自我之间的这个差异,处于自我的幻景与理想的形成。这个理想仅是让出位置给它自己,在主体之内,它给予形式,给受到喜欢的东西,它因此顺服的东西。认同的问题跟心理的分裂息息相关。这种分裂将主体处于依赖的状态,相对于它本身的一个理想化的强迫的意象。这个东西,弗洛依德随后将会强调。

It is through this mirage relation that the notion of an object is introduced.
But this object is not the same as that which is aimed at on the horizon of the
instinct. Between the object as it is structured by the narcissistic relation and
das Ding, there is a difference, and it is precisely on the slope of that difference
that the problem of sublimation is situated for us.

通过这个幻景的关系,客体的观念被介绍。但是这个客体跟本能的领域所瞄准的东西,并不相同。在作为自恋关系的结构的这个客体与物象之间,有一个差异。对于我们而言,确实是在这个差异的斜坡,升华的问题被定位。

In a short note in the Three Essays, Freud gives us a kind of brief summary
in the style of an essay on the difference that strikes us between the love life
of antiquity, of pre-Christians, and our own. It resides, he says, in the fact
that in antiquity the emphasis was on the instinct itself, whereas we place it
on the object. The Ancients feted the instinct, and, through the intermediary
of the instinct, were also ready to honor an object of lesser, common value,
whereas we reduce the value of the manifestation of the instinct, and we
demand the support of the object on account of the prevailing characteristics
of the object.

在「性学理论三篇论文」的一个短注,弗洛依德用论文的文体,给我们一直简短的总结,探讨让我们印象深刻的差异,处于古代,前基督徒,与我们自己的爱情生活之间的差异。他说,这个差异就驻扎在这个事实:在古代,强调点在于本能的本身,而我们则是将它放置在客体。古代人推崇本能,凭借本能的仲介,古代人也准备推崇次要的普通价值的客体。而我们则是减低本能的展示的价值。我们要求客体的支持,因为客体具有佔优势的特性。

Moreover, Freud wrote a great many other pages where he discussed disparaging
commentaries on love life – commentaries made in the name of
what? In the name of an incontestable ideal. You can read the following in
Civilization and Its Discontents: “Among the works of that sensitive English
author, Galsworthy, whose worth is universally acknowledged nowadays, I
once really enjoyed one story. It was called The Apple Tree, and it shows how
there is no room anymore in contemporary civilized life for the simple, natural
love of two human beings of the pastoral tradition.”5

而且,弗洛依德写了许多其他的页数。在那里,他讨论那些探讨爱情生命的贬低的评注。这些评注以怎样的名义发表?以无法争辩的理想的名义。你们能够在「文明及其不满」里阅读以下内容:「在那位敏感的英国作者高尔兹华斯的著作里,他的价值今天受到普遍性的承认。我有一次确实赏识一个故事。篇名叫做「蘋果树」。故事显示,在现代的文明生活里,不再有如此纯朴自然的爱情的空间,在田园传统的两个人的爱情。

The whole passage flows forth spontaneously in a way that I call excessive.
How does Freud know that we emphasize the object, whereas the Ancients
put the accent on the instinct? You will respond that there is no example of
ideal exaltation in any Greek tragedy, unlike our own classical tragedies. Yet
Freud hardly explains the question.

整个的过程自动自发的往前流动,用我所谓的渲染的方式。弗洛依德如何知道,我们强调这个客体,而古代人则是强调本能呢?你们将会回答,不像我们自己的古典的悲剧,在任何的希腊的悲剧里,并没有理想的升华之爱的典范。可是,弗洛依德几乎无法解释这个问题。

Next time we will have to compare our ideal of love with that of the Ancients
by referring to some works of history and to a given historical moment that
will also have to be defined. It is no more or less than a structuralization, a
historical modification of Eros. It is, of course, of great importance that courtly
love, the exaltation of woman, a certain Christian style of love that Freud
himself discusses, mark a historical change. And I will be leading you into
that territory.

下次,我们将必须比较我们的爱的理想,与古代人的爱的理想,凭借提到历史的一些作品,提到也将必须被定义的特定的历史的时刻。那实实在在就是一种结构主义,一种历史对性爱的修正。当然,这是非常重要的,骑士之爱,推崇女人,弗洛依德自己探讨过的某种的基督教风格的爱,标示一个历史的改变。我将会引导你们进入那个领域。

It is nevertheless true, as I will show you, that in certain authors of antiquity
– and interestingly enough in Latin rather than Greek literature – one
finds some and perhaps all the elements that characterize the cult of an idealized
object, something which was determinative for what can only be called
the sublimated elaboration of a certain relationship. Thus what Freud expresses
over-hastily and probably inversely, concerns a kind of degradation which,
when one examines it closely, is directed less at love life than at a certain lost
cord, a crisis, in relation to the object.

可是,这是真实的,如同我将会告诉你们,在古代的某些的作者,足够耐人寻味的,在拉丁文,而不是在希腊文学,我们发现一些因素,或许所有的因素,表现被理想化的客体的崇拜。某件东西具有指标性,对于仅能够被称为是某种关系的升华的建构。因此,弗洛依德所表达的东西,过分匆促,可能逆转地关系到一种堕落。当我们仔细地检视它,它并不是被引导朝向爱的生命,而是朝向某个丧失的线索,跟这个客体的关系。

To set out to find the instinct again is the result of a certain loss, a cultural
loss, of the object. That such a problem exists at the center of that mental
crisis from which Freudianism emerged is a question that we will have to ask
ourselves. The nostalgia expressed in the idea that the Ancients were closer
than we are to the instinct perhaps means no more, like every dream of a
Golden Age or El Dorado, than that we are engaged in posing questions at
the level of the instinct because we do not yet know what to do as far as the
object is concerned.

再次出发找到这个本能是这个客体的某种丧失,文化的丧失的结果。这样一个问题存在于精神危机的中心。从那里,弗洛依德学派出现。这个问题,我们将必须询问自己。比起我们,古代人比较靠近本能的这个观念,所表达的思古之幽情,或许不再具有意义,就像我们对于黄金时代的每个梦想。正如我们从事于提出问题,在本能的层次。因为我们还不知道,应该如何处理,就客体而言。

At the level of sublimation the object is inseparable from imaginary and
especially cultural elaborations. It is not just that the collectivity recognizes
in them useful objects; it finds rather a space of relaxation where it may in a
way delude itself on the subject of das Ding, colonize the field of das Ding
with imaginary schemes. That is how collective, socially accepted sublimations
operate.

在升华的这个层次,这个客体跟想象无法分开,特别是跟文化的建构。这不仅是因为大众在它们那里体认出有用的客体,而且找到一个轻松的空间,在那里,大众可以用某种方式欺骗自己,对于「物象」这个主题,用想象的基模将「物象」的领域殖民化。那就是大众从社会上接受升华的运作的方式。

Society takes some comfort from the mirages that moralists, artists, artisans,
designers of dresses and hats, and the creators of imaginary forms in
general supply it with. But it is not simply in the approval that society gladly
accords it that we must seek the power of sublimation. It is rather in an
imaginary function, and, in particular, that for which we will use the symbolization
of the fantasm ($ ◊a), which is the form on which depends the
subject’s desire.

社会从这些幻景,获得某种的安慰,道德家,艺术家,服装与帽子的设计师,以及想象的形式的创造者,一般供应给它的幻景。但是这不仅是在社会很乐意给予它的认同里,我们必须寻找升华的力量。而且在想象的功用里,特别是在我们将会使用幻想公式($a)的象征里。这个公式是主体的欲望依赖的公式。

In forms that are historically and socially specific, the a elements, the imaginary
elements of the fantasm come to overlay the subject, to delude it, at the
very point of das Ding. The question of sublimation will be brought to bear
here. That is why I shall talk to you next time of courtly love in the Middle
Ages, and, in particular, of Minnesang.

用历史上与社会上明确的形式,这个a小客体的元素,幻想公式的这些想象的元素,前来跟主体重叠,欺骗它,在「物象」的这个点。升华的问题将会引导到这里。那就是为什么我下次将跟你们谈论中世纪的骑士之爱,特别是抒情歌曲Minnesang 的骑士之爱。

In an anniversary way, since last year I talked to you about Hamlet, I shall speak about the Elizabethan theater, which is the turning point in European eroticism, and civilized as well. It is at that moment, in effect, that the celebration of the idealized object occurs that Freud talks about in his note.
Freud left us with the problem of a gap once again at the level of das Ding,
which is that of religious men and mystics, at a time when we could no longer
rely on the Father’s guarantee.
January 13,1960

作为周年纪念,因为去年我跟你们谈论有关「哈姆雷特」,我将谈论伊莉莎白时代的戏院。在欧洲的性爱主义,那是个转捩点,也成为文明。事实上,就在那个时刻,被理想化的客体的庆祝发生,弗洛依德在他的笔记谈论到。
1960年,1月13日

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
http://springhero.worldpress.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: