雅克·拉康与弗洛伊德的精神分析实践
作者: Dany Nobus 丹尼·诺布斯 / 22295次阅读 时间: 2017年11月14日
来源: 雄伯译
www.psychspace.com心理学空间网

M_(X;G$|F3oUQ {0心理学空间#B+N}k7{q`'dhTS

HYSTERIA AND OBSESSIONAL NEUROSIS 癔症与妄想神经症心理学空间zX])m+d"i4ibl

W VY-Ee"qF0Although all neurotics are uniformly under the spell of repression, suffering from something unspoken which none the less continues to speak in a different realm, Lacan maintained Freud’s decomposition of the neurotic picture in a hysterical and an obsessional side.28 From the 1890s till the 1930s, Freud had experimented with a whole gamut of criteria distinguishing hysterics from obsessional neurotics, such as the time and nature of the traumatic sexual experience, constitutional factors, the moment of disease onset, the location of the symptoms, the fixated phase of libidinal development, the type of repression, and the patients’ unconscious attitudes towards sexuality. 心理学空间0Bm)W+H/s|,Ms

0UK|UDF&su0虽然所有的神经症者都一致地受到压抑的影响,他们遭受某件没有说出的东西的痛苦。这个没有说出的东西仍然继续言说,在不同的领域。拉康维持弗洛伊德对于神经症画面的解构,处于癔症与妄想症的这一边。从1890年,直到1930年,弗洛伊德曾经试验一整套的标准,区别癔症跟妄想神经症的不同,譬如,创伤的性的经验的时间与特性,结构性的因素,疾病开始的时刻,症状的位置,力比多发展的固定的时期,压抑的种类,与病人对应性的无意识的态度。心理学空间F6qJiT

心理学空间7M'?6xD/Y*I

Some of these criteria, notably the nature of the traumatic sexual experience (passive and painful in hysteria versus active and pleasurable in obsessional neurosis), he had come to reject as his theory evolved, whereas others he had suggested without detailing their impact.29 On various occasions, Freud (1918b [1914]:76; 1926d[1925]:113) had also conceded that every obsessional neurosis seems to encapsulate a hysterical nucleus, out of which it develops along complex, obscure pathways. Unlocking the mystery of obsessional neurosis thus involved the challenge of finding its formula of transformation, something for which Freud never claimed credit. Lacan dressed his own differentiation of hysteria and obsessional neurosis in his preferred conceptual garments of subject, Other, object, fantasy, desire and jouissance, without betraying his allegiance to Freud.

U ^'EQM3cy0心理学空间N^V4m[3c1y

有一些的这些标准,特别是创伤的性的经验的癔症(癔症者的被动与令人痛苦,对比于妄想症者的主动与快乐),他逐渐排除它们,随着他的理论的进展。另一方面,他曾经建议其他的标准,但是没有详述它们的影响。在各个不同的场合,弗洛伊德也曾经承认,每个妄想症的神经症似乎总栝癔症的核心。每个妄想神经症就从癔症的核心发展出来,沿着复杂而模糊的途径。解答妄想神经症的神秘,因此牵涉到这个挑战:要找出它的转化的公式,对于这个转化的公式,弗洛伊德从来宣称予以推崇。拉康则是用他较为喜爱的观念的外衣:主体,大他者,客体,幻见,欲望与欢爽,装扮他自己对于癔症与妄想症的区别。但是拉康病没有背叛对于弗洛伊德的忠诚。

.V f{U?^0

5I:U` P;SFI"z-a0Here, Lacan’s Freudian inspiration can be inferred from his unremitting faith in the value of Freud’s case-studies of Dora (1905e[1901]), the Rat Man (1909d) and the Wolf Man (1918b[1914]), as well as from his trenchant critique of the purportedly ‘deviant’, post-Freudian accounts of hysteria and obsessional neurosis, such as the object-relations perspective espoused by Maurice Bouvet during the late 1940s and 1950s (Lacan 1994[1956–57]:26–28; 1998b[1957–58]:387–421).30

(qEE ?viq8X0

:n+qy'Kas _dE&M-v0在此,拉康的获得弗洛伊德的启发,可以从头永不休止的信仰弗洛伊的个案研究的价值推论出来:“朵拉”,“鼠人”,“狼人”,以及从他的锐利地批判据说是“偏离的”后-弗洛伊德学派,他们对于癔症与妄想症的描述。譬如,莫瑞斯,博维特主张的客体关系的观点,在1940年代晚期与1950年代。

9ps2j VI!^o$mLP0

3S%OD HE"k,de*\y3[*}0Following Freud (1909d:156), Lacan argued that the analysis of obsessional neurotics is much more demanding than that of hysterical patients, since what the analyst needs is ‘not only the plan of a reconstructed labyrinth, or even a batch of plans already drawn up’, but also ‘the general combinatory that governs their variety…[and], even more usefully, accounts for the illusions, or rather shifts of perspective to be found in the labyrinth (Lacan 1977i[1958]:266). 心理学空间0t|'R^X1I yg

心理学空间&Z3LBb2siD

追随弗洛伊德之后,拉康主张,妄想神经症的分析,比起癔症病人的分析,要求严格得多。因为精神分析家所需要的东西,“不但是重新建立迷宫的计划,或甚至是一堆已经被拟定的计划,而且是统辖它们的多样态的一般组合、、、甚至更加有用地,对于幻觉的描述,或者说,在迷宫里能够被找到的观点的改变。心理学空间 zDPsiJc]D? N

心理学空间P+] Ki/{I;u$BU

In keeping with Freud (1913i:319), Lacan also surmised that hysteria and obsessional neurosis are two neurotic languages, whereby the obsessional idiom is a dialect of the hysterical standard. Towards the end of his career, Lacan even adduced that the psychoanalytic treatment of all neurotics rests upon a ‘hysterisation’ of the patient, which indicates that he agreed with Freud on the hysterical core within obsessional neurosis (Lacan 1991a[1969– 70]:35–36).心理学空间-NBk;kUxU!D [A

#[ SF%? HE)Tb/k`0虽然遵循弗洛伊德,拉康也推断,癔症与妄想神经症是两种神经症的语言。妄想神经症的词语是癔症的标准语的方言。在他事业的末期,拉康甚至补充说:精神分析对于所有的神经症的治疗,依靠病人的“成为癔症“,这指示著:拉康同意弗洛伊德,对于癔症的核心,在妄想神经症内部。

"g1VDE*h0心理学空间R8[d syYK

Lacan’s proposition that every neurotic subject recognizes and is being recognized by the Other (Lacan 1993[1955–56]:168) provides a good starting-point for a summary of his ideas on hysteria and obsessional neurosis.31 Throughout his seminars, Lacan explored the effects of this neurotic acknowledgement of the Other (the laws of language, the language of laws, the sociocultural rules and regulations), both on the human condition and on the structure of language itself. In a first movement, he aligned the individual’s assimilation of the symbolic order with the normal deployment of the Oedipus and castration complexes in Freud’s theory, according to which the child relinquishes its primary love-object (the mother) in favour of an identification with the father as the representative of the law (Freud 1924d; Lacan 1994[1956–57]:61, 199–230). 心理学空间LO(^x]9O$@

)Lx L+E,n2z*kO1i0拉康的命题是:每个神经症的主体体认出大他者,而且正在被大他者体认。这个命题提供一个很好的出发点,作为他对于癔症与妄想神经症的观念的总结。在他的研讨班里,拉康探索这个神经症的承认大他者的影响(语言的法则,法则的语言,社会与文化的规则与规定)。一方面是依据人类的情况,另一方面则是依据语言本身的结构。在一个最初的运动里,拉康将个人的接受象征秩序,等同于弗洛伊德的理论里,伊狄浦斯与阉割情结的正常的发展。依照弗洛伊德的理论,小孩放弃它的最初的爱的客体(母亲),以迁就对于父亲的认同,作为是法则的代表。

;nt0qm7kv u0

5`a4lfxS!I0Concurrently, Lacan reinterpreted Freud’s notion of castration —the boy’s observation that his mother lacks a penis and the ensuing fear that his own will be cut off by way of punishment for violating a prohibition—as a symbolic cut resulting from the individual’s compliance with the Other.32 According to Lacan, every society forces human beings to postpone the satisfaction of some of their drives and prohibits the expression of some drives altogether, which implies ‘that jouissance [enjoyment] is forbidden to him who speaks as such’ (Lacan 1977k [1960]:319).

+UR.b~9cs,K0

i7Jn a]!d:sl0同时,拉康重新解释弗洛伊德对于阉割的观念—小孩观察到,他的母亲欠缺阳具,并且随后恐惧,他自己的阳具将会被切割,作为处罚,因为他违背一个禁令—作为因为个人的同意大他者造成的象征的切割。依照拉康,每个社会都强迫人类拖延某些的冲动的满足,并且也一块禁止某些冲动的表达。这暗示着:欢爽被禁止,对于言说作为欢爽的人。心理学空间/{l(aK%l@ Gb

心理学空间c.S8b?}7El

Originally defined by Freud as a perceived punishment for transgressing a symbolic law (the incest prohibition), in Lacan’s version castration became part and parcel of leading a law-abiding life. Following this symbolic cut of castration, the neurotic individual experiences both a loss of jouissance, which Lacan designated as -f, and an internal lack, which he dubbed or split subject.33 The entire operation awakens the neurotic’s desire to retrieve what is lost and to annihilate the lack. Desire and jouissance are therefore the two poles of the psychic spectrum within which the neurotic individual has to organize his life (Lacan 1998b[1957– 58]:261–317).

s h!`'u0h Jb0

'j!B-d9G'A+b0阉割原先被弗洛伊德定义,作为是被感知的处罚,因为逾越象征的法则(乱伦的禁令)。在拉康的版本,阉割则是成为遵守法则的生活的部分与包裹。神经症的个人遵循这个阉割的象征,并且经验到欢爽的丧失与内部的欠缺。前者,拉康指明作为是-f;后者,他称之为分裂的主体。整个的运作唤醒神经症的欲望,要重新获得丧失的东西,并且消灭这个欠缺。欲望与欢爽因此是心灵光谱的两个极端。在这心灵光谱内部,神经症的个人必须组织他的生活。心理学空间[Y:~/uq

*w$|r_r4IU0In a second movement, Lacan investigated the relationship between the neurotic’s lack (the split subject ) and the objects with which she tries to neutralize it, simultaneously satisfying her desire and reinstating the feeling of ‘fullness’. This entailed an extrapolation of Freud’s suggestion, in the final pages of his ‘Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality’ (1905d:222–230), that the objects to which a person turns in adulthood are always but substitutes for a lost primary object which can never be retrieved. 心理学空间C y+K3u+\{)Jc K)pC"Q

3g M IE yj#?r0在第二个运动,拉康研究神经症者的欠缺(分裂的主体)与客体的关系。神经症者尝试用这些客体来让关系保持中立,同时又满足她的欲望,并且重新恢复“充实“的感觉。这意味着推断弗洛伊德的建议,在”性学三论文“的最后几页。一个人在成年时转向这些客体,这些客体总是仅是已经丧失的原初的客体的替代品。已经丧失的原初的客体永远无法被重新获得。

~;I-c{"oZ/B7`0心理学空间r6K.m,Z/y

From the late 1950s Lacan conceptualized these fascinating, yet inadequate, objects which turn the neurotic individual on because he ‘reads’ their promise of fulfilment as objects a. In Seminar VI he described an object a as something which ‘satisfies no need and is itself already relative, i.e. placed in relation to the subject…The object takes the place, I would say, of what the subject is—symbolically—deprived of (Lacan 1977a[1959]:15). Again in accordance with Freud, Lacan defined an individual’s relationship with these purportedly satisfying objects as ‘fantasy’, for which he constructed the algebraic formula ? a in which ? stands for ‘desire of/for’ (Lacan 1977k[1960]:313).34心理学空间&]&C3_z3}R$[~ vfz7a

心理学空间!_Yh5ES(v

从1950年晚期,拉康将这些令人著迷,可是又不充足的客体建构成概念。这些客体让神经症者感到著迷,因为他“阅读“出它们作为客体,具有让人满足的展望。在第六研讨班,拉康描述一个小客体,作为是某件并没有满足任何需要,小客体本身总是相对价值,譬如,小客体跟主体的相对地位。我不妨说,小客体具有主体被剥夺的东西的这个位置—象征方面而言。而且,为了符合弗洛伊德,拉康定义一个人跟这些据说令人满足的客体的关系,作为是”幻见“。拉康替这个”幻见“建构一个代数的公数”S<>a“,在这个公式里,a代表”欲望所在,或欲望的目标“。心理学空间8Lb9CJI:xV%Ub

$IE A6yO6w0To the extent that an individual’s partners (parents, peers, lovers, colleagues) have also integrated the Other, they will equally function according to this dynamics of desire and jouissance. Hence, neurotics not only fantasize about what they themselves desire, but also about what other people desire—in their capacity as Other—and about how to transform themselves into desirable, loveable objects for these others. Until his conceptualization of the object a during the late 1950s, Lacan contended that a child who wants to satisfy its mother will identify with the imaginary phallus (f), the object she has ostensibly lost, and vice versa that a mother who uses her child as a new source of enjoyment will approach it as an imaginary phallus (Lacan 1994[1956–57]:71). 心理学空间 lQ*Zh/_ Y2vi6N}Z

心理学空间T\6n;`*K'r

随着个人的伙伴(父母,同侪,情人,同事)也已经将大他者融合一块,他们同样地发挥功能,依照欲望与欢爽的动力结构。因此,神经症者不但幻想有关他们自己的欲望的东西,他们也幻想别人欲望的东西—由于他们具有充当大他者的能力—他们幻想如何将他们自己转化成为被欲望的,可爱的客体,对于这些别人。一直到1950年代的晚期,拉康都将这个小客体,建构观念。拉康主张,想要满足它的母亲的欲望的小孩,将会认同想像的阳具,(f),她已经明显地丧失的客体。反过来说也是一样。使用她的小孩充当享乐的来源的母亲,将会接近小孩,充当是想像的阳具。心理学空间G/_BTs_r

IrwG2w} j!y0Later on he argued that human beings can only relate to the Other’s objects of desire (the objects a), about which they fantasize and with which they try to satisfy the Other. Rather than something with which human beings identify, the objects a are a kind of exchange objects which enable them to enter relationships with others, at once attempting to satisfy themselves and their partners. Yet since the objects a are but inadequate substitutes for the lost enjoyment, neither of these ambitions to obtain satisfaction will ever be realized.心理学空间;g,`dH&ck/HYQ

j8A7KK H*AcH!e,MH1c0后来,拉康主张,人类仅能跟大他这的欲望的客体(小客体)扯上关联。他们幻想关于这些小客体,他们尝试用这些小客体满足大他者。这些小客体并不是人类认同的东西。它们是一种交换的小客体,让他们能够进入跟别人的关系。他们企图满足他们自己,也同时满足他们的伙伴。可是,因为这些小客体仅是丧失的享乐的不充足的替代品,想要获得满足的这些企图心,没有一样将会永久地实现。

(V+R)lK"{C1\-{cu_ w TJ0心理学空间+tYc(A.m P*ZMD/~

According to Lacan (1998a[1972–73]:126) the formula ‘I ask you to refuse what I offer you because that’s not it’ captured the unconscious truth of any neurotic love-relationship, because the object that is offered by the lover is inefficient for restoring the lost enjoyment of the beloved.

_ ~:i!kWj0

KR3Ray9R5u0依照拉康,这个公式“我要求你拒绝我提供给你的东西,因为那并不是我提供给你的东西),掌握到任何神经者的爱的关系的无意识的真理。因为被情人提供的这个客体,并没有能力来恢复被爱的人的丧失的享乐。心理学空间#b3qN/{!k8|

心理学空间7n G%a^5o|_.g

Once the conceptual beacons of Lacan’s theoretical itinerary during the 1950s and 1960s have been described, it is relatively easy to explain how he differentiated between hysterics and obsessional neurotics.35 Hysterical subjects take the Other—whether one of its concrete representatives, or society in general—unconsciously to task for tampering with their enjoyment. They hold the Other responsible for their current misery and swear to take revenge on the Other for all the harm that has been done to them.

r:@f ]2]0F qi0心理学空间7TW;Vek[q

一旦1950年代与1960年代,拉康的理论的脉络的观念的灯塔已经被描述出来。我们就比较容易解释,为什么他区别癔症与妄想神经症。癔症的主体无意识地谴责大他者—无论大他者是它的具体代表,或一般的社会的其中一位--因为大他者损害他们的享乐。他们要大他者替他们目前的悲惨负起责任,并且宣誓要对大他者报复,因为大他者对于他们造成的伤害。心理学空间{]#G a"\|j]c3nA"F!@

6M F:a u,c"H0{3[0It is this hysterical accusation of the Other which Freud initially mistook for a genuine account of sexual abuse during an infantile scene of seduction (Masson 1985:212). Subsequently, hysterics attempt to recuperate what they believe to be unjustly in the possession of the Other through arousing the Other’s desire, which serves as sufficient proof that the Other has been deprived of something. This hysterical strategy prompted Lacan to propose that ‘the hysteric’s desire is not the desire for an object, but the desire for a desire, an effort to maintain oneself in front of this point…where the desire of the Other is’ (Lacan 1998b [1957–58]:407).心理学空间^.S{/hXU-S4T"p

#iv sUs \Y+F9j0就是癔症的指控大他者,弗洛伊德最初将它误解成为是性的凌虐的真诚的描述,在婴孩时代受的诱拐的场景。随后,癔症者企图恢复他们相信不公正地被大他者占有的东西,通过唤醒大他者的欲望。大他者的欲望充当充分的证据:大他者被剥夺掉某件东西。这个癔症的策略激发拉康建议:癔症者的欲望并不是欲望一个客体,而是对于欲望的欲望。癔症者努力要维持他自己,在这一点的面前。大他者的欲望所在的地方。

(H \i9ay7ci&o0心理学空间5]1BaQl}6PI1^

To elicit this desire of the Other, hysterics mould themselves into a figure which they think will arouse the Other, something which grips the Other’s attention and which provokes interest, fascination, attachment or love. And in transforming themselves into an enticing object for the Other, they try to kill two birds with one stone: whilst inducing the lack of the Other, they also annihilate their own (neurotic) loss of enjoyment. For hysterics unconsciously enjoy their complicated ploys to trigger the Other’s desire by incarnating its presumed object.心理学空间&W|gL#vC

!f)[E6cO*KW(\@3ZOu0为了召唤大他者的欲望,癔症者塑造他们自己成为他们认为可以唤醒大他者的人物。吸引大他者注意的东西,并且引起興趣,著迷,情感或爱。当癔症者将他们自己转化成为对于大他者是引诱人的客体,他们尝试一举两得。一方面,他们诱拐大他者的欠缺;另一方面,他们也消灭他们自己(神经症)的享乐的丧失。因为癔症者无意识地享受他们的复杂的策略,为了触发大他者的欲望,凭借将它被认为的客体具体体现。

ldEn tS l!]+aB0心理学空间Lr)y7Q8}

As to the hysteric’s own desire, Lacan stressed on various occasions that it is fundamentally unsatisfied, to the benefit of the desire of the Other (Lacan 1998b[1957–58]:407; 1977i[1958]:261; 1977k[1960]:321).36 Hysterics give the impression of sacrificing their own interests, of postponing the fulfilment of their own desire, and of putting themselves to extreme inconvenience in favour of the Other. It goes without saying that this self-immolation is only a semblance because it is an inherent part of the hysterical strategy to manipulate the Other.

^{ p%p!{"U$J@0

Y4@!J9}E0至于癔症者自己的欲望,拉康在各个不同的场合强调:癔症者的欲望基本上是没有被满足,结果有利于大他者的欲望。癔症者给予的印象是:牺性他们自己的利益,拖延他们自己的欲望的满足,并且将他们自己置身于极端不利当中,以迁就大他者。自不待言的是,这种自我牺性1仅是一种类似物,因为它是癔症者的策略的本质的部分,为了操控大他者。 No matter what they display, hysterics do not really want to compensate the desire of the Other, but to sustain it in its very status as lack, deficit, shortcoming. Hysterical subjects are at great pains to keep the Other’s desire unsatisfied too, by preventing the Other from enjoying what they have to offer. When the enjoyment of the Other does loom up, hysterics do their utmost best to change their object-status or to disappear altogether. In 1960 Lacan wrote: ‘[D]esire is maintained [in the Other] only through the lack of satisfaction [the hysteric] produces in it by slipping away from it as object’ (Lacan 1977k[1960]:320, translation modified).

5Ig:~7f`!Z"u0

"leC9x].B+}0无论癔症者展现什么,他们并没有确实想要补偿大他者的欲望。而是想要维持大他者的欲望,作为欠缺,失落,缺点的现状。癔症者的主体费尽心力想要维持大他者的欲望也没有被满足。他们阻止大他者不能享受他们必须提供的东西。当大他者的享乐隐隐在望,癔症者尽他们的全力改变他们的客体的地位,或完全消失。在1960年,拉康写到:「欲望被维持在大他者那里,仅是凭借癔症者在它那里产生的满足的欠缺。他们从它那里溜走掉,作为客体。」

$i x X\N9R3U0

?mX$O{(\ DC0In a clinical setting the psychoanalyst can derive this hysterical economy from the way in which patients talk about their professional and/or love relationships. As a matter of fact, there is hardly anything else hysterics talk and complain about. The following example illustrates how hysteria manifests itself on the level of speech. During analysis, a woman describes her continuous efforts to make herself loveable for her environment, whilst complaining about the fact that she only attracts people who want to take advantage of her or who refuse to take her seriously. Every time she manages to secure herself of somebody’s love, she feels that her partner uses her merely as an interchangeable commodity or as an instrument designed for the satisfaction of sexual lust, which compels her to escape the relationship, physically and/or mentally.

Si:?!rO Y,X X/c0

0rz7V(a*\p'K$N;d0在临床的背景,精神分析家能够获得这个癔症者的经济活力,从病人谈谈他们的专业与(或)爱的关系的方式。事实上,癔症者谈论或抱怨的东西,几乎不是任何的其他的东西。以下的例子说明癔症者如何展示它自己,在言说的层面。在精神分析期间,一位女人描述她继续不断的努力,想要让她自己变得可爱,对于她的环境。另一方面,她抱怨关于这个事实:她仅是吸引那些想要利用她的人们,他们拒绝认真地看待她。每一次她成功地让自己获得某个人的爱,她感觉,她的伴侣使用她,仅是充当一个互相交换的货品,或是充当一个工具,被设计来满足性的欲望的工具。这个性的欲望驱使他讨避这个关系,无论是生理上或是精神上的关系。

E"T~,zJ_.c g@1C@s0

5V0Q4l%G}:w+N!_a0She scorns men for using her vagina merely as a tool for masturbating, but she cannot refrain from offering it to them because it makes her feel important. Whilst priding herself on her ability to lure every partner she wants, she bears witness to an extreme sense of loneliness and despondency.

)T}qL]|_0心理学空间#x.K%[5R4Y2sk

她轻视男人,因为他们使用她的阴户,仅是作为手淫的工具。但是她无法控制不提供阴户给男人。因为这让她感觉重要。虽然她以她诱拐她想要的每个伴侣的能力沾沾自傲,她见证到极端的孤独与沮丧的感觉。心理学空间hmA8t4[ {Vc5y~&_

"M0q9GHf#x0 And although she realizes that she is capable of triggering everybody’s desire, she basically suffers from the fact that nobody desires her as she wants to be desired, inasmuch as all the people she seduces are still interested in other women, or seem to enjoy her simply as a sex object. In other words, no matter how hard she tries in making people desire her, they never desire her enough, because they either desire other people too, or employ her simply as an object for their own satisfaction.37 Since she is constantly enmeshed in complicated intrigues, secret affairs and impossible relationships, she wonders about what it really means to be a woman for a man and for other women.38 To solve this question, she sometimes identifies with other men—assuming that they know women better than women know themselves—or draws other women into friendships that are pervaded by admiration as well as rivalry.心理学空间L]`;s7cI6m2i

心理学空间{(Y,Zo0kb*I

虽然她体会到,她能够激发每个人的欲望,她基本上遭受痛苦,对于这个事实:没有人欲望她,依照她想要被欲望的,或甚至似乎享受她,仅是当著是性的客体。换句话说,无论她如何努力尝试让人们欲望她,他们从来没有充分地欲望她。因为他们要不就是也欲望别人,要不然就是仅是将她作为满足他们自己的客体。因为她不断地纠缠于复杂的诡计,秘密的私通,与不可能的关系。她想要知道关于成为女人究竟是什么意义,对于男人与其他女人。为了解答这个问题,她有时认同其他的男人—她假设男人知道女人,更胜过女人认识女人自己。或是,她吸引其他女人跟她产生关系,瀰漫著崇拜与敌意的关系。心理学空间m1sb#`$g

j)m$BVH$^ x~3s0By contrast, obsessional neurotics refuse to accept that the intervention of the Other has in any way affected their enjoyment. Unlike hysterics they do not accuse the Other of stealing something precious from them. Instead they unconsciously strive to minimize the power which the Other exercises by neutralizing the Other’s desire.

\*@ L.Nr,]@E0

"a|d0B@*v _0对照起来,妄想症神经症者拒绝接受;大他者的介入,有任何方式影响他们的享乐。不像癔症者,他们并没有控诉大他者,从他们那里偷窃某个珍贵的东西。相反地,他们无意识地奋斗,要轻视大他者运用的这个力量。他们将大他者的欲望保持中立。

5F dB!I(D0

2Ji M+l!Am @O0To Lacan, this becomes apparent primarily on the level of language, through the protective formulae with which obsessional neurotics defend themselves against all kinds of imaginary dangers. For example, in Seminar V he stated: [O]bsession is always verbalised. Freud has no doubts about this. Even when he is faced with a latent obsessional conduct, he bears in mind that it has not revealed its structure until it has taken the shape of a verbal obsession…All obsessional formulae have to do with a well articulated destruction…心理学空间+iu5i^'a3w6G:{_:r

心理学空间)qFHot-m6vctu

对于拉康,最初这变成显而易见,在语言的层面。凭借保护的公式,妄想神经症防卫他们自己,对抗各种各样的想像危险。譬如,在第五研讨班,拉康陈述:妄想症者总是侃侃而言。弗洛伊德并没有怀疑关于这点。甚至当他面对一个潜在的妄想症的行为,弗洛伊德牢记在心:妄想症者直到它採取文词的妄想的形状,它才会显露它的结构。所有妄想症的公式都必须处理侃侃而谈的毁灭性。心理学空间R&{-E7Q6B)fg

[qz4U Q0(Lacan 1998b[1957–58]:470)39 Besides these formulae, obsessional neurotics espouse a score of other unconscious strategies to neutralize the Other’s desire. From time to time they may ensconce in vivid fantasies of oblation, meeting all of the Other’s requests following the principle ‘Your wish is my command’. By satisfying all of the Other’ s demands, they believe that the Other will have nothing to desire anymore.40

bH sf3v6j#`i0

,c/r3~$bqU V!y'j0除了这些公式,妄想症神经症者信奉许的的其他的无意识的策略,为了让大他者的欲望保持中立。有时,他们用生活的钩消的幻想安顿下来,满足所有的大他者的要求遵循这个原则:“你的愿望就是我的命令。”凭借满足大他者的所有的命令,他们相信:大他者将会不再有任何欲望的东西。

$b.W_/e Ha9[Lj0心理学空间7HN*M~R b*~tI%L[

Alternatively, they may go to all lengths to obtain the Other’s approval before embarking on a particular project, from starting a relationship to choosing a career. The rationale is that if something is done with the Other’ s explicit permission the desire of the Other can be stilled. Furthermore, obsessional neurotics may harbour sadistic fantasies of torture, destruction and mass extermination, which serve the same purpose of killing the desire of the Other. With regard to these sadistic fantasies, Lacan emphasized in Seminar V:

.S(P#p)f$z5Hn&L0

_Vn#V N'c N A&W\0替代地,他们可能尽一切力量,为了获得大他者的同意。这样,他们才从事一个特殊的计划,从开始一个关系,到选择一个事业。基本原理是,假如有某件东西是凭借大他者的明确的容许才做成,大他者的欲望就能够被平静下来。而且,妄想神经症者可能怀抱中折磨,毁灭,集体消灭的凌虐的幻想。这些幻想充当相同的目的,杀死大他者的欲望。关于这些凌虐的幻想,拉康在第五研讨班强调:

r5C)v+x`"H{vR0

N-DQ6aM/Zb p0[W]e cannot content ourselves with articulating them as manifestations of a tendency; we ought to see in them an organisation which is itself indicative [signifiante] of the relationships between the subject and the Other as such. It is of the economic role of these fantasies as they are articulated that we have to present a formula. In the obsessional subject, these fantasies are characterized by the fact that they remain on the level of fantasies. Only very exceptionally are these fantasies realized and these realizations are always disappointing for the subject. (ibid.: 411)

,r"jB6S(g#q{0

7t2C0CW`)b8@2CWk0我们无法满足我们自己,以表达他们作为是一个倾向的展示。我们应该在他们身上,看出一个组织。这个组织本身指示著主体与大他者自身的关系。我们必须呈现一个公式,关于这些幻想扮演的经济活力,当它们被表达时。在妄想症者的主体,这些幻想的特色是这个事实:它们始终是在幻想的层面。仅有非常特殊的时刻,这些幻想才会被实践。这些实践总是令人失望的,对于主体而言。心理学空间YgoLd[

心理学空间irl o:S:s K `2R_-G

Complicating the picture further, obsessionals may also try to prove to the Other that they possess nothing of value, that they are unworthy of interest, that they lack even the most basic of human qualities, or that they will misuse whatever the Other invests in them. This strategy comes down to letting other people know that they are replenished, thus cancelling out their reasons for seeking fulfilment outside their own realm of functioning. It goes without saying that none of these unconscious obsessional strategies is completely successful and that obsessionals will encounter the desire of the Other time and again.

}e[*QB&N3t0心理学空间Bf B.F?FY.Dt

妄想症者将这个画面弄得更加复杂。他们可能也尝试对大他者证明,他们并没有拥有任何有价值的东西。他们并不值得引起興趣,他们甚至欠缺最基本的人类的特质,或是他们将会误用任何大他者投注他们的东西。这个策略总结成为:让别人知的他们被重新补足,因此他们取消他们的理由,作为寻求满足的理由,在他们自己的功能的领域之外。不用说,这些无意识的妄想症的策略,没有一样是完全成功。妄想症者将会一再地遭遇大他者的欲望。

wOu[+hC9P{9c0

ec9A sS%IV?}c_0Whereas hysterics decry the fact that the Other’s desire is never enough, obsessionals describe the Other’s desire as being always too much. For example, an obsessional patient observes with anger and surprise that his wife is still interested in him, despite his numerous openly confessed extra-marital affairs and despite his carefully directed monstrosities at home. Likewise, another obsessional patient confesses that she has done everything in her power to satisfy her husband and that she has never done anything without negotiating it with him first, yet not succeeding in eradicating her own anxiety in the face of his desires.41心理学空间`"agnGO'eX

心理学空间HAW ] o3i#J oCv

虽然癔症者抨击这个事实:大他者的欲望永远不足够。妄想症者则是描述大他者的欲望,作为总是太多。譬如,一位妄想症的病人渴望而起惊奇地观察到,他的妻子依旧对他感到興趣,尽管他无数次公开坦承有婚外情事,尽管他在家里仔细导演怪诞行为。同样地,另外一位妄想症病人坦承:她曾经尽她的力量所能,来满足她的丈夫,她每次做任何事情,她总是首先跟她的丈夫商量。可是,她并没有成功地抹除她自己的焦虑,当面临他的欲望。心理学空间_L;Z @Ayd Z}7J3N!Vt

[sm:{z%z4P0Apart from the sheer multiplicity of strategies to neutralize the desire of the Other, obsessional neurotics present a labyrinthine case to the analyst because most of these strategies are outright paradoxical. To preserve their own independence, obsessional neurotics indulge in the most obsequious of behaviours. 心理学空间nJ!V(F5?@

心理学空间-?2d.@h a:[S

除了用各色各样的策略来保持大他者的欲望成为中立,妄想症者呈现一个迷宫般的情况给精神分析家。因为大部分的这些策略都是彻底矛盾。为了保持他们的独立性,妄想症的神经症者耽溺于最极尽奉承的行为。心理学空间E8s0HQ_^

心理学空间 r"VF^*m-E/R~

They can agree with everything the analyst says, simply to maintain their own ideas about what is going on in their lives. Similar to the Wolf Man during his analysis with Freud (1918b[1914]:91), obsessional patients have no problems subjecting themselves to the imposed rule of free association, but they only comply with it to satisfy the analyst and to avoid what really matters to them.

K n5e\,f3WS{k0

2CM(l n!XcF`0他们能够同意精神分析家说的一切事情,仅是为了维持他们自己的观念,关于在他们的生活里,所正在进行的东西。类似在弗洛伊德的精神分析的“狼人”,妄想症的病人毫无困难地将他们自己隶属于自由联想赋加的规则。但是他们仅是同意这个规则,为了满足精神分析家,以及为了避免对于他们确实是重要的事情。心理学空间%B9g"n6j4I0d_8U

心理学空间oD+e1NxtM |

Whereas hysterical patients are very uncompromising in their attitude towards the analytic setting—discussing the appointment schedule, breaking the rule of free association by staying quiet, complaining about the lack of attention the analyst is paying to them, in short doing everything to dissatisfy the analyst—obsessional neurotics are generally quite obliging and extraordinarily flexible in making appointments. Hysterical patients often enjoy discussing appointment times, but they hardly miss appointments once they have been made, only to remain silent during the entire session.

H"eDk-E yy { dB0

A~\QLF4],|G/C0虽然癔症的病人非常不妥协,在他们对待精神分析背景的态度。他们讨论看诊的行事曆,以沉默不语来违背自由联想的规则,抱怨关于精神分析家给予他们的关注的欠缺,总之,他们尽一切力量来让精神分析家感到不满意。妄想神经症者则是通常都相的顺从而且特别具有弹性,当他们约定看诊时间。癔症的病人经常喜欢讨论看诊的时间,但是他们很少错过看诊时间。一旦这些时间已经被确定。结果,在整个看诊时间里,保持沉默。心理学空间m%]y/gIe

]2T2X w@\xfP]*}0Conversely, obsessional patients can be extremely reluctant to disagree with a suggested appointment time; they often accept commitments that they know very well they will not meet, or that they know they will only meet in a deceitful way, for instance by acting the part of the good analysand within the analytic play.心理学空间P$~3\;J8E PQ;h

心理学空间D4CIJ"wqY3Y

相反地,妄想症的病人有时极端不愿意不同意被建议的看诊的时间,他们接受承诺,因为他们清楚知的,他们将不会会面,或是他们知的,他们用欺骗的方式会面。譬如,他们扮演乖乖的分析者的角色,在精神分析的游戏里。

"szPzO0心理学空间J};m$d`6vN+x

Since obsessional neurotics refuse to acknowledge that the Other has curtailed their enjoyment, they cannot bear the manifestations of their own desire because these expressions signal the fact that they have lost something after all. The desire of the obsessional neurotic is not unsatisfied, but impossible (Lacan 1991b[1960–61]:291).

-[8G"Krt't(R9Fw,X0

P4psX5I/t0因为妄想神经症者拒绝承认,大他者曾经切除他们的享乐。他们无法忍受他们自己的欲望的展示。因为这些表达意味著这个事实:他们毕竟已经丧失某件东西。妄想神经症者的欲望并不是没有被满足,而是不可能满足。

$m!sw)z5tlV l{9SY0

(F;m\(s,ug0Consequently, obsessional neurotics try to avoid everything they associate with the emergence of their desire. For example, one obsessional patient divulges that she only buys the books that do not interest her, because these are the only books she is capable of reading. Sometimes it happens that one of these books does rouse her interest, in which case she has to throw it away or bring it to a second-hand bookstore. Another patient meditates on the exceptional beauty of the girl he secretly covets, but he would not dream of approaching her, much less starting a relationship. During a sexual encounter with a lookalike he was impotent, which has made him think that he is doomed to have relationships with girls whom he does not really desire. As obsessional neurotics set out to kill their own desire as much as the desire of the Other, they obviously worry about what keeps them alive. Therefore the hysterical question ‘Am I a man or a woman?’ finds its obsessional counterpart in ‘Am I dead or alive?’.

:z3S)clb0

Os+qJ8_0J`0结果,妄想神经症者尝试避免一切他们联想的东西,跟他们的欲望出现联想一块的东西。譬如,有一位妄想症的病人详述:她仅是买了一些她并不感到興趣的书,因为这些书她能够阅读的仅有的书。有时,恰巧地,其中有一本书引起她的興趣。在那个情况,她必须将它丢掉,要不然就送的二手书店。另外一位病人沉思他秘密垂涎的那位女孩的特殊的美丽。但是他不愿意梦想接近她,更不用说,开始一个关系。在跟一位类似相貌的人的性的接触时,他变得性无能。这让他认为,他注的要跟那些他并确实欲望的那些女人拥有关系。当妄想神经者出发去杀死他们自己的欲望与大他者的欲望时,他们显而易见地焦虑,关于让他们保持活力的东西。因此,癔症者的问题:“我是男人?还是女人?”,找的它的妄想神经症的对应:”我死了?还是活著?“心理学空间&n K9eXq*X

^6{,^6K?*P0Whereas the hysterical question highlights the issues of sexual relationships and sexual identity, the obsessional question zooms in on the vicissitudes of existence (Lacan 1966c [1957]:451). To reassure themselves of their existence and to reduce accumulated libidinal tension, obsessional neurotics may engage in all kinds of exploits, from outbursts of senseless violence to relatively innocuous joyriding (Lacan 1998b[1957–58]:417–418). Or they may inflate their behaviours (labouring away night and day) and their personalities (playing ringleader to the crowd), to the point of holding themselves up to utter ridicule (Lacan 1991b[1960–61]:302).心理学空间'c/X+k7Qr}:t6pP:i

心理学空间:G i*D0o-_kg.D_x SX

虽然癔症者的问题强调性的关系的问题,妄想症者的问题则是强调生命存在的起伏。为了让他们的生命存在安心,为了将累积的力比多的张力减少,妄想神经症者可能从事各色各样的企图,从没有意义的暴力的发泄,到比较无害的追求享乐。或者,他们可能膨胀他们的行为,(日夜地工作),与他们的人格(在群众里扮演领导者),甚至让他们自己承受完全的嘲笑。

TI"O5g'Uxf0

U%w5a)r!\_@Ms0www.psychspace.com心理学空间网

123456789
«禅修与拉康精神分析实践 拉康学派
《拉康学派》
法国社区精神卫生部门介绍»
查看全部回复