Changes

[[biology]] (''[[{{Topp}}biologie]]'') {{Bottom}}

==Sigmund Freud and Biology==[[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|work ]] is [[full ]] of references to [[biology]]. [[Freud]] regarded [[biology]] as a [[model ]] of [[scientific rigour ]] rigor on which to base the new [[science]] of [[psychoanalysis]].

==Jacques Lacan's Critique of 'Biologism'==[[Lacan]], however, is strongly opposed to any attempt to [[construct ]] [[psychoanalysis]] upon a [[biology|biological model]], arguing that the direct application of [[biological ]] (or [[nature|ethological]]/[[psychology|psychological]]) [[:category:concepts |concepts]] (such as [[adaptation]]) to [[psychoanalysis]] will inevitably be misleading and will obliterate the essential [[distinction ]] between [[nature]] and [[:category:culture|culture]]. Such biologising explanations of human behaviour ignore, according to [[Lacan]], the primacy of the [[symbolic]] [[order]] in human [[existence]]. Lacan sees this '[[biologism]]' in the work of those [[psychoanalysts]] who have confused [[desire]] with [[need]], and [[drives]] with [[instincts]], concepts which he insists on distinguishing.

These arguments are evident from the very earliest Such [[biology|biologizing explanations]] of [[human|human behavior]] ignore, according to [[Lacan]], the 's psychoanalytic writings'primacy'' of the [[symbolic order]] in [[human]] [[existence]]. In his 1938 work on [[Lacan]] sees this "[[biology|biologism]]" in the [[familywork]], for example, he rejects any attempt to explain family structures on the basis of purely biological datathose [[psychoanalyst]]s who have confused [[desire]] with [[need]], and argues that human psychology is regulated by [[complexdrives]]es rather than by with [[instinct]]s.<ref>Lacan, 1938 [[: 23-4</ref>category:concepts|concepts]] which he insists on distinguishing.

===History===These arguments are evident from the very earliest of [[Lacan]] argues that his refusal of biological reductionism is not a contradiction of 's [[Freudpsychoanalytic]] but a [[return]] to the essence Works of [[FreudJacques Lacan|writings]]'s work. When In his [[Freud{{Y}}|1938]] used biological models, he did so simply because [[biologyJacques Lacan:Bibliography|work]] was at that time a model of scientific rigour in general, and because on the conjectural [[sciencefamily]]s had not then achieved the same degree of rigour. , for example, he rejects any attempt to explain [[Freudfamily]] certainly did not confuse [[psychoanalysisstructure]] with [[biology]] or any other exact s on the basis of purely [[science|biological data]], and when he borrowed concepts from argues that [[biology]human] (such as the concept of the [[drive]) he reworked them in such a radical way that they become totally new concepts. For example, the concept of the [[death instinctpsychology]] "is not a question of biology."<ref>E, 102</ref> regulated by [[Lacancomplex]] expresses his point with a es rather than by [[paradoxinstinct]]: "Freudian biology has nothing to do with biologys."<ref>S2, 75{{1938}} pp. 23-4</ref>[[Lacan]], like [[Freud]], uses concepts borrowed from [[biology]], and then reworks them in an entirely symbolic framework.

==Phallus==Science====Perhaps the most significant example of this is [[Lacan]]'s concept of the argues that his [[phallusrefusal]], which he conceives as a of [[signifierscience|biological reductionism]] and is not as a bodily organ. Thus while ''[[Freudcontradiction]] conceives '' of the [[castration complexFreud]] and but a ''[[sexual differencereturn]] in terms of '' to the [[presenceessence]] and of [[absenceFreud]] of the 's [[penisWorks of Sigmund Freud|work]], Lacan theorises them in non-biological, non-anatomical terms (the .When [[presenceFreud]] and used [[absencebiology|biological models]] of the , he did so because [[phallusbiology]]).This has been one of the main attractions of Lacanian theory for certain was at that [[:category:feminist theory|feministtime]] writers who have seen it as a way model of constructing a [[essentialismscience|non-essentialistscientific rigor]] account of gendered in general, and because the [[subjectivityscience|conjectural science]]s had not then achieved the same degree of rigor.

==Culturalism==However, while [[LacanFreud]] certainly did not confuse [[psychoanalysis]] with [[biology]] or any [[other]] exact [[science]] consistently rejects all forms of biological reductionism, and when he also rejects the culturalist position which completely ignores the relevance of borrowed [[:category:concepts|concepts]] from [[biology.<ref>Ec, 723</ref>.If 'biologising' is understood correctly ]] (that is, not such as the reduction [[:category:concepts|concept]] of psychic phenomena to crude biological determinationthe [[drive]]) he reworked [[them]] in such a radical way that they become totally new [[:category:concepts|concepts]]. For example, but as discerning the precise way in which biological data impact on [[:category:concepts|concept]] of the psychical field), then Lacan [[death instinct]] "is all in favour not a question of biologising thoughtbiology."<ref>Ec, 723{{E}} p. 102</ref>The clearest examples of [[Lacan]] expresses this are Lacan's appeals to examples from animal ethology to demonstrate the power of images to act as releasing mechanisms; hence Lacan's references to pigeons and locusts in his account of the point with a [[mirror stageparadox]]:<refblockquote>E, 3"[[Freudian]] biology has [[nothing]] to do with biology."</ref>, and to crustaceans in his account of mimicry{{S2}} p.75</ref>Sll, 99</refblockquote>

Thus =====Phallus=====[[Lacan]], like [[Freud]], uses [[:category:concepts|concepts]] borrowed from [[biology]] (i.e. [[imago]], dehiscence), and then reworks them in his account an entirely [[symbolic]] framework. Perhaps the most significant example of this is [[sexual differenceLacan]], Lacan follows Freud's rejection [[concept]] of the false dichotomy between "anatomy or convention[[phallus]], which he conceives as a [[signifier]] and not as a [[body|bodily organ]]."<ref> Thus while [[Freud]] conceives of the [[castration complex]] and [[sexual difference]] in [[terms]] of the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[penis]], 1933a: SE XXII, 114</ref> [[Lacan's concern is not to privilege either term but to show how both interact in complex ways ]] theorizes them in [[biology|non-biological]], [[biology|non-anatomical]] terms -- the [[presence]] and [[absence]] of the [[phallus]]. This has been one of the process main attractions of [[Lacan]]ian [[theory]] for certain [[feminist]] writers who have seen it as a way of assuming constructing a sexual position[[biology|non-essentialist]] account of gendered [[subjectivity]].

 ==References===Culture=====However, while [[Lacan]] consistently rejects all forms of [[science|biological reductionism]], he also rejects the [[culture|culturalist]] [[position]] which completely ignores the relevance of [[biology]]. If "[[biology|biologizing]]" is [[understood]] correctly (that is, not as the reduction of [[psychic]] phenomena to crude [[biology|biological determination]], but as discerning the precise way in which biological data impact on the [[psychical]] field), then [[Lacan]] is all in favor of [[biology|biologizing thought]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 723</ref> The clearest examples of this are [[Lacan]]'s appeals to examples from [[animal]] [[nature|ethology]] to demonstrate the [[power]] of [[image]]s to act as releasing mechanisms; hence [[Lacan]]'s referencesto pigeons and locusts in his account of the [[mirror stage]],<ref>{{E}} p. 3</ref> and to crustaceans in his account of [[mimicry]].<ref>{{S11}} p. 99</ref> Thus in his account of [[sexual difference]], [[Lacan]] follows [[Freud]]'s [[rejection]] of the [[false]] dichotomy between "anatomy or convention".<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis]]'', [[SE]] XXII, 1933a. p. 114</ref>

* [[natureSexual difference]]{{Also}}

{{OK}}[[Category:Terms]][[Category:ConceptsFreudian psychology]]