Ethic 128

Ethic 128
The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
精神分析伦理学

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
χ Marginal comments
第十章 边缘的评论

GNOMIC PROPOSITIONS
侏儒的命题

ART, RELIGION, SCIENCE
艺术、宗教、科学

ON THE SUBJECT OF SPITZ
狮毛狗的主题

ANAMORPHOSIS AND ARCHITECTURE
变形与艺术

THE PRIMACY OF THE ES
Es 的原初性

I am not this morning in the state of readiness I consider necessary for me to
conduct my seminar in the usual manner. And this is especially the case,
given the point we have reached, when I particularly want to be able to present
you with some very precise formulas. You will thus allow me to put it
off until next time.

今天早上,我并不是处于有备而来的状态,为了以寻常的方式从事我的研讨班,我认为准备是有需要的。这特别是这个情况,考虑到我们到达的这个时刻,当我特别想要能够呈现给与你们某些明确的公式。你们因此容许我们拖延它,直到下次。

The break caused by my absence of two weeks comes at a bad time, since
I would have liked to go beyond what I announced last time that I would be
dealing with – after having dealt with it, of course.

我缺席两个星期引起的中断,来得真不是时刻,因为我本来想要超越我上次宣布我将要处理的东西。当然,在我已经处理它之后。

1
Courtly love is, in effect, an exemplary form, a paradigm, of sublimation.
We only have essentially the documentary testimony of art, but we still feel
today the ethical ramifications.

事实上,骑士之爱是一个典范的形式,一个升华的典范。我们仅是拥有基本上是艺术的文件的证词,但是我们今天依旧感觉伦理学的分枝。

If on the subject of courtly love, apart from the lively archaeological interest
in the matter, we still only have the documentary testimony of art in a
form that is almost dead, it is obvious that its ethical ramifications are still
felt in the relations between the sexes.

假如探究骑士之爱的主题,除了对于此事具有生动的考古学興趣,我们依旧仅拥有艺术的文件的证词,用几乎是死掉的形式。显而易见,它的伦理学的分枝依旧被感觉到,在两性之间的关系。

The long-lasting influence of the effects of a phenomenon that one might
think is little more than an issue of aesthetics is thus of a kind to make us
aware of the importance of sublimation – something that psychoanalysis has
specifically foregrounded.

这一个现象的影响持续久远,我们可能认为,仅是美学的议题。这种影响因此是相同种类,让我们知道升华的重要性。精神分析曾经明确地作为先前基础的某件东西。

I would like to be at the top of my form in order to show you how the
question has been posed historically, and how it is posed from the point of
view of method, for I believe that there again we are in a position to throw
some light on admitted difficulties that historians, Romance scholars, philologists,
and various specialists who have approached the problem have
encountered. They apparently recognize that they have in no way managed
to reduce the phenomenon of courtly love in its historical emergence to an
identifiable form of conditioning.

我想要处于我的形式的顶端,为了要跟你们显示,这个问题在历史上如何被提出,以及它从方法论的观点,如何被提出。因为我相信,我们再次处于这个立场,要启明被承认的这些困难,历史学家,浪漫主义的学者,语言学家,以及曾经探究这个问题的各种的专家,他们曾经遭遇的困难。他们显而易见体认出,他们根本就没有成功过将骑士之爱的现象,在它出现于历史中,还原成为可辨认的制约的形式。

The recognition of the fact is common, and I would say almost uniform.
One encounters a paradoxical phenomenon, one that is almost taken for
granted; in every example of this kind scholars have often been led to examine
influences – something that in many cases is only a way of displacing the
problem. They tell us that the origin of the problem is to be found in the
transmission of something that happened somewhere else. Yet we still need
to know how that happened somewhere else. But in the event that is precisely
what gets lost.

这个事实的体认是普遍的。我甚至说几乎是一致的。我们遭遇一种悖论的现象,这个现象几乎被视为是当然,在每一个这种的例子,学者们时常被引导检视影响。在某些情况,某件东西仅是一种替代这个问题的方式。他们告诉我们,这个问题的起源应该被找到,在某件东西的传递,它发生在某个其他地方。可是,我们依旧需要知道,那件事情在某个其他地方是如何发生。但是在确实是已经迷失的事情那里。

In this case, the recourse to influences is far from having illuminated the
problem. We will try to approach the problem at its very center, and we will
see that Freudian theory is of a kind to shed a certain light there. Thus in
this way I take up the problem not only for its value as example but also for
its value relative to method.

在这个情况,诉诸于影响根本就没有启明这个问题。我们将会尝试探究这个问题在它的核心。我们将会看出,弗洛依德的理论在那里很能够有所启蒙。因此,以这种方式,我探讨这个问题,不但因为它作为典范的价值,而且因为它相对于方法的价值。

To start out from this very specific point doesn’t mean that everything that
concerns sublimation is to be considered from the perspective developed here,
namely, from the point of view of the man / woman relation, of the couple. I
do not claim to reduce sublimation to that, nor even to center it on that. I
believe on the contrary that to start out from this example is essential in order
to arrive at a general formula, whose beginnings we can find in Freud, if we
know where to look for it – and I don’t mean search for this or that detail.

从这个明确点开始,并不意味着,每样跟升华有关的东西,应该被考虑,从在此发展的观点。换句话说,从男人与女人,夫妻的关系的观点。我并没有宣称要将升华还原到那里,甚至也没有将它集中在那里。相反地,我相信,从这个例子开始是重要的,为了到达一般的公式。这个公式的开始,我们在弗洛依德那里找到。假如我们知道如何去寻找它。我的意思并不是要寻找这个或那个细节。

If I proceed sometimes by emphasizing one of Freud’s sentences, an isolated
formula, or, I was about to say, some gnomic proposition, then I am
very conscious of making that gnomic proposition work for me. When I give
you a formula such as “The desire of man is the desire of the Other,” it is a
gnomic formula, although Freud didn’t seek to present it as such. But he
does so from time to time without doing it on purpose. Thus I once quoted
a very short formula which brought together the respective mechanisms of
hysteria, obsessional neurosis and paranoia with three forms of sublimation,
art, religion and science. At another point he relates paranoia to scientific
discourse. These clues will help us articulate in all its generality the formula
in which we will in the end order the function of sublimation with reference
to the Thing.

假如我们有时继续,凭借强调弗洛依德的其中一个句子,一个孤立的公式,或者,我即将要说,某个简洁的命题。那么我清楚知道,让这个简洁命题为我工作。当我给予你们一个公式,譬如,「人的欲望就是大他者的欲望。」这是一个简洁的公式,虽然弗洛依德并没有尝试呈现它的本身。但是他有时这样做,将歇斯底里症的各别的机制汇集一块,妄想症的神经症与具有三种升华形式的偏执狂,那就是艺术,宗教,与科学。在另外一点,它将偏执狂跟科学的辞说相提并论。这些线索将有助于非常一般性地表达这个公式。在那里,我们最后将会规划秩序,给升华的功用,提到这个「物象」。

This Thing is accessible in very elementary examples, which are almost of
the type of the classic philosophical demonstration, including a blackboard
and a piece of chalk. I referred last time to the schematic example of the vase,
so as to allow you to grasp where the Thing is situated in the relationship that
places man in the mediating function between the real and the signifier. This
Thing, all forms of which created by man belong to the sphere of sublimation,
this Thing will always be represented by emptiness, precisely because
it cannot be represented by anything else – or, more exactly, because it can only be represented by something else. But in every form of sublimation, emptiness is determinative.

这个「物象」在一些基本例子是可接近的。这些例子几乎属于古典哲学的证明的那种,包括黑板与一枝粉笔。我上次提到花瓶的这个基模的例子,为了让你们能够理解,在那里,这个物象被定位在将人放在在实在界与能指之间的仲介的功用的这个关系。这个物象,被人类创造的所有它的形式,属于升华的范围。这个物象将总是被代表,由空洞,确实是因为它无法被代表,用任何其他东西。或者更加确实地说,因为它仅能够是被代表,有某件其他的东西。但是在升华的每个形式,空洞是具有决定性。

I will point out right away three different ways according to which art,
religion and the discourse of science turn out to be related to that; I will point
this out by means of three formulas that I don’t say I will retain at the end,
when we have completed our journey together.

我将立刻指出三个不同的方式。依照这三个方式,艺术,宗教,与科学的辞说,结果跟那个相关。我将指出这点,凭借我并没有说我最后将保留的三个公式,当我们已经一起完成我们的旅途。

All art is characterized by a certain mode of organization around this emptiness.
I don’t believe that that is a vain formula, in spite of its generality, in
guiding those who are interested in explaining the problems of art; and I
believe I have the means of illustrating that to you in a variety of striking
ways.

所有的艺术的特色是某种的组织的模式环绕空无。我并不相信,那是一个空洞的公式,尽管它的一般性。当它引导那些对解释艺术的问题感到興趣的人。我相信我拥有这个工具,用各种生动的方式,跟你们解释。

Religion in all its forms consists of avoiding this emptiness. We can illustrate
that in forcing the note of Freudian analysis for the good reason that
Freud emphasized the obsessional traits of religious behavior. Yet although
the whole ceremonial phase of the body of religious practices, in effect, enters
into this framework, we can hardly be fully satisfied with this formula. A
phrase like “respecting this emptiness” perhaps goes further. In any case, the
emptiness remains in the center, and that is precisely why sublimation is
involved.

各式各样的宗教主要在于避免这个空无。我们能够用弗洛依德的精神分析说明那一点。理由很充分:弗洛依德强调宗教行为的妄想症的特征。可是,虽然宗教实践的整个仪式的部分,实际上进入到这个架构,我们几乎无法充分地满足这个公式。像「尊重这个空无」的词语,或许更加深入。无论如何,这个空无始终是在中心。这确实是为什么升华被牵涉在内。

As for our third term, the discourse of science, to the extent that it finds
its origin in our tradition in the discourse of wisdom or of philosophy, the
term Freud uses in connection with paranoia and its relation to psychic reality,
the term, Unglauben, finds its full meaning there.

至於我们第三个术业,科学的辞说,甚至它找到它的起源,在我们智慧或哲学的辞说的传统。弗洛依德使用的术语,关于偏执狂与它跟心灵现实的关系,Unglauben(不信仰) 这个术语在那里找到它的充分的意义。

I emphasized this fact in passing in a recent Seminar; Unglauben is not the
negation of the phenomenology of Glauben, of belief. Freud never returned
to the subject in a comprehensive and definitive way, yet it nevertheless runs
throughout his work, and he gives extreme importance to this function in the
Entwurf. The phenomenology of belief remained for him an obsession to the
end; thus Moses and Monotheism is constructed in its entirety in order to
explain the fundamental phenomena of belief.

在最近的研讨班,我顺便强调这个事实:「不信仰」并不是「信仰」的现象的否定。弗洛依德从来没有回到这个主题,用完整而明确的方式。可是它仍然偏佈在他的著作里。他非常重视Entwurf (架构)的这个功用。对于他而言,信仰的现象学始终是一种著迷。因此「摩西与单一神教」完整地被建构,为了解释信仰的基本现象。

More profound and more dynamically significant for us is the phenomenon
of unbelief. It is not the suppression of belief, but it has to do with man’s
relationship to the world and to truth that is specific to man, a relationship
he inhabits.

对于我们而言,更加强烈重要的是不信仰的这个现象。不信仰并不是信仰的压抑。不信仰跟人与世界的关系,跟人的明确的真理息息相关,人驻居在这一个关系里。

In this connection you would be wrong to trust in summary oppositions or
to think that history has known sensational turning points, such as the supposed
passage from the theocratic age to so-called humanist forms of liberation
of the individual and of reality. The conception of the world is not decisive
here. On this occasion, it has nothing to do with something resembling a
Weltanschauung – and certainly not mine. I am only pointing the way here, I
am only trying to help you orientate yourself in the bibliography of significant
works on the subject, works by specialist who in their different fields are
equipped with some talent for analysis. I advise you to look up the work of
an historian, Lucien Febvre, who is the author of the widely accessible, The
Problem of Unbelief in the Sixteenth Century. It is a work that enables you to
see how the thoughtful use of historical methods allows us to pose more precisely
the question of the forms of development of thinking on the subject of
problems of faith.

关于这点,你们将是错误,假如你们信任结论的相反,或是假如你们认为历史已经知道耸动的转捩点,譬如,从被认为是神权的时代,经过到所谓的个人与现实解放的人道的形式。世界的观念在此并不是决定性。在这个场合,它跟某件类似Weltanschauung(世界观)东西根本没有关系。那确实并不是我的世界观。我仅是指示这里的途径,我仅是尝试帮忙你们定位你们自己,在这个主题的重要的著作的索引。那些专家的著作,在不同的领域里,它们都具备有精神分析的某些天赋。我劝告你们查阅一位历史学家的著作,鲁新、费布瑞。他是这本广泛流传的「十六世纪的不信仰的问题」这本书的作者。这本著作让你们能够看出,历史方法的思维的使用,让我们能够更加确实地提出思想的发展的形式的问题,对于信仰的问题这个主题。

If you have the time and you would like to read something amusing, you
should read a little book by the same author that is supplementary but not
secondary, not a little boat bobbing in the wake of a ship; it is called Concerning
the Heptameron. The author of the Heptameron is Marguerite de Navarre,
whom, I hope, you will not mix up with Queen Margot, the wife of Henry
IV. She is not just a libertine author, but turns out to have written a treatise
that is mystical in kind. But that is not something which excites the astonishment
of the historian.

假如你们有时间,你们想要阅读某件有趣的东西,你们应该阅读相同作者的一本小书。这本书是补充,但是并非是次要,不是跟随在大船后面的起伏的小舟。书名被称为「七日谈」。这本「七日谈」的作者是玛格丽特、拿瓦瑞。我希望,你们不要跟玛格特皇后混为一谈,那是亨利四世的妻子。她并不是一位放荡的作家,但是她证明曾写过一篇神秘性质的论文。但是那并不是某件激发历史学家的惊奇的东西。

He tries to show us what the collections of tales that go under the title of
the Heptameron might mean in the context of the time and of the psychology
of their author. And he does it in such a way as to allow us to read that work
with not so much a more informed eye as an eye that doesn’t censure the text
or, in particular, the reflections of each of the characters after each of the
tales that are supposed to be true, and that certainly are for the most part.
The thoughts of the respondents that belong to the register of moral and even
formal religious reflection are usually censured because one assumes at the
beginning that they are no more than the accompanying sauce. But that is
something it is important not to get wrong – in any dish it is the sauce that
is the essential ingredient. Lucien Febvre teaches us how to read the Heptameron.
Yet if we knew how to read, we wouldn’t need him.

他尝试跟我们显示,在「七日谈」的标题之下,那些故事的收集意味著什么,在当代的内涵与它们的作者的心理。他用这样一种方式这样做,为了让我们能够阅读那个著作,不是用更加清楚明白的眼光,而是用并不苛评那个文本,或并没有特别苛评每一位人物的反思,在被认为是真实的故事之后。故事确实大部分是真实的。属于道德,甚至是正式的宗教的省思的铭记的回应者的思想,通常受到苛评,因为我们开始时认为,它们仅是陪伴滋味的酱油。但是那是某件重要的东西,为了不要犯错。在任何盘子里,这个酱油才是基本的成分。鲁新、费布瑞教导我们,如何阅读「七日谈」。可是,假如我们知道如何阅读,我们不会需要他。

As far as unbelief is concerned, it is from our point of view a place in
discourse that is to be conceived precisely in relation to the Thing – the
Thing is repudiated or foreclosed in the proper sense of Verwerfung.

就不信仰而言,从我们的观点,在被构想跟「物象」有关的辞说中的位置。这个「物象」被排斥,或除权弃绝,用Verwerfung.(除权弃绝)的适当意义来说。

In the same way that in art there is a Verdrangung, a repression of the
Thing, and in religion there is probably a Verschiebung or displacement, it is
strictly speaking Verwerfung that is involved in the discourse of science. The
discourse of science repudiates the presence of the Thing insofar as from its
point of view the ideal of absolute knowledge is glimpsed, that is, something
that posits the Thing while it pays no attention to it. As everyone knows, this
point of view has historically proved in the end to be a failure.

同样地,在艺术方面,有这个「物象」的压抑。在宗教方面,可能有一种替换。严格来说,「除权弃绝」牵涉到科学的辞说。科学的辞说排斥「物象」的存在。因为从它的观点,绝对知识的理想被瞥见。换句话说,某件东西提出这个「物象」,虽然它并没有注意到它。众所周知,这个观点从历史上最后证明是失败。

The discourse of science is determined by this Verwerfung, and, in the light
of my formula that what is foreclosed in the symbolic reappears in the real,
this is probably why it leads to a situation in which, at the end of physics, it
is something as enigmatic as the Thing that is glimpsed.

科学的辞说受到这个「除权弃绝」所决定。从我的公式的观点,在象征界被除权弃绝的东西,在真实界重新出现。这可能是为什么它导致一种情况。在物理学的结束,那是某件迷团的东西,就像被瞥见的「物象」。

I will postpone until next time a discussion of my paradigm of courtly love,
an example of sublimation in art whose vital effects we still come across. We
will take note of them after I come back from my trip; we will take a sampling of these traces, of the indisputable effects of the primary signifying construction that is determinative in the phenomenon of courtly love. And we will attempt to recognize in contemporary phenomena something that can only
be explained through recourse to such an origin.

我将骑士之爱的典范的讨论,拖延到下次。这是艺术升华的一个例子,它的重要的影响,我们依旧会碰到。我们将会注意到它们,在我从的旅行回来。我们将会尝试探索这些痕迹,那是原初的能指化的建构的无可置疑的理想,在骑士之爱的现象。我们将会企图在当代的现象,体认出某件东西,仅有凭借诉诸于如此的起源,才能够解释的东西。

Since I am engaged in marginal commentary today, let me point out in
passing that you would be wrong to think that this concept of the Thing to
which I am giving a new development this year wasn’t, in fact, immanent in
our discussions of previous years.

因为我今天从事边缘的评论,让我们顺便指出,你们将会是错误的,假如你们认为,今年我正在新的发展的「物象」的这个观念,事实上,在我们前几年的讨论,它并不是内在性。

Moreover, since there are those who question certain characteristics of my
style, let me remind you for example of the expression “The Freudian Thing”
that was the title of something I wrote, and it wouldn’t be a bad idea for you
to look it up. That text and that title surprised because if one starts to analyze
my intentions from a philosophical point of view, one comes to relate them
to a concern that was very popular at one time, namely, the resistance to
reification. Of course, I never said anything about reification. But intentions
can always be wrapped around a discourse. It is clear that if I chose such a
title, I did so deliberately. If you reread the text, you will see that I am
essentially speaking of the Thing. And I speak about it in a way that was
evidently the cause of the undoubted discomfort the text provoked at the
time. The fact is I sometimes make the Thing itself speak.

而且,因为那些质疑我的风格的某些特性的人,譬如,让我提醒你们「弗洛依德物象」的这个术语。那是我写的某件东西的标题。你们最好去查阅它一下。那个文本与那个标题令人惊奇,因为假如我们想要开始分析我的意图,从哲学的观点,我们渐渐将它们跟某个时刻的很受欢迎的关心扯上关系。换句话说,对于人被物化的抗拒。当然,我对于人被物化,并没有任何评论。但是有些意图总是被包裹在一个辞说里。显而易见地,假如我选择这样一个标题,我是刻意为之。假如你们重新阅读这个文本,你们将会看出,我基本上提到这个「物象」。我谈论到它,显而易见地,我的方式将是这个文本在当时会引起无可置疑的不舒服的原因。事实上,我有时让这个「物象」本身谈话

February 3, I960

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

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: