From an other to the Other 25

From an other to the Other 25
从他者到大他者

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

4.12.68

Now, there is no subject at
the precise point where it interests us, except the subject of an assertion
(dire). If I posit these two references, that to the Real and that to the
assertion, it is to clearly mark that here that you may still vacillate and
pose the question, for example, whether this is not what was always
imagined about the subject. It is moreover also there that you have to
grasp what the term subject states in so far as it is the effect, the
dependent (la dependance) of this assertion.

现在,在我们感到興趣的这个确实时刻,没有主体存在,除了就是主张的主体。假如我提出这两个关联,对于实在界与对于主张,这是要清楚地标示,在此,你们可能依旧摇摆并且提出问题。譬如,是否这是关于主体已前总是被想像的东西。而且,在那里,你们必须理解主体这个术语陈述的东西,因为它是这个效应,这个主张的这个依靠。

There is no subject except
of an assertion, this is what we have to correctly circumscribe in order
never to detach the subject from it.

没有主体存在,除了就是主张的主体。这就是我们必须正确地描述的东西,为了将主体跟它区隔出来。

To say moreover that the Real is the impossible, is also to state that it
is only the most extreme circumscribing of the assertion in so far as it
is the possible that it introduces and not simply that it states. The flaw
remains no doubt, for some people, that this subject would then be, in a
way, a subject taking its worth from this discourse.

而且,说实在界是不可能界,也等于是陈述,实在界仅是最极端的描述这个主张。因为这是它介绍的这个可能界,而不仅是它陈述的这个可能界。对于一些人们,这个瑕疵始终无可置疑。以某种方式,主体将因此是从这个辞说获得的价值。

That it would only
be the deployment, a canker crossing in the middle of the world where
the junction takes place that, all the same, brings this subject to life.
It is not just anything in things that makes a subject. This is where it is
important to take things up again at the point where we do not tip over
into confusion in what we are saying – the confusion that would allow
there to be restored this subject as thinking subject, any pathos
whatsoever — about the signifier, I mean, through the signifier, does not
of itself make a subject of this pathos. What this pathos defines is in
every case, quite simply, what is called a ffat.

这仅是这个运作,在世界中央的蔓延跨越,在汇集发生的世界,它仍然让主体恢复生命。这不仅是事情里的任何东西形成主体。这是再次探讨事情非常重要的地方,在我们没有绊倒进入混乱。这个混乱让主体能够被恢复,作为是思维的主体,任何的情感,关于这个能指。我指的是,通过这个能指,它的本身并没有成为这个情感的主体。在每个情况,这个情感所定义的东西,仅仅就是所谓的事实。

And it is here that there
is situated the distance in which we have to question what our
experience produces. Something different that goes much further than
the being that speaks in so far as it is man that is at stake. More than
one thing can suffer from the effect of the signifier, everything in the
world that does not properly become a fact (fait) unless its signifier is
articulated. Not ever, never, does any subject come unless the fact is
said.

就在这里,这个距离被定位。在这个距离,我们必须询问我们的经验产生的东西。某件不同的但噢乖西,比起言说的这个人更加深入的的东西。因为岌岌可危的是这个人。因为能指的影响而遭受痛苦的不仅是一件事情,在世界上的每件事情,没有被恰如其分地成为一个事实,除非它的能指被表达。除非这个事实被说出,没有主体来临。

Between these two frontiers is where we have to work. What
cannot be said about the feet is designated in the assertion, by its lack,
and that is the truth. That is why the truth always insinuates itself, but
can be inscribed also in a perfectly calculated way where it simply has
its place, between the lines. The substance of the truth is precisely
what suffers from the signifier. That goes very far. What suffers from
it in its nature. Let us say, when I say that this goes very far, this
/ precisely goes very far in nature.

在这两个边界之间,就是我们必须工作的地方。关于这个事实无法被说出的东西,在主张里被指明,被它的欠缺。那就是真理。那就是为什么真理总是嘲讽它自己,但是真理也能够被铭记,以精打细算的方式,它仅是拥有它的方式,这字里行间。真理的物质确实就是因为能指而遭受痛苦的东西。那非常深入。因为能指而遭受痛苦的东西,在它的特性。让我们说,当我说,这非常深入,在特性上,这确实非常深入。

4.12.68
For a long time people seemed to accept what is called the spirit. It is
an idea that got across in some little way. Moreover, nothing ever gets
across as much as people think. In any case it got across a little
because of the feet that it proves that there is never anything else at
stake under the name of spirit than the signifier itself. Which
obviously puts a lot of metaphysics out of sync.

长久以来,人们似乎接受所谓的精神。精神用某方小小方式让人明白。而且,没有一样东西像精神那样如同人们认为地让人明白。无论如何,精神稍微让人明白,因为这个事实:精神证明,从没有任何其他东西岌岌可危,在精神的名称之下,比起这个能指的自身。这显而易见地,同时加上许多的形上学。

As regards the
relationships of our effort to metaphysics, as regards what is involved
in a putting in question that tends not to lose all the benefit of the
(51) experience of metaphysics, something of it remains.

关于我们的努力跟形上学的关系,关于所被牵涉的东西,当提出的问题倾向于不丧失所有的形上学的经验的利益,关于它的某件东西保留着。

Namely, the
following which is indeed in a certain number of points, of areas more
varied and better equipped than one might think at first approach and
of very different qualities, it is a matter of knowing what
‘structuralism’ has to bring about. The question is raised in a
collection that has just appeared, I got the first fruits of it, I do not
know whether it is in circulation: “What is structuralism?” which we
owe to the summons addressed to some people by our friend Francis
Wahl.

换句话说,以下确实某些的点,某些的地区,更加变化,装备更加齐全,比起我们第一次接近可能认为的,并且属于不同的性质。问题是要知道“结构主义”必须导引出什么。这个问题被提出,在刚刚出现的文集。我获得它的最初的成果。我并不知道,这个文件是否发行当中:「结构主义是什么?」我们将这个问题归功于我们的朋友法朗西斯 瓦尔,针对某些人们的召唤。

I advise you not to miss it, it brings a certain number of
questions up to date. But undoubtedly this means that it is rather
important to mark our distinction from metaphysics. In truth, we have,
on this point, marked something that it is not useless to state, that one
must not believe too much in what advertises itself as disillusion. The
disillusion of the spirit is not a complete triumph if elsewhere it
sustains the superstition that would designate in an idealness of matter
this very substance that one first puts into the spirit as impassible.

我劝告你们不要错过它。它带来某些现代的问题。但是无可置疑地,这意味着,非常重要的事情是标示我们更形上学的差异。事实上,我们在这个时刻已经标示某件东西,陈述一下不无用途。我们一定不要过分相信自我广告作为幻梦觉醒的东西。精神的幻梦觉醒并不是完整的胜利,假如别的地方,它维持这个迷信。这个迷信以物质的理想指明这个物质,我们起初放进精神里做为无法通过的东西。

I am calling it superstition because after all we know its genealogy. There
is a tradition, the Jewish tradition curiously, in which one can indeed
highlight what a certain transcendence of matter may be able to sketch
out. What is stated in the scriptures, singularly unnoticed of course,
but quite clear concerning the corporeality of God.

我称它为迷信,因为毕竟我们知道它的系谱学。有一个传统,耐人寻味的犹太的传统。在这个传统里,我们确实能够强调某个超验的物质可能能够描述出来。在圣经里被陈述的东西,当然并没有独特地被注意到,但是非常清楚,关于上帝具有肉身。

These are things
that we cannot develop today. It was a chapter of my seminar on The
name o f the father, which as you know [the sign of a cross in the air] I
have definitively renounced, make no mistake. But in any case, this
superstition described as materialist – one may well add popular, that
changes nothing at all — deserves the share of love that everyone has
for it, because it is indeed what has been most tolerant up to now of
scientific thinking. But you must not believe that this will always last.
It would be enough for scientific thinking to make people suffer a little
in this quarter — and it is not unthinkable — for the tolerance in question
not to last!

今天有些东西,我们无法发展。那是我的研讨班的一个章节,探讨“父亲之名“。你们知道,(空中出现十字架的符号),我已经明确地放弃”父亲之名“,无可置疑地。但是无论如何,这个被描述为物质主义的迷信—我们很有理由增加”普遍流行“,并且没有什么差别—这个迷信应该获得每个人对它的爱好的分享。因为这确实是科学思想迄今一直包容的东西。在这个部分,科学的思想让人们稍微痛苦一些就足够了—这并非不可思议—为了让受到质疑的包容不要延续下去。

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: