You are on page 1of 6

拉崗講座 2

Psychoses002 Introduction to the question of the psychoses

One is led to think then that psychogenesis is to be identified wit the

reintroduction of this celebrated relation into a relationship with the
object of psychiatry. This is in fact very difficult to conceive, because
it’s literally inconceivable but, like all things that are not well
grasped, or captured in a real concept, it remains a latent
assumption, one that has been latent throughout all the changes in
the complexion of psychiatry over the last thirty years. Well, if that
is what psychogenesis is, I say—because I think that most of you are
by now capable of grasping it, after two years of teaching on the
symbolic, the imaginary and the real, and I also say it for those who
aren’t yet up to it—that the great secret of psychoanalysis is that
there is no psychogenesis. If that is what psychogenesis is, there
precisely nothing that could be further from psychoanalysis in its
whole development, its entire inspiration and its mainspring, in
everything it has contributed, everything it has been able to confirm
for us in anything we have established.

我們忍不住認為,心 因性等於是在介紹跟精神分析的著名關係。這個事實上難
它仍然是潛在的假設。過去 三十年來,在精神分析的發展過程中,它始終只是
就可以瞭解了。但我要說的: 精神分析的秘密就在於它並非心因性。假如它就是

Another way of expressing things, one that goes much further, is to

say that the psychological is, if we try to grasp it as firmly as
possible, the ethological, that is, the whole of biological individual’s
behavior in relation to his natural environment. There you have a
legitimate definition of psychology. There you have an order of real
relations, an objectifiable thing, a field with quite adequately
defined boundaries. But to constitute an object of science, one must
go a little bit further. It has to be said of human psychology what
Voltaire used to say about natural history, which was that it’s not as
natural a all that and that, frankly, nothing could be more anti-
natural. Everything that in human behavior belongs to the
psychological order is subject to such profound anomalies and
constantly presents such obvious paradoxes that the problem arises
of knowing what needs to be introduced in order for a cat to find its

另外一種說法是認 為,心理跟人類學有關,也就是生物的個人行為跟他自然環
確,可具體表現。不過要 成為科學客體,我們尚須進一步探討。可以說人類心理
還是違反自然。屬於心理層次 的人類行為每件都相當異常,不斷地呈現明顯的

If one forgets the landscape, the essential mainspring, of

psychoanalysis, one comes back—which is naturally the constant,
daily-observed tendency of psychoanalysts—to all sorts of myths
formed ages ago. How long ago remains to be defined, but they
date more or less from the end of the eighteenth century. The myth
of unity of the personality, the myth of synthesis, of superior and
inferior functions, confusion about automatism, all these types of
organization of the objective field constantly reveal cracks, tears
and rents, negation of the facts, and misrecognition of the most
immediate experience.


Make no mistake, though. I’m not going to fall into the myth of
immediate experience that forms the bais of what people call
existential psychology or even existential psychoanalysis.
Immediate experience is no better placed to arrest r captivate us
than in any other science. In no way is it the measure of the
development that we must ultimately reach. Freud’s teaching, which
in this respect is in total agreement with what takes place in the rest
of the scientific domain—however differently we have to conceive it
from our own myth—brings resources into play that are beyond
immediate experience and cannot be grasped in any tangible
fashion. In [sucjpanalysis, as in physics, it’s not the property of color
as sensed and differentiated by direct experience that holds our
attention. It’s something which is behind this, and which conditions

存在精神分析學的基礎。當下經驗跟其他科學一樣, 不見得更能吸引我們。他完
精神分析學跟物理學一樣, 吸引我們注意的,不是直接經驗所感受分辨的顏色

Freudian experience is in no way preconceptional. It’s not a pure

experience, but one that is well and truly structured by something
artificial, the analytic relation, as it’s constituted by what the subject
recounts to the doctor and by what the doctor does with it. It’s by
setting out this initial mode of operatio that everything gets worked

係所精密建構起來的經驗。這個關係就是主體向醫生述說, 醫生予於處理。由這

Throughout this reminder you must have already recognized the

tree orders that I’m forever harping on as so necessary to
understanding anything at all about analytic experience—that is, the
symbolic, the imaginary, and the real.
詳述的,那就是:象徵, 想像和真實。

You saw the symbolic appear just now when I alluded, and from two
different directions, to what is beyond all understanding, which all
understanding is inserted into, and which exercises such as
obviously disruptive influence over human and interhuman

當我提到超越瞭解的東西時, 你們看到我使用象徵, 以及其他兩個不同的引


You have also seen the imaginary indicated in the reference I made
to animal ethology, that is to the captivating or ensnaring forms that
constitute the rails upon which animal behavior is conducted
towards it natural aims. M.Pieron, who for us doesn’t have an odor
of sanctity, called one of his books Sensation, the Guide to Life. It’s
a very pretty title, but I don’t know that he applies himself to
sensation as much as he says, and the book’s contents certainly
don’t confirm this. What is correct in his approach is that the
imaginary is surely the guide to life for the whole animal domain.
While the image equally plays a capital role in our own domain, this
role is completely taken up and caught up within, remolded and
reanimated by, the symbolic order. The image is always more or less
integrated into this order, which, I remind you, is defined in man by
its property of organized structure.

當我剛才提到動物人類學時, 你們也看到我所表現出來的象徵。就是這種迷人
的形式構成鷹架, 讓動物的行為可以立足其上,導向它自然的目的。丕隆先生
有本書名是「感覺 :人生的指引」。書名取得美 但是我不知道他有沒有人如其文,
運用感覺,因為書的內容確實未能證明。但他方法可取 之處是:象徵對於整個
色要經過象徵過程重新塑造,賦於新生命,才能展現光彩。我 再次提醒,影像
What difference is there between what belongs to the imaginary or
real orders and what belongs to the symbolic order? In the
imaginary or real orders we always have more and less, a three
shold, a margin, continuity. In the symbolic order every element has
value through being opposed to another.

那麼屬於想像和真實的影像,跟屬於象徵的影像有什麼不同?前兩者, 我們總

Take an example from the domain that we are beginning to explore.


One of our psychotics tells us how foreign the world is which he

entered some time ago.

變成符號 。他不但被偵查,觀察,監視,而且人們跟他談話, 指指點點, 眨眼。
你立刻會注意到,弔詭的是 ,這些都侵入真實,無生命,非人類的領域。讓我

讓我們探討這個幻覺的直覺。車子有意義, 但病患往往說不出是什麼意義。車子


或者,我們可以考慮 他跟車子的遭遇,就像紅色胸膛的知更鳥,遇到配偶異性,
衛。僅僅是遭遇的本身就 會引起對待敵意的行為。在此紅色有想像的功用,就瞭