From an other to the Other30

From an other to the Other30

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

So then we have another quarter of an hour and the little note that I
received goes as follows: “Last Wednesday you related, without
specifying, the ordered pair and a signifier represents the subject fo r
another signifier, (S S) ”. That is quite true. That is why no doubt
my correspondent put a bar underneath and underneath the bar “Why?”
with a question mark. Underneath the why another bar, then marked
by two big points or more exactly two little circles filled $ – > S
in in black. “When the ordered pair is introduced into
mathematics some force is necessary to create it.”


From this I recognise that the person who sent me this sheet knows what she
is saying, namely, that she has a least a shadow, and probably more, of
mathematical instruction. It is quite true. One begins by articulating
(55) the function of what a set is and if one does not introduce into it,
in effect, the function of the ordered pair by this sort of force that in
logic is^alled an axiom, well then, there is nothing more to be done
with it than what you have first defined as a set. In parenthesis, one
adds on – either directly or indirectly – the set has two elements. “The
result o f this force is to create one signifier that replaces the coexistence
o f two signifiers”.


This is quite correct. A second remark
“The ordered pair determines the two components, while in the
formula a signifier represents the subject fo r another signifier, it would
be astonishing fo r a subject to determine two signifiers.” I only have a
quarter of an hour and nevertheless I hope to have the time to clarify as
it should be done, because it is not difficult, what I stated the last time,
which proves that I did not state it adequately since someone, who as
you can see is very serious, questions me in these terms.


I am therefore going to write on the board – whatever may be the
inconvenience that was pointed out to me the last time about using the
board which ought to be put there so that everyone can see what I am
writing and that is not going to happen today given the difficulties that
conditioned my arriving late – this: At no time did I subsume
the co-existence o f two signifiers into one subject.


If I introduce the
ordered pair, as my interlocutor surely knows, I write for example the
following: , these two signs by a lucky chance find themselves
to be the two pieces of my diamond shape when they are connected up,
these two signs only serve on this occasion to very specifically write
that this is an ordered pair.


The translation in the form of a set, I mean
articulated in the sense of the benefit expected from the force in
question, is to translate this into a set whose two elements, the
elements in a set being always themselves the set, you see there being
repeated the bracket sign {(Si), (Si S2)}, the second element of this set
{Si, S2}, an ordered pair is a set which has two elements, a set formed
from the first element of the pair and a second set; they are then both
one and the other subsets formed from the two elements of the ordered
pair. {(S,), (S,, S2)}

这个数学集合的形状的翻译,我指的是它被表达,用受到置疑的力量所期望的利益的意义。这是要将这个翻译成为一个集合,这个集合的两个元素,集合里的元素自身总就是集合。你们看见这个括弧顶符号被重复:{(Si), (Si S2)}。这个集合的第二个元素{Si, S2},有秩序的配对就是具有两个元素的集合。它们因此一个与另外一个次集合。这个次集合被形成,用有秩序的配的的这两个元素:{(S,), (S,, S2)}

Far from the subject here in any way subsuming the two signifiers in
question, you see, I suppose, how easy it is to say that the signifier Si
here does not stop representing the subject as my definition the
signifier represents a subject fo r another signifier articulates it, while
the second subset makes present what my correspondent call this “coexistence”,
namely, in its broadest form this form of relation that one
can call “knowledge”.


The question that I am posing in this
(56) connection and in the most radical form, whether a knowledge is
conceivable that reunites this conjunction of two subsets in a single
one, in such a way that they can be under the name of O, of the big O,
identical to the conjunction as it is here articulated in a knowledge of
the two signifiers in question.



Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: