From an other to the Other 45
从他者到大他者
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康
8.1.69 VI 13
It is the point that, as imaginary support, corresponds to the
desire of the Other, what I have always written under the form of $£o,
namely, the phantasy, that there lies hidden this function of the “I”.
作为想像的支持,这个点对应于大他者的欲望。我总是书写,用SO的形式。换句话说,幻见的公式。这个“我”的功能就隐藏在那儿。
The “I” in so far as, contrary to the point of convergence called desire
of the Other, it is in a diverging fashion that this “I” hidden under, the
$$ o, is directed under the form that precisely I called at the beginning
that of a true questioning, of a radical questioning, towards the two
points where there lie the elements of the answer. Namely, in the line
on top, big S, which means a signifier, a signifier of the fact that O is
barred, and which is precisely what I took, what I also gave you the
trouble to ha ve a support to conceive of what I am here stating.
跟所谓的大他者的欲望的汇集相反,这个“我”,因为是用分叉的方式,这个隐藏在SO底下的“我”,被引导在这个形式之下,开始时,我确实称它为真实质疑的公式,强烈质疑的公式,朝向这两点,回答的元素就隐藏在那里。换句话说,在上面的这个线条,大写的S,它意味着能指,大他者O被划杠的能指。那确实是我採用的东西,我也给予你们这个麻烦,要拥有一个支持来构想我在此正在陈述的。
Namely, that the field of the Other does not secure, does not assure at
any place, , to any degree, the consistency of the discourse that is
articulated here, in any case, even the most apparently certain.
And on the other hand, the lower line, a meaning in so far as it is
fundamentally alienated. And it is here that you must grasp the sense
of my starting this year with the definition of the surplus enjoying and
its relationship with everything that one can call, in the most radical
sense, the means of production, at the level of meaning, if already the
pot, as I have pointed out to you, is only an apparatus to mask the
consequences of discourse, I mean the major consequences, namely,
the exclusion of enjoyment.
换句话说,大他者的领域并没有获得辞说的一致性,根本没有在任何地方保证任何程度的一致性,对于在此被表达的辞说。无论如何,即使是最明显的确定。在另一方面,这个下面的线条,是一个意义,因为它基本上是异化的。就在这里,你们必须理解这个意义,我今年陈述,用“剩余享乐”的定义。用“剩余享乐”,及其跟我们能够所谓的生产的工具的关系,用最强烈的意义来说,处于意义的层次。如同我已经跟你们指出的,假如这个壶仅是一个工具用来遮蔽辞说的结果。我指的是主要的结果。也就是,享乐的排除。
You see that in this way there is put into this Entzweiung, the term is
Hegelian, into this radical division which is the very one at which
Freud’s discourse culminates at the end of his life, the division of the
“I” articulated as such. It is nothing less than that between these two
terms, namely, the field where the Other in a way, in some imagining,
for a long time that of the philosophers, could correspond to any truth
and where precisely this is cancelled out by the simple examination of
the functions of language. I mean that we know how to make
intervene in it the function of the cut that answers “no!”, no to the God
of the philosophers.
你们看见,用这个方式,这个分裂“Entzweiung”被放进这个区分,这是黑格尔的术语,被放进这个强烈的区分。在这个区分,弗洛依德的辞说达到高潮,在他生命的结束。这个被表达作为“区分”的“我”的区分。这实实在在是处于这两个术语的区分,换句话说,在某些的想像里,长久以来,就是哲学家的想像里,大他者能够以某种的方式对应于任何真理的领域。在那里,这个区分被取消,被语言的功能的简单的检查。我指的是,我们知道如何介入这个切割的功能。这个切割回答“不”,对于哲学家的上帝说“不”。
And that, on the other hand, on a different
register, the one in appearance where enjoyment is waiting. It is there
precisely that it is a slave, and in the same way people said that up to
now that one could reproach psychoanalysis for overlooking the
conditions in which man is subjected to the social, as it is put, without
seeing that one is contradicting oneself. The materialism described as
historical only has a sense precisely by grasping that it does not depend
on the social structure since it affirms itself that it is on the means of
production. Namely, only from that with which one makes things that
deceive surplus enjoying. Namely, that, far from being able to hope to
fill the field of enjoyment, are not even sufficient for what is lost in it,
because of the Other.
在另一方面,在不同的铭记,外表上的铭记,享乐正在那里等待着。确实就是在那里,它是一位奴隶。同样地,人们说,直到现在,我们能够谴责精神分析,因为忽略这些情况,在那里,人们隶属于所谓的社会,而没有看见,我们正在跟自己相牴触。被描述为历史的唯物论,仅是具有意义,确实凭借理解,它并没有依靠社会的结构,因为它肯定它自己,它依靠生产的工具。换句话说,仅是从外面用了制作欺骗“剩余享乐”的东西的工具。换句话说,这些东西根本就不能够希望填满享乐的领域,它们甚至不足够填满里面失落的东西,因为大他者。
I was not able, my God, as usual, to go any quicker than my own
violins. Nevertheless, I can announce here where I intend to take
things up the next time. I will tell you that it is not in vain that from
(81) the mouth of the God of the Jews, what I held onto is “I am what I
is”. It is indeed here that it is time for something to be finally
dissipated, something already clearly said by someone called Pascal. If
you wish, perhaps this will help you to understand what I am going to
tell you the next time, to read a little book that has appeared in Desctee
de Brouwer under the title of Pascal’s wager by a M Georges Brunet,
who knows admirably well what he is saying.
我的天,通常,我并不能够进行得比起我的小提琴还要快。可是,我能够在此宣佈,我下次打算要探讨事情的地方。我将告诉你们,这并非白费力气,从犹太人的上帝的嘴巴里,我所坚持的东西是:“我的生命实存在于我作为他者的生命实存”确实就是在这里,某件东西最后应该被驱散的时刻。某件东西已经清楚地由巴斯卡说出。你们若愿意,这或许将会帮助你们理解我下次将要告诉你们的东西。用“巴斯卡的赌注”的标题,乔治 布伦尼写的。他清楚明白他正在说什么。
As you have seen earlier
this is not true for every professor! But he for his part knows. What
he says, moreover, does not go very far, but at least he knows what he
is saying. On the other hand, it is a disentangling that is indispensable
for you about what is involved in this little sheet of paper folded in
four, that, as I already said, I already spoke about this, was found in
Pascal’s pockets, the dead Pascal. I speak a lot about the dead God, it
is probably to deliver us from many other relationships with others that
I evoked earlier, my relationships with the dead Freud; that has a
completely different sense.
如同你们早先已经看见,这个标题并非对于每位教授都是真实!但是,就他而言,他知道。而且,他所说的东西并没有很离谱,但是至少,他知道他正在说什么。另一方面,对于你们不可免除的瓦解,关于这张小纸张所牵涉的东西。被折叠四次的纸张。我已经说过,我已经谈论关于这个,在巴斯卡的口袋被找到这张纸,这位死去的巴斯卡。我经常谈谈关于死去的上帝。那或许是为了解放我们,脱离跟别人的许多其他的关系,我早先召唤的别人。我跟死去的弗洛依德的关系,那拥有完全不同的意义。
But if you would not mind reading this Pascal’s wager by Georges
Brunet, at least you will know what I am talking about, when I speak
about this text, which is scarcely a quarto, as you know. It is a writing
that overlaps, that becomes entangled, that criss-crosses, that is
annotated. It was a text for the pleasure, of course, of professors. This
pleasure is brief, because they were never able to get absolutely
anything from it.
但是,假如你们不介意,阅读乔治 布伦尼写的“巴斯卡的赌注”,至少你们将会知道我正在谈论什么。当我谈论这个文本,那几乎不到四开本。你们知道。它是重叠的书写,变成纠缠,互相交叉,被注释。当然,这是一个适合于教授们享乐的文本。这种享乐是简短的,因为他们从来不能够从它那里获得任何东西。
There is something that is, on the contrary, quite clear, and it is with
this that I will begin the next time. That strictly nothing else is at stake
except precisely the “I”. People spend their time asking whether God
exists as if it were even a question. God is, there is absolutely no kind
of doubt about that, that absolutely does not prove that he exists. The
question does not arise. But it is necessary to know if “I” exists.
I think I will be able to make you sense that it is around this
uncertainty, does “I” exist, that Pascal’s wager is played out.
相反地,有某件东西相当清楚。我下次就是要用这个文本开始。那确实没有别的东西岌岌可危,除了确实就是这个“我”。人们花费他们的时间询问上帝是否存在,好似那甚至是一个问题。上帝存在,关于那点,绝对无可置疑。那绝对没有证明,上帝存在。这个问题并没有产生。但是有必要知道,“我”是否存在。我认为我将能够让你们理解,就是环绕这个不确定,这个“我” 存在。巴斯卡的赌注被赌光了。
雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com