Changes

Réponse au commentaire de [[Jean Hyppolite ]] sur la "[[Verneinung]]" de [[Freud]]

In February 1954, in the [[seminars]], the [[philosopher ]] Hyppolite, a specialist on [[Hegel]], commented on Freud's article on "Verneinung" (1925), which he sug�gested be translated as Denegation instead of [[Negation ]] (R.F.P. 1934).

The [[real ]] question is to analyze how the [[return ]] of the [[repressed ]] operates.

Freud [[analyzed ]] a [[complex ]] mode in which the repressed is intellectually accepted by the [[subject]], since it is named, and at the same [[time ]] negated because the sub�ject refuses to recognize it as his, refuses to recognize himself in it.

Denega�tion [denegation] thus includes an assertion on which the [[psychoanalyst ]] can rely but whose status is difficult to define.

The stakes are very high because the frontier between [[neurosis ]] and [[psychosis ]] is drawn here, between [[repression ]] [Verdriingung] and [[repudiation ]] [Verweifung) (a term that [[Lacan ]] replaced here by "[[withdrawal]]" [retranchement] before definitively calling it "[[foreclosure]]" lforclusion] in 1956 (30».

The version published in La [[Psychanalyse ]] is an important rewriting of the [[session ]] of the Seminaire I (25).

The Introduction condenses the entire beginning of the teaching and the Reponse promotes two of Hyppolite's [[ideas]]: the creation of the [[symbol ]] refers back to mythic rather than genetic time; the [[symbolic ]] creation of "negation" [la negation] is situ�ated at [[another ]] level of the subject than "assertion."

Against the "doctrinarians" of the [[analysis ]] of [[resistances]], Lacan estab�lishes two poles of [[analytic ]] [[experience]]: the ([[imaginary]]) ego and the (sym�bolic) [[speech]].

For him, "the [[true ]] subject," the one who must "come to be" [advenir], is "the subject of the [[unconscious]]" and "the unconscious is the [[discourse ]] of the [[Other]]."

He then gives the following condensed description of [[therapy]]: "First. the subject talks [[about ]] himself without talking to you, then .. , he talks to you without talking about himself.

To this possible reshaping of [[the Imaginary ]] by [[the Symbolic]], he opposes the intersection of the Symbolic and [[the Real ]] without Imaginary mediation, which would be the characteristic of psychosis.