Identification 125

认同

Jacques Lacan

雅克 拉康

11.204.62 XVII 204

Let us leave the princess and the troubles that she gave Euler.

He wrote 254 letters to her, not simply to make her understand

Eulerian circles. Published in 1775 in London, they constitute a

(4) sort of corpus of the scientific thinking at that date.

让我们离开这位公主与她带给尤勒的困扰。他写了254封信给她，不仅是为了让她理解尤勒的环圈。这些环圈被出版在伦敦，在1775年。它们形成那个时期的一种的科学思想的著作。

The only thing that survived from it effectively are these little

circles, these Eulerian circles which are circles like any other

circles it is simply a matter of seeing the use that he made of

them. It was to explain the rules of the syllogism and in the

final analysis exclusion, inclusion and then what can be called

the intersection of two what? Of two fields applicable to what?

有效地从这部著作存留下来的唯一的东西，就是这些小环圈，这些尤勒的环圈，它们是圆圈，就像其他圆圈一样。问题仅是要看出对它们所做的这个用途。那就是要解释“三段论法”的规则。追根究底就是：排除，包含，然后就是所谓的两个什么的交会？应用到什么的两个领域？

Well, my heavens, applicable to many things, applicable for

example to the field where a certain proposition is true,

applicable to the field where a certain relationship exists,

applicable quite simply to the field where an object exists.

呵呵，我的天，应用到许多事情，譬如，应该的这个领域，某个命题是真实的领域。应用到某个关系存在的领域，应用到客体存在的领域。

You see that the usage of the

Eulerian circle, if you are used to

the multiplicity of logics as they

were elaborated in an immense

effort, the greater part of which

belongs to propositional logic and

the logic of classes, was

distinguished in the most useful

fashion. I cannot even dream of

entering of course into the details

that would be required to make the distinction between these

elaborations. What I simply want to have recognised here, is

that you surely remember one or other moment of your existence

where there has come to you, under this form of a support, some

logical proof or other, some object as a logical object, whether

it involved a proposition, a class relationship, or even simply

an object of existence.

尤勒的圆圈，假如你们习惯于逻辑的多重性，依照它们殚精竭力所被建造。其中最大的部分属于命题逻辑与分类逻辑。它们被区别出来，用最用的方式。当然，我甚至无法梦想进入这些细节，将会被要求的细节，为了区别这些建构之间的区别。在此，我仅是想要体认出来的东西，就是，你们确实记住你们的存在的某个时刻，你们拥有的存在的时刻。在支持的这个形式之下，某个逻辑的证明，某个客体作为逻辑的客体。无论它牵涉到命题，分类的关系，或甚至仅是存在的客体。

Let us take an example at the level of the logic of classes

and let us represent this example

by a small circle inside a big

one, mammals with respect to the

class of vertebrates; this works

quite easily and all the more

simply because the logic of

classes is certainly what

at the beginning opened up

in the easiest way the paths to this

formal elaboration and you should consult

here something already

incarnated in a signifying elaboration, quite simply that of

zoological classification which really gives it its model.

让我们举个例子，在分类的逻辑。并且让我们代表这个例子，用一个小圆圈，在一个大圆圈里面。哺乳动物，关于脊椎动物的分类。这相当容易运作，更加容易运作，仅是因为分类逻辑确实是在开始的地方，展开，以最容易的方式，展开正式建构的途径。你们应该在此参照某件东西，用成为能指的建构具体表现的东西。仅仅是动物学的分类的正式的建构。这种动物学的分类确实给予它这种模式。

But the universe of discourse, as it is quite correctly expressed, is not a zoological universe; and, by wanting to extend the

properties of the universe of zoological classification to the

whole universe of discourse, one easily slips into a certain

number of traps which help you to avoid mistakes and allow there (5) to be heard rather quickly the alarm signal of an significant impasse.

但是辞说的宇宙，依照它正确地被表达，并不是动物学的宇宙。凭借想要延伸动物学的分类的宇宙的特性，延伸到辞说的整个的宇宙。我们很容易陷入某些的陷阱。这些陷阱帮助你们避免错误，并且让一个重大的僵局的警告讯号很快地被听见。

11.4.62 XVII 205

One of these drawbacks is for example an ill-considered use of

negation. It is precisely in recent times that this use was

opened up as possible, namely just at the time when the remark

was made that this exterior Eulerian circle of inclusion ought to

play an essential role in the use

of negation, namely that it is

absolutely the same thing to speak

without any precision for example

of that which is not-man or of that

which is not-man within the animal

world. In other words that in

order that negation should have a

more or less assured, usable

meaning in logic, it is necessary

to know in relation to what set

something is denied. In other

words if A 1 is not A, it is

necessary to know within what it is

not A, namely here in B.

A’ = A

譬如，其中一个挫折就是对于“否定”的考虑欠佳的使用。确实就是在近代，这种使用被展开作为可能。换句话说，就在当这个谈论被发表，“包含”的这个外部的尤勒圆圈，应该扮演重演的角色，在使用“否定”。换句话说，这绝对是相同的事情：不明确地说，譬如，“非人的动物”或“在动物的世界，非人的动物”。换句话说，为了让“否定”在逻辑拥有相当确定，有用的意义。我们有必要知道，某件东西被否认，跟怎样的集合有关。换句话说，假如A1并不是A，我们有必要知道，在怎样的范围内，A1并不是A。也就是在B这里。A’=A

If you open Aristotle on this occasion, you will see negation

dragged into all sorts of difficulties. It nevertheless remains

incontestable that these remarks were not at all expected nor was the slightest use made of this formal support – I mean that it is not normal to make use of it in order to make use of negation –

namely that the subject in his discourse frequently makes use of

elsewhere than where It found its established position that we

have to define the status of negation. It is a reminder, a

reminder designed to clarify for you retrospectively the

importance of what from the beginning of my discourse of this

year I have been suggesting to you about the primordial

originality of the function of negation compared to this

distinction.

假如你们在这个场合打开亚里斯多德，你们将会看见“否定”被拉进各色各样的困难。仍然无可争议的是，这些谈论根本没有期望，对于这个正式的支持，即使稍微地使用，也没有被期望。我的意思是，正常状态，并没有使用到它，为了使用“否定“。换句话说，在他的辞说里，主体经常使用的”否定“，在别的地方，而不是在它发现它已经固定的立场，我们必须定义”否定“的地位。这是个提醒，被用来跟你们反顾地澄清的提醒，澄清从今年的我的辞说的开始，我一直跟你们建议的东西，关于”否定“的功能的原初的原创性，跟这个区别比较起来。

11.206.62 XVII 206

You see then that it was not Euler who used these Eulerian

(6) circles for this purpose; it was necessary in the meantime

for there to be introduced the work of Boole, then that of De

Morgan in order that this should be fully articulated.

你们因此看见，并不是尤勒使用这些尤勒的圆圈，来充当这个目的。同时，这也是必要的，要介绍博尔的研究。然后是，德 莫根的研究，为了让这个充分地被表达。

If I come back to these Eulerian circles then, it is not because

he himself made good use of them, but because it was with his

material, with the use of these circles that there could be made

the progress which followed of which I will give you at the same

time an example which is not the least important nor the least

notorious, in any case particularly gripping and immediate to

see.

假如我回到这些尤勒的圆圈，那倒不是因为尤勒他自己善用它们。而是因为使用他的材料，使用这些圆圈，我们才能够有这个随后的进展，我同时将会给予你们一个例子。那根本就不重要，根本就不恶名昭著。无论如何，看起来并没有特殊有趣与当下。

Between Euler and De Morgan the use of these circles allowed a

symbolisation which is useful also in that it appears to you

moreover implicitly fundamental, which reposes on the position of

these circles which are structured as follows: this is what we

will call two circles which intersect, which are especially

important for their intuitive appearance which will appear

incontestable to everyone if I point out to you that it is around

these circles that there can be first of all be articulated two

relationships which it would be well to accentuate strongly,

which are first of all that of union: involving anything

whatsoever that I enumerated earlier, \J their union, it is the

fact that after the operation of union, what is united are these

two fields.

在尤勒与德 莫根之间，对于这些圆圈的使用容下一种有用的象征。而且，你们觉得这个象征是非常基本的暗示。它依靠在这些圆圈的立场，如同以下的结构的圆圈：这就是我们所谓的交会的两个圆圈。它们特别的重用，因为它们直觉的外表。每个人都觉得它们是无可争议的。首先，有两个关系被表达。这确实要强烈地强调，它们首先就是结合的圆圈：牵涉到我稍早列举的任何东西，它们的结合，就是这个事实，在结合的运作之后，所被结合的东西，就是这两个领域。

is precisely what introduced this

symbol – is, as you see, something

which is not altogether like addition,

the advantage of these circles is to

make you sense that. It is not the

The operation described as

union which is ordinarily

symbolised as follows: – it

same thing for example to add two separate circles or to unite

them in this position.

这确实就是介绍这个象征的东西—你们看见，某件并不完全像是“增加“的东西。被描述为”结合“的运作，普通被作为象征如下：这些圆圈的利益就是要让你们理解那个。譬如，这并不是相同的事情，增加两个分开的圆圈，或是结合它们在这个立场。

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

## Leave a Reply