Changes

{{SeminarsNavBar|RightPrevLink=Seminar XI|RightPrevText=Seminar XI|RightNextLink=Seminar XIII|RightNextText=Seminar XIII}}<BR>{| width="100%" align="center" style="width:700px; border:1px solid #aaa;text-align:left; line-height:2.0em; padding-left:30px;"|-| 1964-1965 Le séminaire, Livre | [[Seminar XII]]| ''<small>[[Seminar XII: |Problèmes cruciaux pour la psychanalyse.French: unpublished.]]</small>''<BR>[[Seminar XII|Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis]]English: unpublished.|}

For Lacan the fundamental problem is that of the subject's relation to language. However<!-- <b>Le séminaire, taking into account the Real - from the trilogy of the Symbolic, the Imaginary and the Real - modifies the situationLivre XII: Problèmes cruciaux pour la [[psychanalyse]]. Previously, </b><br>[[French]]: unpublished.<br>[[English]]: unpublished. --> For [[Lacan]], the crucial issues were fundamental problem is that of the rapports between identification[[subject]]'s relation to [[language]]. However, transference and demand; now taking into account the queston "will entail [[Real]] - from the holding out trilogy of a formthe [[Symbolic]], of an essential topology for analytic praxis." The signifier returns as structured on the Moebius strip with three forms of the hole[[Imaginary]] and the [[Real]] - modifies the [[situation]]. Previously, the torus or ring, crucial issues were the cross-cap, rapports between [[identification]], [[transference]] and Euler's circles as [[demand]]; now the maze of queston "will entail the torus or of the spiral holding out of the demand on the surface of the Klein bottle. These figure though constructed in a simple and combinatory way[[form]], are nevertheless complicated to commentof an essential [[topology]] for [[analytic]] praxis." The torus ia a ring, a [[signifier]] returns as [[structured]] on the Moebius [[strip]] with [[three dimensional object formed by taking a cylinder and joining ]] forms of the two ends together. The topology of [[hole]], the [[torus illustrates some analogies against ]] or ring, the structure [[cross-cap]], and [[Euler]]'s circles as the maze of the subject: its centre torus or of gravity falls outside its volume, just as the centre spiral of the demand on the surface of the subject is outside, being decentered (ex-centric). The "peripheral [[Klein]] bottle. These [[figure]] though constructed in a simple and central exteriority of the torus constitutes one single region[[combinatory]] way, are nevertheless complicated to comment." Psychoanalysis posits the distinction between container and contained much as the unconscious is not a purely interior psychic system but an intersubjective structure, "the unconscious is outside" <br> [[Image:Crucial-problems-for-psychoanalysis-lacan-in- extimitéireland. A common concept of structure implies the opposition between directly observable contingencies and deep phenomenajpg|border|350px|right]] The [[torus]] ia a ring, which are not a three dimensional [[object]] formed by taking a cylinder and joining the object two ends together. The topology of immediate experience. Lacan disagrees with such an opposition as implicit in the [[torus]] illustrates some analogies against the [[structure. He rejects the notion ]] of observable contingencies, since observation is always already theoretical; and he also rejects [[The Subject|the idea that structures are somehow distant from experiencesubject]]: its centre of gravity falls [[outside]] its volume, since thay are present in just as the field centre of experience itself: the unconscious [[subject]] is on the surface outside, [[being]] decentered (ex-centric). The "peripheral and looking for it in central exteriority of the dephts is to miss ittorus constitutes one single region. As " [[Psychoanalysis]] posits the two sides of [[distinction]] between container and contained much as the Moebius strip are continuous, so structure [[unconscious]] is continuous with phenomena.Thus, the Moebius strip subverts our normal (Euclidean) way of representing spacenot a purely interior [[psychic]] [[system]] but an [[intersubjective]] structure, for it seems to have two sides but in fact has only one. The two sides are distinguished by "the dimension of time, the time it takes to traverse unconscious is outside" - <i>[[extimité]]</i>. A common [[concept]] of structure implies the whole strip. The figure illustrates how psychoanalysis problematizes binary oppositions (love/hateopposition between directly observable contingencies and deep phenomena, inside/out, signifier/signified, truth/appearance): which are not the object of immediate [[experience]]. Lacan disagrees with such an opposition as implicit in the opposed terms rather than be radically distinct, are viewed as continuous with each other. For instance, structure. He rejects the Moebius strip helps to understand the traversing [[notion]] of fantasy (la traversée du fantasme): only because the two sides are continuous it observable contingencies, since observation is possible to cross over always already [[theoretical]]; and he also rejects the [[idea]] that [[structures]] are somehow distant from inside to outside. Yetexperience, when passing a finger round since thay are [[present]] in the surface field of experience itself: the strip, it unconscious is impossible to determine on the precise point where one has crossed over from inside surface and [[looking]] for it in the dephts is to outsidemiss it. With Slavoj Zizek, As the traversing two sides of the fantasme implies to accomplish an act that disturbes the subject's fundamental fantasy[[Moebius Strip|Moebius strip]] are continuous, unhinging the level that is even more fundamental than basic symbolic identificationsso structure is continuous with phenomena. For Lacan<br> Thus, "fantasy is not simply a work the [[Moebius strip]] subverts our normal (Euclidean) way of imagination as opposed representing [[space]], for it seems to hard reality, meaning a product have two sides but in fact has only one. The two sides are distinguished by the [[dimension]] of the mind that obfuscates the approach to reality[[time]], the ability time it takes to perceive things as they really are." Against [[traverse]] the basic opposition between reality and imagination[[whole]] strip. The figure illustrates how psychoanalysis problematizes binary oppositions ([[love]]/hate, fantasy is not merely on the side of the latter[[inside]]/out, signifier/signified, it is rather that little piece of imagination by which [[truth]]/appearance): the subject gains access to reality - the frame that guarantees the sense of realityopposed [[terms]] rather than be radically distinct, are viewed as continuous with each [[other]]. Thus when the fundamental fantasy is shatteredFor [[instance]], the subject sustains a loss of reality. Then, [[Moebius Strip|Moebius strip]] helps to [[understand]] the [[traversing the fantasme has nothing to do with a sobering act ]] of dispelling fantasy (<i>la traversée du [[fantasme]]</i>): only because the fantasies that obscure two sides are continuous it is possible to cross over from inside to outside. Yet, when passing a finger round the clear perception surface of the real state of things or with a reflective act of achieving a critical distance strip, it is [[impossible]] to determine the precise point where one has crossed over from daily ruminations (superstitions)inside to outside. Fantasy intervenes as support when a line is drawn between what is simply our imagination and "what really exists out there." On the contrary, "With Slavoj [[Zizek]], the traversing of the <i>fantasme involves the subject</i> implies to accomplish an act that disturbes [[The Subject|the subject]]'s over-identification with [[fundamental fantasy]], unhinging the field level that is even more fundamental than basic symbolic identifications. For Lacan, "fantasy is not simply a [[work]] of [[imagination: in it]] as opposed to hard [[reality]], and through it, the subject breaks the constrains [[meaning]] a product of fantasy and enters the terrifying[[mind]] that obfuscates the approach to reality, violent territory of pre-synthetic imagination, where disjecta membra float aroundthe ability to perceive things as they really are." Against the basic opposition between reality and imagination, fantasy is not yet unified and domesticated by merely on the intervention side of a homogenizing fantasmatic frame."As for Lacan's assertion the latter, it is rather that little piece of imagination by which [[The Subject|the subject's constitutive decentrement, subjective experience is not regulated by objective unconscious mechanisms decentred with regard ]] gains access to reality - the subject's self-experience and as such beyond control, but by something more unsettling[[frame]] that guarantees the [[sense]] of reality. For a standard view Thus when the dimension that fundamental fantasy is constitutive shattered, [[The Subject|the subject]] sustains a [[loss]] of subjectivity is that of phenomenal self-experiencereality. In Lacan's perspective Then, traversing the analyst is the one who can deprive the subject of <i>fantasme</i> has [[nothing]] to do with a sobering act of dispelling the very fundamental fantasy [[fantasies]] that regulates obscure the universe clear [[perception]] of self-experience. [[The subject Real|the real]] [[state]] of the unconscious emerges only when the subject's fundamental fantasy becomes inaccessible, is primordially repressed, argues Zizekthings or with a reflective act of achieving a critical distance from daily ruminations (superstitions). Thus, the unconscious Fantasy intervenes as support when a line is drawn between what is simply our imagination and "what really [[exists]] out there." On the inaccesible phenomenoncontrary, not "traversing the objective mechanism that regulates phenomenal experience. When <i>fantasme</i> involves [[The Subject|the subject displays signs of a fantasmatic self]]'s over-experience that cannot be reduced to external behaviour, what characterizes human subjectivity proper is identification with the gapfield of imagination: in it, la béance, that separates the two: fantasy becomes unattainable; and through it is this inaccessibility that makes the subject empty, [[Image:Lacansem1b1.gifThe Subject|the subject]]. The rapport totally subverts breaks the constrains of fantasy and enters the standard notion terrifying, violent territory of a directly selfpre-experiencing subject. Insteadsynthetic imagination, there is an impossible rapport between the emptywhere <i>disjecta membra</i> float around, non-phenomenal subject not yet [[unified]] and domesticated by the phenomena that remain inaccessible. This actual rapport is registered by Lacan's articulation [[intervention]] of fantasy, a homogenizing [[Image:Lacansem1b1.giffantasmatic]] frame."<br> a, developed in Seminar XIV, La logique du fantasme. As for Lacan's interest in topology arises since he sees it as providing a non-intuitiveassertion of [[The Subject|the subject]]'s constitutive <i>decentrement</i>, purely intellectual means of expressing the concept of structure. His topological models "forbid imaginary capture": unlike intuitive images in which perception eclipses structure, here "there [[subjective]] experience is no hidden of not regulated by [[objective]] unconscious mechanisms [[decentred]] with [[regard]] to [[The Subject|the symbolic." Hence, topology replaces language as the main paradigm of structure: it is not a mere metaphor for structure, itsubject]]'s structure itself[[self]]-experience and as such beyond [[control]], but by something more unsettling.For a standard view the dimension that is constitutive of [[subjectivity]] is that of phenomenal self-experience. In Lacan's perspective the [[analyst]] is the one who can deprive [[The Subject|the subject]] of the very fundamental fantasy that regulates the [[universe]] of self-experience. The [[subject of the unconscious]] emerges only when [[The Subject|the subject]]'s fundamental fantasy becomes inaccessible, is primordially [[repressed]], argues Zizek. Thus, the unconscious is the inaccesible phenomenon, not the objective [[mechanism]] that regulates phenomenal experience. When the subject displays [[signs]] of a fantasmatic self-experience that cannot be reduced to [[external]] [[behaviour]], what characterizes [[human]] subjectivity proper is the gap, <i>la béance</i>, that separates the two: fantasy becomes unattainable; it is this inaccessibility that makes the subject empty, <font face="LACAN" size="3">S</font>. The rapport totally subverts the standard notion of a directly self-experiencing subject. Instead, there is an impossible rapport between the empty, non-phenomenal subject and the phenomena that remain inaccessible. This actual rapport is registered by Lacan's articulation of [[fantasy]], <font face="LACAN" size="3">S</font> &lt;&gt; <i>a</i>, developed in [[Seminar]] XIV, <i>[[La logique du fantasme]]</i>.<br>Lacan's interest in topology arises since he sees it as providing a non-intuitive, purely [[intellectual]] means of expressing the concept of structure. His [[topological]] models "forbid imaginary [[capture]]": unlike intuitive [[images]] in which perception eclipses structure, here "there is no hidden of [[the symbolic]]." Hence, topology replaces language as the main paradigm of structure: it is not a mere [[metaphor]] for structure, it's structure itself. ==English translation==An [[English]] [[translation]] of [[Seminar XXI]], made from unpublished [[French]] transcripts, was made by a [[reading]] group associated with Cormac Gallagher and [http://www.lacaninireland.com ''Jacques Lacan in Ireland''] and arranged in a presentable [[form]] by Tony Hughes.* [http://www.lacaninireland.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/12-Crucial-problems-for-psychoanalysis.pdf Download], [https://mega.nz/#!2ew3xIIL!qSR9fLpbYOsr5c5kZhHJgFth2jzttq9kYt_InPDuZs0 Mirror #1] {{Center|<pdf width="450px" height="600px">File:12-Crucial-problems-for-psychoanalysis.pdf</pdf>}} ==English Audio =={{#widget:Iframe|url=https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/playlists/38134004&color=%23ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true|width=100%|height=450|border=0}} ==French=={| class="wikitable floatright" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="float:right;margin-left:10px;text-align:justify;vertical-align:top;background-color:#ffffff"|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" width="200px" style="padding-left:10px" | Date| bgcolor="#ffffff" width="50px" style="padding-left:10px" | PDF|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 02 décembre 1964| [https://mega.nz/#!OO5DQa5Q!L0c-5A-t3iCMrvP-WbiB8UxKHljTMwXHDcBAAC5EJHY link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 09 décembre 1964| [https://mega.nz/#!zegTzSba!T2iwFMDpBtgkb-VUdkUXQ8XUU2YVJJ3-piG1-hH_iEc link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 16 décembre 1964| [https://mega.nz/#!Kboh1K7Y!yNQGv3LdUJgM5sU_NYYKIDrVcfh5btQjPucZCB8IlWE link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 06 janvier 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!Tf5XUIzS!1B6TV_Qm0eUwUDySmmrw11bi7NPbxRPaxQNuzbZLA3E link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 13 janvier 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!3D53lC4K!Azz3a-_BFhdl17og6axyKPjJa2xnitHLtvOyItcjgkQ link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 20 janvier 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!2XoXSKaD!7pAldEL3pVdTJwVv4x9KhE4wxvjlQVghV795Xv01TZQ link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 27 janvier 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!iT4jzCgB!FtL7PmAdTRXYCOWyIc606nZI2MkyBHi3zieFGo8b3Ng link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 03 février 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!CbhFCQ5Q!-RBKUkuKnQjJJUbnpAG8w4E9jpFqg56_xyxToitzbN4 link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 24 février 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!2bx1RI7D!rPxbsxbsGO8P4rkQw6xroHkPzLWJV9uWZnbeyLn3WZI link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 03 mars 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!qfh3SYTI!jbfEbsyVGgslxECWVlAgJnxzKgr4RJPTwZVOqf4wbeg link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 10 mars 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!6OoBVQoa!G9syPgXhmNUlWQzGg8gbTnH05xRrTIsJYpKOUhTcBNI link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 17 mars 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!uOghDKiC!Xj4qkvdyEZ0bMw0bfIoX_U3Y0LwvrPzCwDEWAmPZZzE link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 24 mars 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!bKp1mK7K!REY6fBnhmsSmLZOM7YnvCONJjMYZ2zvJ_0XAySx_VHk link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 31 mars 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!2OwRgQIT!svxNWuc8q6Zuo6clsPHTZcZKYT59uxMdGUwxi191l_U link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 07 avril 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!zH5zTa5I!U6KDBhlG6mi_JeCU9NO0SZf-8zx7q4mMkiL54KunMoI link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 28 avril 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!eHwnWAqQ!ELTiBcDa7L6IcMnLvCUhW293Tb5f0x3cX0uSMoJ9Jd8 link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 05 mai 1965| [[Missing]]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 12 mai 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!PP4hySwA!DdLaJjlDKcavW8O6Fwhq_pKEPPikTCdOLVBA_lOQQ1c link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 19 mai 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!GT4H1KCZ!-or4ZkwiwbCfs82QRJQyvS_oWvgnTQ1dHiNpHTKYPx0 link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 26 mai 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!CPp3SYII!pfq2LkS66jmeFOfNbnDWv_Au3gI2HVxlt0OI7Evl6LU link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 02 juin 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!OC41HYBB!pw9vOwjwUAMqFgGCW_TrjgL5jRwe3sjRg1edaluE6EI link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 09 juin 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!WTwXhSAR!gtCxW3UqVUpz-jHMz9ruFvvmirG4-K_ltELrczQ3Jv8 link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 16 juin 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!jfhVWIZK!jocWjxHhoJjUgweXcX51cWj0AfX-MECUIWGTgsSKVmw link]|-| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 23 juin 1965| [https://mega.nz/#!Ta5nGarD!_04Wjj_t5yCJYURpTUojqD3ZVLbgU7P0aySLQBfDhFo link]|}French versions of [[Jacques Lacan|Lacan's]] [[Seminars]] Source: http://ecole-lacanienne.net* [[:File:Seminaire_12.pdf|Download]]<BR>{{Center|<pdf width="450px" height="600px">File:Seminaire_12.pdf</pdf>}}[[Category:Seminars]] [[Category:Jacques Lacan]] __NOTOC__ __NOAUTOLINKS__