Tom - 12/31/01 10:10:41 EST
...and you are a spectre of whom, please? Of Marx, or of Lacan? When one takes into account the ferocious negative transference he attracted, perhaps at an unconscious level recent events have been an outrageous demand for the end of his story.

spectre - 12/31/01 01:10:29 EST
Never seen much discrepancy between revenge and love. Both entail trauma and an outrageous demand for the end of history.

wynship - 12/29/01 16:49:41 EST
i prefer #2 myself.

Tom - 12/29/01 07:37:00 EST
Not one of Parmenides' best, I have to say.

marc - 12/28/01 20:38:57 EST
< Hi, I am interested in how the thought of Baudrillard can be accommodated to that of Lacan, and was wondering if Lacan ever commented on B.'s work? I know he died in '81, but this time Baudrillard's most important books had been published in france - does anyone have any information?

Terry1 - 12/28/01 15:40:24 EST
And surely when Medea killed her children....She killed herself................it was HER body that split to create the child. Woman as 'the not one'

Terry1 - 12/28/01 15:38:51 EST
Is tantrics a way of ntrolling access to the real?

Terry1 - 12/28/01 15:38:04 EST
Parmenides:'The one is one'

Tom - 12/28/01 10:11:50 EST
Two can only become one by dividing it by itself.

Terry1 - 12/28/01 09:15:37 EST
This is a serious question..............Has anybody any views on Lacan and Tantrics?.When we practice Tantrics can two become one?

wynship - 12/27/01 12:14:34 EST
My jouissance. It brings me a certain ecstacy to remind myself and others that what we take for truth is not what it seems to be, and that our social conventions are in some sense bizarre and arbitrary. I have sympathies with the trickster figure in native american folklore, who shares this task.

wynship - 12/27/01 09:31:17 EST
a pointed question, perfume, which i will take under consideration. Medea was killing more out of revenge than love, I think.

mieke.loeckx@zonnelied.be - 12/27/01 08:24:05 EST
I am looking for more information about the use of la poupée-fleur de Dolto. and more information about the infleunce of cat(s) in the therapy with autism. i want to use it in the therapy of a disturbed child., if jou have more informatio, please contact me at the following e-mail address: mieke.loeckx@zonnelied.be

Terry1 - 12/27/01 08:14:34 EST
I went to the Centenary Celebrations of Lacan in london 2 weeks ago..............Lacan's daughter addressed the audience of 500............bruce Fink was ill in Brussels and could not attend..............Interesting talk on female sexuality...One speaker said that women come into being through love............A woman would kill her chilkdren for the love of a man.......Medea

Terry1 - 12/27/01 08:11:30 EST
Freud said sexual activity is a demand on the mind for word?

perfume - 12/26/01 21:25:33 EST
Thank you winship.
happy holidays to you... and let my worklessness unwork to the point the point of bliss we want to favor.
Will you tell us about your own?

perfume - 12/26/01 21:12:35 EST
Thank you Terry1.
Seasons Greetings for you... I keep up the good work up thanks to you and other nice people on the messageboard.

marc - 12/26/01 12:07:16 EST
Hi, I am interested in how the thought of Baudrillard can be accommodated to that of Lacan, and was wondering if Lacan ever commented on B.'s work? I know he died in '81, but this time Baudrillard's most important books had been published in france - does anyone have any information?

wynship - 12/26/01 11:39:02 EST
happy holidays, perfume. keep unworking your worklessness, as well.

Terry1 - 12/25/01 07:13:18 EST
Seasons Greetings Perfume................keep the good work up

perfume - 12/25/01 03:31:52 EST
bretby,
go to http://www.lacan.com/frameXIII1.htm

bretby - 12/24/01 18:47:36 EST
I have a question -- my copy of Four Fundamentals is not on hand and I am trying to remember the details of the example with the fisherman (and the can?). Can someone fill me in? Much appreciated.

wynship - 12/22/01 22:01:41 EST
'Living in the Moment/Present' - is that like living in the present moment? "Where a certain unity obtains in the grouping of things, one has always posited _spirit_ as the cause of this corrdination: for which notion there is no ground whatever. Why should the idea of a complex fact be one of the conditions of this fact? of why should the _notion_ of a complex fact have to precede it as its cause?--" - Nietzsche, _The Will to Power_, section 526.

Terry1 - 12/20/01 15:36:10 EST
The Philosophy School is based on the concept of 'Living in the Moment/Present'..........to BE real......The school uses the Gunas.........Satwas......Patwas.etc..........The method they use of relaxation/mediation is :'......Feel your weight on the chair...........Feel your feet on the floor......Feel the air on your face.........Feel the clothes on your body...........Feel your tongue in your mouth..........What am I?...............not this..........not this...... This is a method of meditation and relaxation based on the classical Neo-Platonists belef systems of Masillio Ficino (The teacher of Lorenzo de Medici) and others.

Terry1 - 12/20/01 15:13:36 EST
Yes Antonia I did..She's a lovely person...Why?

wynship - 12/13/01 14:52:49 EST
i had to wonder about it too. "spiritual" is a "loaded" word. Like a loaded gun, you don't know when it will go off!

antonia - 12/13/01 13:08:41 EST
wynship - thank you, I found it...had to wonder about the Philosphy school that trained Emily Watson, and Terry1 KNOWS about. And where is Terry1 by the way?

wynship - 12/13/01 09:40:49 EST
check down at the bottom - he wrote about his meeting with her.

antonia - 12/13/01 03:52:51 EST
Terry1 -
a month ago you said you would meet Emily Watson --- did you meet Emily Watson?

Jean-Paul - 12/11/01 19:47:27 EST
All you hockey-watching, Bud-drinking people need to grow goatees, read some Proust, consider your mode of jouissance.

???? - 12/11/01 16:57:23 EST
why would he know what we need?

GooDai - 12/10/01 21:41:30 EST
All you big word talking educated people need to slow down, drink a few Bud's and watch some hockey. Go Red Wings!

wynship - 12/10/01 12:42:08 EST
To the contrary, Tom, I don't require you to read about operations research. However, I'm happy to answer any questions people may have about it.

Tom - 12/10/01 10:45:24 EST
Don't know, but I suspect that one underneath Claudia's last post is being greedily eyed up... I'll give it two days...

wynship - 12/10/01 10:41:42 EST
claudia - IP = "integer program". LP = "linear program". Are the blank line theives related to the blank line poster(s)?

Tom - 12/09/01 04:23:56 EST
claudia, just as wynship reads Lacan, Bataille and Guattari, to return the compliment we should all be familiar with the process of creating a new constraint to remove an area not containing any integer feasible solutions.

claudia - 12/08/01 22:30:23 EST
IP= ? LP= ?

wynship - 12/05/01 10:39:26 EST
"A *cutting plane* (or *cut*) for any IP problem is a new functional constraint that reduces the feasible region for the LP relaxation without eliminating any feasible solutions for the IP problem."

chris - 12/05/01 04:15:57 EST
although have found use of phrase 'passage to the act' in Zizek, I'm still having difficulty with what this possibly means ... is there anywhere in Lacan or Lacanian literature where this is made clearer?

FBC - 12/04/01 13:11:20 EST
The cut initiates one into the symbolic order by alienating them from the real. The cutting of the cord which connects one with the maternal body. It also has to du with lines of fragilization, places where one might be "cut off". This is a not very technical or particularly "Lacanian" answer to your question but I advise trying to find a copy of Seminar X, the one on anxiety, Lacan does some work with the cut there. Also there is a nice introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Analysis which I woln't give the details of lest I be accused of spamming. Write for details, fcallo@utk.edu

Tom - 12/04/01 11:11:34 EST
The Blank Line Thieves crept in during the night...

someone - 12/03/01 09:14:36 EST
Could someone please explain the concept of the "cut"?
Shan't.

lcn - 12/03/01 07:35:36 EST
hey orada hic Turk var mi?

frustrated student - 12/02/01 23:03:42 EST
Could someone please explain the concept of the "cut"? Thanks! I am working on a long paper dealing with psychoanalysis and ideas on writing..

someone - 12/02/01 18:38:51 EST
oh yes...

neri - 12/02/01 17:00:20 EST
Is there someone out there?

wynship - 11/30/01 22:26:14 EST
Borderline, writing complimentary posts to yourself? Wouldn't that be narcissistic, rather? help me out, i am no expert here.
But regarding your comment about the state -- where is democracy left without liberalism? La communauté désoeuvrée?
Thanks for the quote, Antonia. Mightn't that quote be expanded to include modernity in general, and not just capitalism?

wynship - 11/30/01 09:00:42 EST
that was me with my bad habit of typing the name of the person to whom I am addressing the message again.

Antonia - 11/29/01 17:50:36 EST
Marx: "all that is solid melts into the air"

Tom - 11/29/01 16:40:31 EST
Er, that wasn't me. Don't want people to think I send complimentary posts to myself, it would seem rather borderline. wynship?

Tom - 11/29/01 13:27:28 EST
I like your posts, Tom. You always seem to know where I am coming from, and where I am going!

Tom - 11/29/01 08:29:52 EST
The state has no choice in the matter...

wynship - 11/28/01 10:33:08 EST
what did Marx say about democracy? It still seems absurd that liberal economy would be incompatible with liberal politics, even if both are 'empty signifiers' -- in fact, all the more so if they are. If they are so incompatible, why does the state always insist on their actual confluence?

Antonia - 11/27/01 14:37:38 EST
and don't we have enough of democracy after all...?

Rudolph - 11/27/01 14:36:01 EST
good old Karl M., wynship...and Marshall Berman, of course.

wynship - 11/27/01 10:10:00 EST
hmmmn, where have I heard *that* phrase used before? Schumpeter, anyone?

Tom - 11/27/01 06:12:06 EST
All that is solid (including democracy) seems to be fading into air, wynship...

wynship - 11/26/01 20:31:04 EST
i suppose hypotheses could be seen as competing in that observations might support one or the other of discrete alternative hypotheses, _ex post_. But I was talking about the distribution *prior* to evidence. Bayes' Theorem, decision theory, have nothing to say about this distribution, except that it should represent your best guess about the world. Logic simply doesn't intervene, here. _Prior to the evidence_, any hypothesis is as good as any other, and while different distributions will eventually converge, given the same evidence, the prior has a strong influence on the manner and the rate. It functions very much as a hermeneutic filter.

Tom - I hope that you are going to engage me and not assert incommeasurability or withdraw in conceit over my ignorance. If you are saying that democracy and capitalism are incompatible, I need something more than assertions that it is obvious. Might it be one of those widely- and strongly-held, "obvious" opinions that fade into air once they are questioned? Brrrr indeed - maybe it has become too warm and cozy in here, and time to open a window for some fresh air?

Wynship - 11/25/01 10:17:45 EST
Of course the subconscious has it's logic, it's rationality. i'm just saying that, from the point of view of decision theory, it isn't logical in a decision-theoretic sense. Certainly we are talking about two different kinds of logic, here, yes - the logic of the conscious mind and that of the unconscious, decision theory being that of the conscious? What are the "competing hypotheses?" Hypotheses don't compete in decision theory, they merely go through changes in their probabilities, and none is any more or less logical than any other (another consistency with lacan, who called them all paranoid). Yes, of course the analyst's desire is speaking in his formulations, and he would readily admit it; decision theorists just call desire "utility". [ducks flying vegatable] I'm an american and worse -- an engineer! [makes scary face: *8-0] oogabooga!

Tom - 11/25/01 09:32:41 EST
Nothing irrational about the unconscious... irrational _seeming_, certainly, but its underyling logic is rational to the point of being formulable... nothing can escape it ... hence your decision theorist believes the prior probabilities he sets up are truly irrational, the competing hypotheses all fairly categorised and logical, when in fact his desire is speaking here as it does everywhere... she says brightly, "I see no contradiction in advertising executives selling real honest-to-god, non-empty democracy." Brrrrr. You're American, wynship, n'est-ce pas?

wynship - 11/24/01 20:09:07 EST
Something about decision theory - I don't believe that it denies the subconscious. Decision *theorists*, generally speaking, certainly do. But the theory, I believe, submits to a psychoanalysis-friendly reading. The prior distribution in Bayes' theorem is at least as irrational as the subconscious. No judgement can be passed on it from decision theory - one prior distribution is just as justified as the next, no matter how they differ. Therapy - I won't speak of analysis - might be only the modification of priors with new evidence, such that diverse priors converge. Conditional probability too has a "bar", without which all conditionality is lost...

wynship - 11/24/01 11:05:19 EST
I meant that I understand decision theory much better than I understand Lacan, not that I understand decision theory better than Lacan understood it -- that would indeed be disingenuous! I would also be putting on airs! But I don't follow your logic. First question is: How is this statement falsifiable? In orther words, say democracy was not an empty simulacra -- what would be different? how would we know? You seem to imply that we would know because it wouldn't be sold by advertising executives, but this doesn't follow to me. I see no contradiction in advertising executives selling real honest-to-god, non-empty democracy. I'm open to being shown the error in my ways, however. Please, educate me.

Tom - 11/23/01 20:56:25 EST
Clearly Powell's statement doesn't _in itself_ make democracy into an empty concept. The forces of capital, however, are in the process of doing exactly that, although it may be some time before this becomes apparant. Decision/Game theory does not accept the reality of the unconscious, so for you to imply that you understand it "much better" than Lacan is a little disingenuous.

Rudolph - 11/23/01 01:31:00 EST
If language is a constant object of reflection for Lacan, the central element in his theorization of psychoanalysis, so as to give psychoanalysis the true meaning as a talking cure, then what is Colin Powell's metalanguage sense, its pure signification? Can its apparent ambiguity be resolved by a referential operation, namely the bombing of a defenceless country?

wynship - 11/22/01 20:56:27 EST
oops -- that was me, wynship, not Tom. I was addressing the message to Tom.

Tom - 11/22/01 20:56:01 EST
Okay I'm going to play devil's advocate, here. (someone's gotta do it.) I understand decision theory much better than lacan, and from its perspective, a free market is quite compatible with a democratic political system. I don't see how Powell's statement makes democracy into an empty concept. Freedom is quite another matter, and a much bigger subject.

perfume - 11/21/01 18:46:33 EST
all - sorry to say but the invitation to China didn't belong in here, and this is how I deleted it.
Our invitations - in the calendar board - are selected in accord with the theoretical thought of lacan.com

Tom - 11/19/01 16:19:09 EST
[checks archive]
Goodness, that would indeed seem to be _exactly_ what I do.
It's cool. The habit is tracable to a traumatic incident involving a pheasant.

wynship - 11/19/01 12:00:53 EST
yikes. so if i ask about the relevance, you hear me accusing irrelevance?

Tom - 11/18/01 19:48:29 EST
Well, I thought you were going to accuse that post as being irrelevant to Lacan like you did the one on two-dimensional shitting, in which case I was going to point to the way Powell's remarks evoke the commodification _of democracy itself_; that we are now reaching the point where capital flows cause 'democracy' and 'freedom' to become completely empty concepts, simulacra; and that the Lacanian relevance of this is that the whole thing, from the time of the strike (what was crucial for the terrorists was to hit the towers not because they were symbols, or when people were working in them, but when _money_, jouissance, hated American enjoyment, was flowing through them) to the fact that Hegel could see that a culture whose members are prepared to kill themselves will ultimately, inevitably, triumph over one devoted to the denial of death, was essentially predicted in the awesome final section of 'Aggressivity in psychoanalysis'. But you didn't :)

wynship - 11/18/01 09:59:55 EST
why are you shhh-ing me?

Tom - 11/18/01 06:48:02 EST
(sssshh, wynship)

Tom - 11/18/01 06:47:47 EST
"According to Colin Powell, enlisting advertising executives to broadcast pro-American propaganda in Islamic countries is justified. He says, 'What are we doing? We're selling something. We're selling a product. That product is democracy. It's the free enterprise system, the American value system.'"

wynship - 11/09/01 09:48:25 EST
yes, I remember that performance as clearly as the bathroom sex scene. In the thick scottish accent, "I promise to be a good girdle"...

wynship - 11/09/01 09:45:24 EST
thank you, perfume. |-)

perfume - 11/08/01 18:47:27 EST
wynship - through there's plenty Pettibon along Lacanian Ink, I guess spectre reacts against the one on the cover of Miller's book, "First Letter"...

antonia - 11/08/01 00:35:32 EST
Terry1 - so interesting what you tell of Emily Watson... I think her praying is one of the extraordinary parts in the film... Zizek's article is in,
http://www.lacan.com/frameXIV3.htm, though only a tiny piece of it.

antonia - 11/07/01 22:51:11 EST
Marduck, you can go to "symposia" in here, and then to Zizek on Film, and then read "Remake a Hitcoch film?"

Marduk - 11/07/01 17:33:48 EST
Is there any place on the Net where can I find some detailed analysis of Hitchcock`s films (from Zizek for example)? I mean e-books, books and essays I can read online...

Terry1 - 11/05/01 17:03:39 EST
Its strange I met Emily Watson at a seminar.........I discovered she is a member of a spiritual school of philosphy.......and has been all her life, even as a child. She spoke at the school's philosphy seminar. She actually stated that she believed the camera doesn't lie....Its strange because I know the philopshy she believes in and it artiiculates the here and now........to live IN the moment. Watson does have a consciousness and self awareness that is unusual...She said in the film 'Breakng the Waves' she tried to LIVE the life of the GOOD truth......Her philosphical belief system supports her and she called acting a 'game'...quoting Robert Altman who she is working with. She new nothing of Lacan but I KNOW the Philosphy school that trained her and it would point her in the spiritual direction of a Lacanian

wynship - 11/05/01 11:42:05 EST
spectre - how has lacan.com adopted Pettibone or his "talking pictures"? I don't see him listed in the site index.

spectre - 11/05/01 02:44:05 EST
Is it I, or the publishing industry, which has taken possession of Pettibon? I can picture Rudolph leafing through a glossy table-top edition of punk fliers, or better yet, surfing for images of them on the web--his eye liberated, the drive installed and directed. An insect.

erazorhog - 11/03/01 22:58:47 EST
"Breaking the Waves" is a powerful film. Emily Watson is a gifted actor. Stelan Skarsgaard (sp?) plays the male lead and is very convincing. The move is, however, Watson's show, and she is masterful. I can't recall the names of the director or screenwriter or cinematographer at this instant, and, oddly enough, the ending of the film. Too many intervening films... I recommend "Breaking the Waves".

wynship - 11/03/01 09:46:45 EST
yeah spectre, give us a brake... preferably a disc brake...

Rudolph - 11/02/01 16:51:59 EST
pure spectre - your posessive instintcs stink...and who said immediacy is better??? veil your voracity spectre, veil yourself...give us a brake...

spectre - 11/02/01 12:45:40 EST
Checked out for some months to chat on stonerrock.com. Gladdened (and somewhat saddened) to see how lacan.com has adopted the "talking pictures" of Raymond Pettibone. What gets lost in Pettibone is digitally reproduced, issued in table-top editions? Didn't it somehow seem more vital when it was availibe to us only as xeroxed fliers staple to phone poles? Hasn't Pettibone lost its brute immediacy now that I can read about him in Art Forum and teach him to my honors students? How dutifully they'll study him. But, what specific kind of immediacy, was ever originally availible through a xerox? And what next for lacan.com? Pushead?

wynship - 11/01/01 11:39:58 EST
ahhhh, harmony in the chatroom... :-)

perfume - 11/01/01 00:17:36 EST
wynship, thank you so much for your compliments on the splash page!

Terry1, oh...I love the applause to the index page, thank you very much!

As for Wim Delvoy's machine, it will be the show at the New Museum, next January...

wynship - 10/30/01 22:07:35 EST
hahaha.. okay, i just got Lacanian Ink in the mail and now I see the relevance. I think the shit machine is a breakthrough work of art. Bataille would have loved it. So would Guattari. Me? An analyst?? Bwahahahahhahah! i'm flattered.

Tom - 10/30/01 11:36:25 EST
Ssshhh wynship... it was merely my spontaneous response to reading the interview with Wim Delvoye. I'd hate to be your analysand... "STICK TO THE POINT", you'd shout at me...

wynship - 10/30/01 07:54:49 EST
by that logic, a three-dimensional dog would have a hard time shitting either, because its intestine would bore a hole straight through it. more importantly, what does this have to do with lacan or anything else?

Tom - 10/27/01 19:42:56 EDT
If you have a two-dimensional dog, it can't shit, because its intestine (from mouth to anus) would cut the dog in half.

My point is this.

Terry1 - 10/27/01 17:06:01 EDT
The metaphysics of the woman's position is a detour. The woman's position is better structured in a man. Woman has to pass by masclinization. That is why women are more hysterical and open to wonder. There is no signifier in the unconscious for a woamn she has to identify with a man and go beyond it.

Knowledge is between the subject and the object. Truth is not a static relation. Truth develops through scansion. Truth is not epistemology, not ontology but anthropolgy. Truth is the movement into reading it is dial;ectical scansion.

Terry1 - 10/27/01 16:58:47 EDT
Wonderful index page Perfume

wynship - 10/26/01 20:36:48 EDT
oh perfume i love the new splash page.

FBC - 10/15/01 22:09:52 EDT
Tom said: "We are the Nearly All Overmen."

Claudia said: " weren't we the survivors?"

We are the overmen when we can survive our illness and live therefrom. Reiterating, love thy neighbor, love thy muslim, love thy trauma? See the idea of erotic irony in Thomas Mann.

claudia - 10/14/01 16:31:52 EDT
weren't we the survivors?

Tom - 10/13/01 20:26:23 EDT
We are the Nearly All Overmen.

Tom - 10/09/01 14:39:15 EDT
"For all Americans today, "Love thy neighbor!" means "Love the Muslims!" OR IT MEANS NOTHING AT ALL." - surely Zizek's point must be that, for a true Christian, "Love thy neighbour" means "Love the TERRORISTS", or it means nothing. Loving the Muslims is easy.

wynship - 10/05/01 07:53:47 EDT
of course, there's loads of 2ndary lit. on _Ecrits: A Selection_, the usual starting-place. and soon there will be another English translation, which one hopes will be significantly better (and more complete). Personally, I think "The Purloined Letter", the first essay in the original French _Ecrits_ is quite a good introduction. Better if you have read your Heidegger. Wonderful essay by Derrida on it as well, English translation in _The Post Card_.

Lulee - 10/05/01 05:01:43 EDT
I just took this test at www.yle.fi/vielayksiasia -don't bother if you don't understand Finnish- and it suggested that out of all the philosophers in the world Jaques Lacan is the one I can best relate to. Interesting, huh?

wynship - 10/04/01 12:03:41 EDT
well, bruce fink has written some companions to some of lacan's seminars, but I don't know about the ethics one. It's relatively new.

Alan - 10/04/01 00:39:53 EDT
I'm a college student studying Lacan's Seminar on the Ethics of Psychoanalysis. I find it extremely inspiring but also extremely difficult to comprehend. Can anyone suggest any good books or websites that can serve as an introduction to Lacan's work? Thanks.

FBC - 10/02/01 21:41:29 EDT
By what signs do we know that an event is "fully symbolized? Isn't there always a remainder which assures the misconstruction of the cause?

claudia - 10/01/01 16:19:42 EDT
jean-marc - we do not like spamming in here

jean-marc - 09/30/01 23:44:12 EDT
LACANIANS PLEASE READ LA NOTION DE FAIT PSYCHIQUE- ROBERT BLANCHÉ!!!!!!!!

jean-marc - 09/30/01 23:41:38 EDT
FBC- I have the same interest you do . I would like to know texts comparing psychoanalisys and philosophy of mind. I recomend a very interesting and quite unknown book that could be a good start point to the kind of study we would like to do : " LA NOTION DE FAIT PSYCHIQUE , ROBERT BLANCHÉ - PARIS - FELIX ALCAN "

Jean-Marc - 09/28/01 09:01:43 EDT
A book wrote to lacanians: La Notion de Fait Psychique, Robert Blanché, Felix Alcan, Paris, l935

Antonia - 09/24/01 09:42:16 EDT
Tom -
the fact that "in the days immediately following the bombings we dwell between the traumatic event and its symbolic impact.." doesn't mean that we'll succeed into fully symbolise the event...

Tom - 09/21/01 18:14:50 EDT
Zizek: "...in the days immediately following the bombings, it is as if we dwell in the unique time between a traumatic event and its symbolic impact..."

...but psychoanalysis teaches us that for many people (and for many nations) some events are so traumatic that they are never fully symbolised - the acting-out just repeats... wasn't the attack itself a symptom of the centuries-old, unresolved fury many Islamic people feel towards the West? And how can American successfully symbolise this?

Hobart - 09/12/01 18:43:57 EDT
Time for the excessive gesture that recasts the existing order.

wynship - 09/12/01 09:45:29 EDT
Tom, it's just a healthcare advertisement analysis. what's wrong with that?

Tom - 09/10/01 18:21:30 EDT
...and what kind of lies are 'truth' on this side of the abyss... http://www.pfizer.com/pfizerinc/policy/ERhealthcare.pdf

wynship - 09/09/01 13:49:37 EDT
maybe philosophy of mind is a category within angloamerican philosophy? psychoanalysis is of continental european origin and interest.

FBC - 09/07/01 08:55:59 EDT
I was wondering if any one here could explain the absence of psychoanalytic theory from the academic field of "philosophy of mind". I am taking a class in the above this year and am truely distressed at the lack of interest in the subject. Thanks

wynship - 09/05/01 09:10:51 EDT
Thanks, Tom. Yes, i meant the 'end' not in the sense of 'the movie is over and we can all go home now'. I meant 'end' as objective, and to connote 'means and ends'. as baudrillard aptly puts it, everyone is trying to get someone else to do something. everyone has got to achieve some result, some end. there is precious little of Gelassenheit.

TheFett - 09/04/01 23:45:43 EDT
By the way, Tom, I AM INDEED an idiot. There is no need for you to point that out.

TheFett - 09/04/01 23:44:07 EDT
To an outsider looking in, aren't we all speaking in strange tongues? But even so, isn't it truth that we speak, despite the fact that it cannot be deciphered? Is truth based on what you know or what you COULD know?

Tom - 09/04/01 17:20:58 EDT
truth can be said to have become male in plato ... we are at the 'end' of that platonic tradition.
wisely chosen quotation marks, wynship - never in history has truth been so cripplingly male (witness present state of psychiatry).... perhaps we are indeed reaching the end in the sense of heading inexorably towards the point of complete absurdity, of S(/A/)... What kind of truth lies on the other side of the abyss?

perfume - 09/04/01 13:02:36 EDT
thank you winship for your answer to nainacal... Lacan was in fact born in 1901.

wynship - 09/04/01 08:07:59 EDT
i don't know about yours, but my silence only makes callow wisecracks and hasn't written a book in years...as for the splash, 1901 is also there, so I suppose he was born in 1901 and 2001 is the centennial of his birth. No, I don't believe one can communicate with the dead.

nainacal - 09/04/01 02:37:16 EDT
New around here but I noticed on the splash page that it looks like Lacan's death date is 2001. In the text of his history, it says he died in 1981. If I am Lacanian then I suppose he can never die and the dates are correct. Do you have any ideas on this or does your silence speak volumes?

wynship - 09/03/01 23:54:10 EDT
you have the right to do whatever, i was just suggesting you not commit to an interpretation of my comment that makes it obviously wrong. For Nietz., modernity and modern philosophy have plato and the decline of greek civilization as their origin, a decline that resorts to dogma out of weakness. truth can be said to have become male in plato and after because it is thought to be unchanging and something about which one can have certainty - very unwomanly qualities, at least for Neitz. (also, note plato's disparaging words for women in the apology). for Nietz. the real, original and maybe-to-be-recovered truth (that of Parmenides?), of course remains female. I like to answer Alejandro's comment in the affirmative because presently we are at the 'end' of that platonic tradition.

claudia - 09/03/01 21:45:09 EDT
sssh winship...I have the right to assume you are answering Alejandro's message, right?

wynship - 09/03/01 16:41:54 EDT
don't assume that you know what I meant

claudia - 09/03/01 15:08:51 EDT
wroooooooong, Winship...

wynship - 09/02/01 21:13:37 EDT
That's certainly what Nietzsche meant.

Tom - 09/02/01 18:32:35 EDT
Oh oops that was me "Tom", not ""

- 09/02/01 18:31:07 EDT
(Should have looked in the bath tub first, TheFett. Now you've just made yourself look stupid.)
A physician traces a symptom to its cause in space; an analyst in time.

Alejandro - 09/02/01 16:30:23 EDT
truth begins as a woman and finishes as man? Is this what you mean?

wynship - 09/02/01 10:00:16 EDT
truth begins as a woman in the earliest surviving fragments of western philosophy. no doubt, Nietz. is referring to these writings of Parmenides.

Lacan - 09/02/01 06:24:10 EDT
Thefett, have you read freud or lacan?
btw, hle managed to get on mirc...you should too, weed smoker..:(

TheFett - 09/02/01 00:02:45 EDT
Tom- you should not personify truth. It is not a physical matter that was meant to be categorized under a preference for males or females. I do not believe there is even a difference of sex between two truths.
ALSO, I FOUND MY FLEET. IT WAS IN THE BATH TUB, WHERE I LEFT IT.

wynship - 08/30/01 10:32:27 EDT
perhaps dreams do not veil wounds so much as unveil them

ernest - 08/30/01 08:17:43 EDT
"what if truth was a woman?"
F.W.Nietsche

Lacan - 08/29/01 14:05:25 EDT
humm...I didn't know that there was a guy named lacan....I got my name from somewhere else...:/ and thefett, you shouldn't post here, post in spinals board ;)

antonia - 08/29/01 13:54:02 EDT
what if gay was hysterical - in the sense it makes questions that have no answer
Tom - 08/28/01 19:36:12 EDT
What if truth was gay?

- 08/28/01 02:46:56 EDT
TheFett - no spam!

TheFett - 08/27/01 22:11:59 EDT
IT'S QUITE LARGE IN SIZE AND IT HAS MY NAME WRITTEN ON THE BOW OF THE LEAD SHIP.

patrick - 08/27/01 12:24:55 EDT
trauma is articulated through the surreal-dream, object(a)...the naming of the unnameable, the immobile image stages a fundamental fantasy, where the 'dream' is a veil for a wound...beholding the surreal, we find it traumatic, experience anxiety, since we lack castration (hence sense of paranoia), and are bombarded with surplus fantasy, signifiers without signifieds..yet, illustrating the impossibility of desire...we imagine in order to shield ourselves from the nothing at the heart of us. we hallucinate in place of the wounding sense of void/dismemberment..this is the surreal trauma.

TheFett - 08/27/01 08:34:53 EDT
HAS ANYONE SEEN MY SCALE MODEL OF THE SPANISH ARMADA?!?!?!?

wynship - 08/26/01 12:22:39 EDT
i was wrong - 'trauma' comes from a similar greek word meaning 'wound'. i suppose that the question is whether the german traum also comes from that word, or whether dreams come from wounds, a question that is perhaps approriately posed to a surrealist.

patrick - 08/24/01 16:36:54 EDT
wynship - between these two things: trauma and the dream, you also have the surrealist image.
isn't the process you describe similar to what miro and masson popularised, and breton's link between shellshock and automatism, as a means of analysis? the surrealist image, essentially uncanny, being the art of jouissance, the index of the death drive.

wynship - 08/23/01 10:40:49 EDT
i'm fascinated that the german word for dream - 'traum' - is a root for the english word 'trauma'. could it be that trauma is traumatic precisely because it is dreamlike? then, recovery from trauma might be possible by analyzing the traum as if it were a dream - as it were, by translating it into german.

Terry1 - 08/22/01 16:25:57 EDT
The Other is the big other object A, not object petite (a).

Terry1 - 08/22/01 16:24:47 EDT
Being in love is an investment of the ego in the object. It empties the ego.The approval of love of love is the reciprocal effect of the Other. A piece of the ego becomes other in love.

claudia - 08/22/01 09:21:22 EDT
Terry1 - how come...I am not loving myself in the other that is my neighbour...my neighbour hates me... and I don't even want him to love me - I hate him too.

Terry1 - 08/21/01 17:29:46 EDT
Love is narcissistic: 'I love myself in the other'

perfume - 08/20/01 15:23:01 EDT
It's I to blame...excuse me wynship, I didn't realize your message was addressing different people. I edit the messages so that the threads last longer, or I would have to be archiving the messageboard even earlier than I do...

wynship - 08/20/01 13:09:50 EDT
hey, someone edited my message. Those were two seperate statements, the first in reply to antonia's question, the second a reply to Terry1.

wynship - 08/19/01 00:51:56 EDT
perhaps to an abject, or a subaltern...
the discussion has been off-track from the beginning.

antonia - 08/18/01 22:38:49 EDT
Terry1 - You are saying the object will be debased through love... how lower than being an object are we supposed to go?

Terry1 - 08/18/01 14:45:04 EDT
'Love is the moment of the debasement of the object' Why?

Terry1 - 08/18/01 07:48:48 EDT
OK we need to get back on track.

patrick - 08/15/01 09:50:26 EDT
the sleep of lacan brings forth monsters. object(a) is the point of departure.

antonia - 08/14/01 17:49:35 EDT
it's that the stars *** started this things of your own piss

Terry1 - 08/14/01 15:18:23 EDT
Kim can you say something about Stanislowski's 'method' acting. How ddoes the actor get 'in' role?

wynship - 08/13/01 23:57:39 EDT
You go ahead, antonia - I am such a terrible astrologer.

antonia - 08/13/01 09:35:21 EDT
Actually Mapplethorpe is a previous generation. Andres Serrano is alive, middle aged - could be 48. Ask the stars: ***

wynship - 08/12/01 15:32:07 EDT
did he copy Mapplethorpe, or vice-versa?

antonia - 08/12/01 09:45:43 EDT
Andres Serrano immersed the Christ in piss

wynship - 08/12/01 07:35:40 EDT
I once told me uncle, his wife, and his sister (three different people) that they could drown in their own piss. Maybe that is what ***'s message is about?

lionel - 08/10/01 23:09:40 EDT
*** -
are you in love with your own piss?

spectre - 08/08/01 03:25:30 EDT
Kim--
Sounds like an introduction to Stanislavski's method acting; we had to creep toward an audience around a series of geometric obstacles, all the while emoting affect X. Though the instructor never told us this, I guess, as with Jackobsen, the emphasis was, despite all distractions from the IT, despite the giant, not to break the contact with the THOU, the audience. Either exercise seems to require a perverse amount of self-control.
The goal of psychoanalysis: to have a broken heart without falling into theatre.

wynship - 08/03/01 08:28:57 EDT
my night is devoid of stars, as well as of the false hope they give - always that of finding and orienting oneself in the darkness.

antonia - 08/02/01 23:55:17 EDT
the stars dixit

*** - 08/01/01 21:19:53 EDT
Postmodernism is to be in love with your own piss (:

wynship - 08/01/01 08:12:49 EDT
yeah, spectre, death is everpresent in hegel's ontology because it's present in negation, which is the end of all labor and struggle, as well as language. For hegel, death is almost volitional because it's always the end of a project and of labor. I am talking, however, about the 'other death', the non-volitional one, and that sounds more like Heidegger to me. Dasein's possibility of not-being is always an issue for it.

Terry1 - 07/31/01 17:07:10 EDT
'We never die or we never live' Bladerunner.......The living dead have the symptom.....The laws of thermodynamics and quantum consciousness ensure that we never really die. The 'Pull to Singularity' ensures our own transformation into the ONE......The dance of life...........The language of the body...To walk as a dance and create the space through which we walk.....And the Gods laugh.......

Kim - 07/30/01 17:34:41 EDT
spectre, speaking of death, dancers in some parts of the world are taught to walk the floor
as if across a sleeping giant's back--and to make this walk as if your heart is in pieces.

spectre - 07/28/01 18:55:14 EDT
Kim, you're getting increasingly interesting. I appreciate that you've done your reading. Zizek, however, who has made a career of saying "x has absolutely nothing to do with y" (Pollock has absolutley nothing to do with Greenberg, Spinoza has absolutely nothing to do with God, tango has absolutely nothing to do with compadrito) would seem to disagree regarding Lacan and being-unto-death. I believe the nay-sayer contends that for Heidegger death is an extreme out there which one approaches with philosophical resolution, as a point at which all accounts will be settled (it's been a while since I read B&T); whereas Lacan, more in keeping with Hegel, would suggest that death is located not on the infinite horizon but rather at the heart of human life. One lives in terms of death in a very different way; one doesn't approach death so much as live constantly stepping around it like a cat at one's heels.
Mikkel is Mikkel Borch-Jackobsen, who teaches at the University of Washington as well as in France. He's got a pretty good handle on Lacan, reading him in terms of the notorious Kojeve lectures at which Lacan, and EVERYBODY else, was in attendence. I prefer, though, The Freudian Subject, a more exasperatingly convulted and therefore more rewarding read--takes the brain through some narrow keyholes.

wynship - 07/24/01 10:40:33 EDT
whoops - "that is what affords..."

wynship - 07/24/01 10:38:26 EDT
i don't know who he is. i've only read a few chapters of his book. this business about death being the absolute master is too monumental for my postmodern taste. i'm more inclined to think that perhaps death isn't the absolute master, or even a master at all, but somethink very weak, so weak that it does not even allow us to stop speaking, and perhaps that it what affords it such fear and attention (esp. among philosophers).

antonia - 07/24/01 00:34:58 EDT
wynship - why don't you tell who Mikkel is?

wynship - 07/23/01 10:39:09 EDT
Ernest - Josephina never speaks here when I am around. Otherwise, I'm sure she would tell you. She's very helpful.

Ernest - 07/23/01 00:41:47 EDT
who is Mikkel?

Spinozists - 07/22/01 23:40:45 EDT
crazy psychnal types read more Spinoza! less Freudo more Spino

wynship - 07/22/01 14:01:27 EDT
we're all happy you've memorized the title of Mikkel's book.

antonia - 07/22/01 12:32:21 EDT
wynship - yes it does... death is the absolute master

wynship - 07/22/01 10:24:07 EDT
death has nothing to do with mastery.

antonia - 07/22/01 09:25:44 EDT
so death is the master

wynship - 07/22/01 08:55:09 EDT
death is impossible.
silence cannot begin to speak, because silence is always already speaking.

Cefe - 07/21/01 21:50:27 EDT
Kim - Especially the "little one."

Kim - 07/21/01 20:44:50 EDT
Silence is possible. that is why we desire death.

Blanchot - 07/21/01 18:14:45 EDT
Silence is impossible. That is why we desire it.

Terry1 - 07/21/01 17:38:47 EDT
Silence is beginnng to speak

Kim - 07/21/01 12:48:02 EDT
Unnameable -- Here's an exerpt from an essay by Peter Starr (The Tragic Ear of the Intellectual:Lacan) that may interest you...the kinds of conclusions he draws possibly mirroring those which gave rise to the accusation you mention..."Thus the analysand mimics the tragic hero to the extent that he passes beyond the anxiety characteristic of the ego functions, to the level of a certain primordial horror governed by the conjoined mysteries of procreation and death. Like tragedy, analysis points to an ethical field beyond the self-interested pursuit of pleasure, beyond any concern for utility or consequent focus on instrumentality, beyond even the desire for a localisable object--to an ethical field, in short, beyond all utilitarianisms. Its aim is catharsis, understood not as "discharge" or "purgation"--concepts central to Freud and Breuer's account of the abreaction of psychic trauma in the early Studies on Hysteria--but rather as a form of ritual "purification" (286-7/244-5). Against those who would reduce psychoanalysis to a strictly therapeutic process of uncovering and working over repressed psychic material, Lacan will advocate a tragic purification of desire through the subject's assumption of what he calls, following Heidegger, "true being-for death"."
Of course Camille Pagilia (sp?), who apparently liked neither Lacan nor Foucault, also had some pretty heated things to say on this topic.

the unnameable - 07/21/01 08:08:22 EDT
hi, i am interested in how psychoanalysis can answer the accusations of someone like foucault. (for example the purification of desire being another method of normalising and disciplinary power.) i do not wish to say any more in case of prejudicing your response.
thanks, unnameable

Kim - 07/19/01 11:56:49 EDT
Hey Cefe, Glad you found the site.
The articles in the symposia and bibliography areas are probably more useful for your project than the messageboard -- but there are other artists here, I believe -- and I don't think you'll find them the abburida gente you seem to be encountering in Zurich. Suerte.

Ceferina - 07/19/01 00:14:18 EDT
Kim--I see the artists on the Art Thinks section of this site are all Argentine. Thank you for telling me about this site.

wynship - 07/18/01 14:58:53 EDT
August - I was saying not that psychosis was a breakdown in "the structure of language", but that psychosis was a reification of that structure. Somehow, in psychosis, that connection between signifier and signified looses its artificial quality and becomes locked in and naturalized. It is as if the signified could always be found within the signifier, as if from an excess of "jointure" such as that found in the philosophy of, say, Leibniz.

Kim - 07/18/01 14:19:00 EDT
wyn da shit and tsarian-
Your posts put Che and Schopenhauer in bed for me because
Schopenhauer said that the individual,
the person, is a manifestation of the will,
that the individual is a phenomenal form of will--
and Jean-Paul Sarte said:
"Che is the most complete human being of our age."
I find it interesting, then, that the most complete human being
of our age IS, in many crucial respects, a photograph.

August Plume - 07/18/01 12:27:01 EDT
Be careful not to simply the idea that psychosis is a breakdown in "the structure of language." This idea only makes sense in the context of its temporal nature. Take away anticipation and temporality and language just becomes inert stuff.

Kim - 07/17/01 17:38:01 EDT
And must one really read Schopenhauer to get him?
After all, as with Che Guevara, (who also spoke to the suffering pretty simply), he managed,
more importantly, to get himself photographed in a way that makes his every idea stand absolutely clear.

wyn da shit - 07/15/01 15:26:48 EDT
antinia - an anonymous voice. perhaps the sound of language speaking. or someone who wants to be keen with it.

]starian - because we don't have time to read him. i am interested, though, in his psychologyof will. I haven't read him, but have read around him in Nietzsche, Hardy.
i have to respond to everybody. i have to, yes! yes! then I will be ... complete!!! ;-)

tsarian - 07/15/01 04:12:44 EDT
I've been away from Lacan for a while but all this only makes more sense after the readings I've been doing in 18th-century and early 19th-century science and epistemology. How come noone talks anymore about Schopenhauer; with at least 50 million Elvis fans militating against him he's got to be doing something right.

Antonia - 07/14/01 16:53:30 EDT
who is talking?

- 07/13/01 16:44:08 EDT
wynship - if you want to be so keen with signification, the meaning of the name Antonia gave you is so much nicer than the one you gave yourself..........

windy shit - 07/13/01 08:05:32 EDT
Antonia - So much about signifier,
signified. So little about signfication.

Antonia - 07/12/01 14:49:21 EDT
windship -
silence ...the analyst, a signifier...an angel...just a head and two wings, no body

wynship - 07/11/01 09:36:20 EDT
Silence and the body. The role of the analyst: PASSing wind?

Terry1 - 07/11/01 07:06:46 EDT
Silence and the body. The role of the analyst.

Terry1 - 07/11/01 07:05:24 EDT
Kim..We are PASSing

kim - 07/11/01 04:41:35 EDT
anyone here?

Antonia - 07/05/01 13:12:48 EDT
ghede - I say wynship is the pASSing angel: a long silence - since the beginning he says.

wynship - 07/01/01 13:29:24 EDT
I like the idea that this conversation has been "shut down" since the beginning. That lacan pathologizes science has interesting implications, especially given his essentialization of psychosis. If Bruce Fink is to be believed, Lacan locates psychosis in an essential structure of language, within the patient. Language is subjectum, hypokeimenon, in the psychotic, and nothing will ever change that. In the non-psychotic, language is writing and absence - uncertain, mistrusted. That this structure is itself essential and cannot be altered means that those who are "fundamentally" non-psychotic can indulge in science to whatever extent we please, because we will never expel our distrust for it. We can become, to alter a quote from Steven Rodman of the Chicago Bulls, "Sick as we wanna be." Go ahead, Lacan seems to be urging us, indulge in science without limit, because it is powerless to hurt you. No matter how sick you become as a result, you are still fundamentally sane. Only your parents can really hurt you (and if they have, there is nothing you can do about it anyway, so you *still* might was well indulge in science without limit, for whatever reason - money, power, fame, etc.). But - as Deleuze and Co. point out - this argument rests on its own hypokeimenon, that of 'structure', and mimics the psychosis that it sought at last to pin down and immobilize and exclude itself from.

patient a - 07/01/01 13:00:39 EDT
When I was three and four years old, I used to have nightmares about three-to-six-foot-tall vaginas floating in mid-air. They were "closed" - just the lips, none of the surrounding tissue, which made them very tall and narrow. They wouldn't do anything, but the sight of them would scare me a great deal.

ghede - 06/30/01 19:37:49 EDT
I am also curious about the pASSing anGel

objet petit a - 06/27/01 18:19:29 EDT
What the hell is 'objet petit a'? "The phallus"?

Terry1 - 06/27/01 04:15:29 EDT
Perfume.............Elaborate on the PASSing angel.

Antonia - 06/27/01 01:10:27 EDT
yes it does.

Mulatta - 06/27/01 01:09:59 EDT
the issue of silence has nothing to do with angels

claudia - 06/26/01 22:24:50 EDT
Pasa un Angel...

perfume - 06/26/01 22:24:18 EDT
An Angel Passes...

Terry 1 - 06/26/01 14:42:54 EDT
Let's talk about the issue of silence?..........

claudia - 06/25/01 23:11:49 EDT
let's translate Alix's post, maybe no one is sharing their voice because not every one understands.
Lacan writes "The unconscious is structured as a language"
Subsidiary question: what does it mean?

patrick - 06/25/01 18:45:52 EDT
no one is sharing their voice...

Alix - 06/19/01 09:48:34 EDT
Est-ce bien Lacan qui a écrit "L'inconscient est structuré comme un langage" ? Question subsidiaire : qu'est ce que ça veut dire ?

antonia - 06/16/01 13:16:30 EDT
claudia - so the omission says of the tendentious Roudinesco biography... since you seem to know what I mean

claudia - 06/15/01 22:43:36 EDT
b - so the omission says of the Roudinesco biography and how much it is not reliable.

patrick - 06/15/01 17:15:18 EDT
what is "negativity"?

Terry1 - 06/15/01 13:16:11 EDT
Thankyou for the clarification Perfume........

perfume - 06/13/01 02:59:34 EDT
b - Lacan was Picassos' medical doctor.
You can read the Chronology at: http://www.lacan.com/rolleyes.htm Lacan studies medicine and later psychiatry.

b - 06/13/01 02:51:16 EDT
In what sense was Lacan Picasso's physician. I read the Roudinescu biography and saw nothing about this.

Terry1 - 06/12/01 14:16:48 EDT
Lacan, of course, was Picasso's physician.

Hugh Spankel - 06/11/01 21:36:08 EDT
Terry1 --
You forget that there is a difference between psychoanalysis and intellectualism. Psychoanalysis wasn't at issue in my posting.

b - 06/11/01 20:53:43 EDT
i have respectfully to disagree with T1 about Lacanian psychoanalyis being a "humanity" and a therapeutics. too much that I've read and come to on my own would lead me to think just the opposite. i realize that Lacan always wanted to be considered a doctor, but I believe that was predominantly so that he could lay claim to an unimpeachable title, not to mention justify certain of his outfits. but i'd love to take a look at any materials you could recommend which might change my opinion on this matter.

Stäcy - 06/11/01 20:21:58 EDT
Terry....I'm here

Stäcy - 06/11/01 20:21:26 EDT
I am haveing a slight problem

Stäcy - 06/11/01 20:19:42 EDT
Hi there

ghost in the machine - 06/11/01 14:41:47 EDT
I believe the phenomena I am describing remains loyal to Lacanian psychoanalysis, especially if "unheimlich" affects provoke anxiety. Art as a mode of transference/counter-transference (even with so-called mediocre talents) has, throughout history, closely resembled the process of psychoanalysis. (The only difference being the subject has been both analyst and analysand). The burden of such hyper-reflexivity and detachment is clearly evident in their frequent dysfunction. But isn't poetry also a humanity whose goal is the relief of suffering? If I experience the sudden intrusion of the real and this is registered by me as something disturbing, doesn't this deserve analysis?
patrick.

Terry1 - 06/11/01 08:59:49 EDT
Hugh Spankel - You have forgotten that Lacanian psychoanalysis is a humanity. Whose aims and goals are the relief of suffering.

Hugh Spankel - 06/10/01 16:16:34 EDT
One might wonder whether what passes for intellectualism these days, and this goes back even to Sartre, is really a type of pathology, and whether the pressure to publish or perish has pushed otherwise mediocre talents to the point of madness, e.g. the pressure to reinterpret ordinary things from everyday life as unsettling, "unheimlich," etc.

antonia - 06/10/01 11:34:34 EDT
Aren't delusions/hallucinations always temporary, even when the case is that there is a psychotic structure?
Much as I know it can be that the hysterical has delusions - hears voices - and with the obsessional that he speaks to himself...

ghost in the machine - 06/09/01 10:56:27 EDT
yes, of course the stimmung is irrational. what i want to know is, considering it's often a temporary delusion/hallucination (often occurring during periods of high anxiety), how does this relate to foreclosure? Does the subject require a psychotic structure for this to occur?
What I meant by "induced" was a kind of phenomenological analysis of an object, like in Sartre's Nausea. If I stare long enough at a tree, it loses/gains meaning. What does this may me? If I critique the very findamentals of the symbolic, obviously something is happening?
patrick.

Terry1 - 06/08/01 17:42:24 EDT
When you ask: 'how is stimmung possible as am induced state?' you are applying rationality to an irrational concept. The rational mind is limited in its structure and functioning.

ghost in the machine - 06/08/01 16:45:55 EDT
I need an analyst

Jonah - 06/08/01 00:53:36 EDT
A High-Toned Old Christian Woman: Poetry is the supreme fiction, madame. Take the moral law and make a nave of it And from the nave build haunted heaven. take The opposing law and make a peristyle, And from the peristyle project a masque This will make widows wince. But fictive things Wink as they will. Wink most when widows wince. And the Lord God prepared a gourd, and made it come over Jonah, that it might be a shadow over his head, to deliver him from his grief. Noumena for Kant is that which, though it is unknowable, is a free choice when deciding whether to pursue what is unknown or not. How else do we know the phenomenological from the noumena with which we describe it? Berkeley is a lacanian.

Terry1 - 06/06/01 07:31:04 EDT
Multhew:The superego punishes the subject beyond what is necessary. The Law regulates the punishnet through language. Plato's Neumenal world is unknowable by his own account. I think you are referring to the Phenomenal world. The world of things....

Terry1 - 06/06/01 07:23:25 EDT
Ruffed : Articulate for us what made widows weep.......their loss of an object is too obvious. All human beings look for meaning. Being is a LACK of meaning. We all lack.

ruffed grousing - 06/06/01 00:25:51 EDT
Law is noumena, you care for words or elect not to and retreat to your gourde, and one should inform you of the force of shortchanging mockery. Of course Kim, the Unconscious is not an amount of anything determinable by measure, unless you're willing to look for meaning in the course you chose. And as for W. Stevens, see what makes widows wince.

Multhew de Antwerp - 06/05/01 22:23:58 EDT
I say it's pretty clear. The Law is the Superego within the epoch of modern subjectivity. There is a horrifying dimension to the Law, and you can find it in Kant. But to say that just being subject to the temporal dimension of language leads to the peculiar experience of the superego as an excessive, mocking force is to shortchange the idea of the superego.

claudia - 06/05/01 20:36:50 EDT
who said so Muthew de Antwerp?
much as I know the superego is a correlate of castration...

Muthew de Antwerp - 06/05/01 20:06:18 EDT
Even conceived in its horrible (or sublime) dimension, the Law is not the Superego.
Not for all people.

antonia - 06/05/01 16:15:18 EDT
b - I am curious about your reflection on toucans... can you please explain some more?

ghost in the machine - 06/04/01 17:10:31 EDT
I have a question on psychosis: Giorgio de Chirico (and then later, the surrealists) relied on what is known in German as the "Stimmung" and "truth-taking-stare" to induce a delusional state, where banality becomes ineffably *significant*. What I want to know is, how is this induced state possible? how is it "controlled" without lapsing into psychosis? I read somewhere that de Chirico was "schizoid"....but what I want to know is, why are some people diagnosed as psychotic, yet for others, these episodes are more sporadic, sublimated.. benign? In Lacanian terms, how does this extreme poetic mood relate to foreclosure? Can anyone clarify this for me?
Thanks, Patrick.

b - 06/04/01 16:40:02 EDT
Thanks Perfume. I thought I was being labelled "manic."

Terry1 - 06/04/01 02:06:07 EDT
Perfume don't worry but they were succinct entries. Perhaps we could repeat as in the sonata form.......To repeat,elaborate, work through and then repeat again.... For Perfume we could say....'And still I learn' this was a tag line for Goya's last sketch of himself as an old man with a stick.

perfume - 06/03/01 21:46:16 EDT
the messageboard - please forgive me .....I was editing the notes and suddenly I see two or three were missing... I really don't know how it happened, but I am to blame, let's say that my inexperience in web matters is to blame... too late to fix it... sorry again

claudia - 06/03/01 02:51:48 EDT
melanie - go to http://www.lacan.com/hitch.html - IS THERE A PROPER WAY TO REMAKE A HITCHCOCK FILM? and read from "As to this paradox of the omnipresent gaze..." on.

melanie - 06/02/01 22:44:57 EDT
could someone offer a brief lacanian analysis of hitchcock's the birds

antonia - 06/02/01 21:54:48 EDT
Terry1 - as for the other side of subjectivity... I say it is egotism

Terry1 - 06/02/01 17:12:19 EDT
' Repetition is the limit of freedom' lacan. If you are human you HAVE to make something of your life (as Lacan did). Human BEings cannot just BE, they have to BEcome something. Organisms without nervous systems and cortical functioning EXist. Human Beings need more than EXistence they must have meaning in their lives. Even nihilists have meaning so they are spared the trauma of psychosis. Psychosis is a LACK of meaning in the subject. A pleasurable state for the psychotic but a dehumanised state of trauma for a subject trapped in the real. The truth is structured like a fiction and can seem pleasurable for those who advocate such a state.

Terry1 - 06/02/01 17:01:05 EDT
A subject who is void is NOT a SUBject

Terry1 - 06/02/01 16:59:55 EDT
What is the other side of subjectivity?

Kim - 06/02/01 16:54:32 EDT
Why redirect him?
Aliens told me through my telescope that the people who post to this messageboard very strongly favor one side of subjectivity over the other: the subject as void over the subject who makes something his own, who is free to the extent he is determined. Humanity is banal; why not make the most of it? Ah, that's right -- you don't have the choice. You either already are, or you already are not. Is it wrong, in fact, to talk about the Unconscious in terms of amount? Aren't there some people with more in them, more easily taken along different tracks, accepting limitation and multiplying within it? They've made the choice deep within. Metaphors are created. They are banal, just as some blase intellectual called evil banal. All people are repetitive -- some more narrowly than others.

bill - 06/02/01 16:40:57 EDT
i think its wa good point when ylu say aliens arenot the Other. i dont know whetgher athere are aliens butr i know how they wouyold be treated when they came down. i think it would make yu tell whether someone was a true lacanain or not.

b - 06/02/01 01:18:08 EDT
. . . there are men whose words are as the sound of toucans in the place of toucans . . .

Terry1 - 06/01/01 19:21:46 EDT
Kim can you say more about Wallace Stevens?

Terry1 - 06/01/01 19:17:58 EDT
Perfume can you tell us more about the seperation from S. Zizek reference Renata Selecl..She is Professor of Cultural Theory..now..It makes her contribution on Saturday more,knowing her history.......She like a true Lacanian tried to answerher own questions regarding love anxieties..... ' The male phallus is sustained by a need for erection structured around uncertainty. The woman is always unsure what it is in her that draws the man to her. She never really knows what it is. The anxiety for the man is to maintain the erect penis in spite of the oepedipul comedy and castration. The woman has to bear the attention of the man not knowing what it is in her that draws the man to her. What is a 'look'?

b - 06/01/01 19:04:57 EDT
I think the presence of the analyst is crucial insofar as the analyst is able to maitain the impression of always being on the verge of speech, always being on the verge of interupting, punctuating, interpreting. This source of anxiety is what causes the analysand to free-associate, producing not cogent arguments but rather rhetorical gestures which allow for the reconstruction of specific scenarios, scenes. Note that Lacan suggests Aristotle's Rhetoric as crucial reading; it's all about the situatedness of speech. I don't think it would be possible to experience this kind of anxiety on line. I do worry about how others will respond to what I post here, and my anticipations shape my comments, but it's just not possible to be interupted while typing as would be the case in a properly analytic situation.

Kim - 06/01/01 17:30:58 EDT
Bill - Maybe you could just start something new--regardless of what the other message said?

bill - 06/01/01 17:17:05 EDT
what happened to that message here the other day? i liked it it was a pretty good one. someobody said something new. i didnl;t like the grosos partr about someones penis but it had something new to say.

Kim - 06/01/01 15:26:09 EDT
Was it Wallace Stevens who wrote about an order so violent it resembles disorder? (I've heard that used to describe obbsesive-compulsive disorder, and more cleverly, the suburbs). But to trade on that thinking, web-analysis, especially on the part of the analysand, would seem to represent an inhibition so violent it resembles disclosure. B's point about the free-write is a good one. We are all already so so good at hiding the truth. The body of the analyst might not resolve, but would probably, mitigate against that. Ie. the effect of the cubists putting words and letters as visual elements in their paintings.

b - 05/31/01 23:00:57 EDT
an analyst on line might be fine idea if it were possible to ensure that the analysand only free-wrote her responses and never revised. not a likely scenario. additionally, the issue of the body in the analytic situation has never seemed more crucial than it does to me now that i've begun studying orthographic geometry. the analyst would have almost to be an authentic pervert to be able sit as perfectly still as is necessary, to acheive such a state of virtual rigor mortis.

FBC - 05/31/01 11:23:44 EDT
The idea of analysis on lne brings into focus the question; what is the role of the analyst's body in analysis? That such a role exist is underscored by the fact that the question of the validity of on line analysis even arises.

antonia - 05/28/01 17:38:59 EDT
Thus the story of Echo, Narcissus wife, that can only speak with his (Narcissus') words.
I love you, says him
love you... love you... responds she

velo-sui - 05/28/01 11:15:45 EDT
Where might I obtain videos of Television or Other Lectures?

To speak with the words of others - that must be the ultimate freedom. -Leaud in The Mother and the Whore

perfume - 05/27/01 21:15:09 EDT
Terry1, so that's quite a run-in...did you say hello? I haven't seen Renata Salecl after her separation. I know she has a small Slavoj Z. baby and recently published two books with Verso. Of Darian Leader?...well,a year ago he sent a book of Henry Bond - an English artist, photographer - with his article as an introduction. and I have his Lacan-for-beginners book which I heard is doing very well. I published Darian in 1994...in lacanian ink 8.

Terry1 - 05/27/01 17:30:23 EDT
For Perfume

Terry1 - 05/27/01 17:29:58 EDT
I saw Darian Leader on Saturday with Renata Salecl. She speaks well with reference
Love Anxieties.

perfume - 05/27/01 15:18:36 EDT
I was fixing the messageboard as I always do and, as I uploaded the edited version I got to see someone had posted a new message...too late because the new version didn't include it...
problem is I can't find it anymore. My apologies to the person that posted the message, and could you please post it again?

Terry1 - 05/26/01 17:27:28 EDT
Kim
Lacan would not be outraged as Lacan believed the Analyst was nothing and the Analsand was everthing. Every analysand was a training analyst. Webtherapy is interesting, it must be based on the TRUTH of the speaking being. We are in effect anonomous on here. We would need to make a site secure if we were to proceed in any way with a Lacanian based form of Webtherapy. That is why we must try to retain the integrity of this site and not play around with atavars. If we cannot speak our TRUTH here where can we?

spectre - 05/25/01 14:12:21 EDT
This conversation has been "shut down" from the beginning.

Han Keung-Jin - 05/25/01 14:11:24 EDT
Perhaps someone should make the claim that the "truth" -- the repressed kernel as Zizek might say -- of psychoanalysis is precisely its American offshoot: modern-day "therapy." What psychoanalysis must emphatically disavow is that the masses have accepted psychoanalysis with open arms, and what they have accepted is all that psychoanalysis ever was: the chance to regress -- that is, if we do accept the distinction between theory and practice with emphasis on practice that many Lacanians, particularly Bruce Fink, today advance against so-called "academic" Lacanism.

Kim - 05/24/01 19:27:15 EDT
Terry1--Thanks for the explanation.
I imagine Lacan might be outraged, then, at this internet analysis that seems geared rather toward making things very convenient and safe for the client, rather than challenging.
Well, all in all it's pretty clear this web-counseling is an entirely different animal from analysis --and probably not worthy of much discussion here -- but thanks again for your explanation of what Lacan was up to.

Terry 1 - 05/24/01 14:36:20 EDT
Ther 50 minute hour was rejected by Lacan because of the ritualisation involved in that formula. Where a patient would talk rubbish for 45 minutes and only produce material in the last 5 minutes. Lacan felt that if the 50 minute hour was thrown out the patient wouldn't know when the session would end. It could end after only 5 minutes.......Lacan felt this uncertainty on the part of the patient of when the session would end would produce much more material and would act as a stimulus to produce a required result.

Kim - 05/24/01 01:16:07 EDT
Does anyone wish to comment on the story in the Times (or was it USA Today--hard to tell on the web) about the proliferation of therapists who work with clients on the Web. The article didn't suggest there were many who claimed to do psychoanalysis (it seemed mostly to be behavior modification) but it suggested the biggest risk was in deceptions regarding identity (both on the part of clients and therapists) -- the questions raised by one, I suppose, getting to share his secrets and have them too. But proponents applauded the escape from the restrictions inherent in the typical 50 minute session -- which I believe Lacan also disregarded (and was roundly criticized for). Can anyone speak to why Lacan resisted it? Also, isn't it true Lacan once said he loved his dog Justine because she never mistook him for anyone else. (He was speaking, I think, of the way we project our lost unity with onto our objects of desire). I think I love my dog, Miss Lonelyhearts, because he always mistakes me for exactly the person I wish to be. (Geez I pray no one reads that sexually).