作者: Dany Nobus 丹尼·诺布斯 / 5294次阅读 时间: 2017年11月14日
来源: 雄伯译 标签: 雄伯


Jacques Lacan and the Freudian Practice of Psychoanalysis
Dany Nobus 丹尼 诺布斯心理学空间TQH'I'P-o7z
心理学空间1Ya9uS$gJ,G7c U

&x"d`.p S Mq!O3L D0

Chapter 1 Diagnosis via speech and Transference
第一章 经由言说与移情的诊断

}uc#[.yF+~0WHY DIAGNOSIS? 为什么诊断?心理学空间4X;cu8Y9x6z

`*tm&YB&v }uKQ8s0Throughout his works, Lacan insisted on the differences between various mental organizations, on the analyst’s need to recognize these differences, and on the mandatory adoption of a differential treatment approach in the light of the psychic economy the analyst has acknowledged in the patient. The ‘Lacanian analyst’ has to bear in mind some basic nosological categories and is held to diagnose patients at the earliest stage of the clinical process, because her position within the treatment should differ according to the psychic structure of the patient. Hence, the initial assessment of the patient is not merely a matter of registration, due to the fact that it has major clinical consequences.心理学空间/Vq {1d QE6uRS

心理学空间7_'w._,\NH&N ig4o/?


mY |n(i)W0心理学空间9PR2Od S6Dc

Like so many other aspects of Lacan’s clinical theory, the importance of a correct diagnosis prior to the beginning of psychoanalytic treatment is rooted in Freud’s papers on technique. In ‘On Beginning the Treatment’ (Freud 1913c), Freud argued in favour of a trial period (Probezeit, Erprobung, Sondierung) of one or two weeks before the start of the treatment, for which he adduced the necessary, yet laborious diagnostic procedure as one of the main reasons.

x-N%B"y;M0心理学空间bL(ys B.FR



Until the end of his career, Freud remained convinced that the standard method of psychoanalysis was of no use to people suffering from paraphrenia—or some other form of psychosis—which prompted him to demand that the analyst recognize this contraindication during the trial period (ibid.: 124).1 Failure to do so, or making a diagnostic mistake, would be disastrous as some patients (neurotics wrongly diagnosed as paraphrenics) would be unjustly excluded from treatment, whereas others (paraphrenics erroneously qualified as neurotics) would be unjustly admitted.




Compared to Freud’s dual opposition of neurosis and psychosis, Lacan’s nosological framework is slightly more sophisticated and its categories more mutually exclusive. Whereas Freud also designated the psychoses as narcissistic neuroses (and the neuroses proper as transference neuroses) (Freud 1916–17a[1915–17]:420), Lacan defined neurosis and psychosis as fundamentally different psychic structures with separate causalities.

E7H!k!|nw k0

K/W_ {k+}!An%k0跟弗洛伊德将神经症与精神病的双重对立比较起来,拉康的疾病分类架构就稍微更加精细。这个疾病分类的范畴更加将两种疾病互相排除。虽然弗洛伊德也将精神病者指明作为是自恋的神经症者(并且将神经者的本身作为是移情的神经症者),拉康则是定义神经症与精神病,作为是基本上不同的心灵的结构,具有差异的因果关系。心理学空间4A#FNIc.j{

心理学空间X} U-te

To the Freudian neurosis/psychosis dualism he also added the distinct psychic structure of perversion, which Freud chiefly addressed on a purely phenomenological level—as sadism, masochism, exhibitionism, voyeurism, etc. Indeed, Freud never sharply discriminated between psychosis and perversion, and his only formal distinction between perversion and neurosis resides in his thesis that the latter is the negative of the former, which he defended for example in ‘Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality’ (1905d:165). Lacan rationalized and systematized Freud’s diagnostic categories, ultimately constructing the triptych of neurosis, psychosis and perversion, in which each of the terms represents a separate clinical entity.

5E4A/@)g-ZJb#M0心理学空间.os!n`;] A0mH)X



Furthermore, the clinical impact of these categories within Lacanian analysis no longer concerns the patient’s possible entry to the treatment, but rather the analyst’s prescribed position within the treatment and his preferable handling of transference. Unlike Freud, Lacan did not regard psychotics as unsuitable candidates for analysis. This does not imply that for Lacan the Freudian dispositions remain valid under all circumstances, but that the clinical premises of Freudian psychoanalysis can and should be modified, without therefore losing their vigour, to accommodate different types of patients.


G_`&HH"a3r E wSaN0而且,在拉康的精神分析里,这些范畴对于临床的影响,不再是关注于病人是否可能进入治疗。而是关注于精神分析家在治疗里被指定的立场,以及他较为有利地处理移情。不像弗洛伊德,拉康并没有将精神病视为是精神分析的不合适的对象。这并没有意味着,对于拉康,弗洛伊德的性情无论在什么情况始都是正确。而是意味著,弗洛伊德的精神分析的临床的假设能够,而且应该被修正。但是不要因此就丧失这些假设的力量,这是为了接纳不同种类的病人。

2N,?}(lB @)E&O5U0

xk/y Dwh"f0www.psychspace.com心理学空间网

TAG: 雄伯
«禅修与拉康精神分析实践 拉康学派