拉康思想研究Ethics 212
Ethics 212
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
精神分析伦理学
XVI The death drive
第16章 死亡冲动
CREATIONISM AND EVOLUTIONISM
创造主义与进化主义
WOMAN AS EX NIHILO
女人作为从空无中创造
If everything that is immanent or implicit in the chain of natural events
may be considered as subject to the so-called death drive, it is only because
there is a signifying chain. Freud's thought in this matter requires that what
is involved be articulated as a destruction drive, given that it challenges
everything that exists. But it is also a will to create from zero, a will to begin
again.
假如在自然事件的锁链里内在具有及暗含的一切，可能被主体视为是所谓的死亡冲动，那仅是因为有一个能指化的锁链。对于这件事情，弗洛依德的思想要求，所被牵涉的东西应该被表达，作为一种毁灭性的冲动，假如考虑到，它挑战到存在的一切事物。但是这也是一种从零开始创造的意志，重新开始的意志。
This dimension is introduced as soon as the historical chain is isolated, and
the history presents itself as something memorable and memorized in the
Freuthan sense, namely, something that is registered in the signifying chain
and dependent on its existence.
这个维度被介绍，当历史的锁链被孤立出来。历史呈现它自己，作为某件可记忆及被记忆的东西，在弗洛依德的意义。换句话说，某件东西被铭记在能指化的锁链，并且依靠它的存在。
That's what I am illustrating by quoting the passage from Sade. Not that
Freud's notion of the death drive is not a notion that is scientifically unjustifiable,
but it is of the same order as Sade's Pope Pius VI. As in Sade, the
notion of the death drive is a creationist sublimation, and it is linked to that
structural element which implies that, as soon as we have to deal with anything
in the world appearing in the form of the signifying chain, there is
somewhere - though certainly outside of the natural world - which is the
beyond of that chain, the ex nihilo on which it is founded and is articulated
as such.
那就是我正在说明，凭借引述萨德的这个段落。倒不是因为弗洛依对于死亡冲动的观念，并不是在科学是能够自圆其说的观念。而是它跟萨德的皮尤思六世，属于相同的秩序。如同在萨德，死亡冲动的观念是一个创造主义的昇华，它跟那个结构性因素息息相关。那个结构性因素暗示着：当我们必须处理世界上的任何东西以能指化的锁链的形式出现，有某个地方—虽然确实是在自然世界的外面—那就是那个锁链的超越的东西，这个从空无中创造。它以从空无中创造作为基础，并且依照这个样子被表达。
I am not telling you that the notion of the death wish in Freud is not
something very suspect in itself - as suspect and, I would say, almost as
ridiculous as Sade's idea. Can anything be poorer or more worthless after all than the idea that human crimes might, for good or evil, contribute in some
way to the cosmic maintenance of the rerum concordia discors?
It is even doubly suspect, since it amounts in the end to substituting a
subject for Nature - and that is how I read Beyond the Pleasure Principle.
我并没有告诉你们，在弗洛依德，死亡愿望的观念本身并不是可疑的东西，作为可疑者。我不妨说，它几乎就像萨德的观念那样的荒谬。毕竟，难道还有任何东西会比这个观念更加贫瘠及没有价值吗？这个观念是：人类的犯罪，无论是善良或是邪恶，都会以某种方式促成宇宙的维持「空气、土、火、水等四元素的平衡」。这甚至是双重的可疑，因为最后它相等于是以一个主体来替代自然。那就是我阅读「超越快乐原则」的心得。
However we construct this subject, it turns out to have as its support a subject
who knows, or Freud, in effect, since he is the one who discovered the
beyond of the pleasure principle. Nevertheless, Freud is consistent with himself
in also pointing, at the limit of our experience, to a field in which the
subject, if he exists, is incontestably a subject who doesn't know in a point
of extreme, if not absolute, ignorance. One finds there the core of Freudian
exploration.
无论我们如何建构这个主体，它结果会拥有一个知道的主体，作为它的支持。实际上，这个主体就是弗洛依德，因为他是发现超越快乐原则的这个人。可是，弗洛依德对自己是一贯的，当他也指向一个领域，在我们精神分析经验的极限。在那个领域，主体假如存在的话，他无可置疑的是一个不知道的主体，在极端无知的点，即使不是绝对的无知。我们在那里发现弗洛依德探险队核心。
I don't even say that at this point of speculation things still have a meaning.
I simply want to say that the articulation of the death drive in Freud is neither
true nor false. It is suspect; that's all I affirm. But it suffices for Freud that
it was necessary, that it leads him to an unfathomable spot that is problematic,
since it reveals the structure of the field. It points to the site that I
designate alternatively as impassable or as the site of the Thing. Freud evokes
there his sublimation concerning the death instinct insofar as that sublimation
is fundamentally creationist.
我甚至没有说，在这个沉思的这个点，事情依旧拥有意义。我仅是想要说，在弗洛依德，死亡冲动的表达既不是真实，也不是虚假。它是可疑的。那就是我所肯定的一切。但是对于弗洛依德，这样就足够了。它是必要的，它引导他到一个深不可测的问题棘手的地点，因为它显示这个领域的结构。它指向这个地点，我轮替地指明是不可通过，或是作为无意识物象的地点。弗洛依德在那里召唤他的昇华，关于死亡本能。因为那个昇华基本上是创造主义。
One also finds there the essential point of the warning whose tone and note
I have given you on more than one occasion: beware of that register of thought
known as evolutionism. Beware of it for two reasons. What I have to tell you
now may seem dogmatic, but that's more apparent than real.
我们也在那里发现，这个警告的基本的要点，我曾经在不仅一个场合，给予它的语调及注释。请小心注意，众所周知的进化主义的思想的铭记。因为两个理由，请小心注意。我现在必须告诉你们的东西，可能显得武断，但是那是比真实更加明显。
The first reason is that, however much the evolutionist movement and
Freud's thought may share in terms of contemporaneity and historical affinities,
there is a fundamental contradiction between the hypotheses of the one
and the thought of the other. I have already indicated the necessity of the
moment of creation ex nihilo as that which gives birth to the historical dimension
of the drive. In the beginning was the Word, which is to say, the signifies
第一个理由是，无论进化论的运动及弗洛依德的思想是多么类同，在当代及历史的亲密性。有一个基本的矛盾，处于前者的假设与后者的思想之间。我已经指示从空无中创造的运动的必要性，作为诞生冲动的历史的维度。在宇宙的开始是「文字」，换句话说，这些能指化的东西。
Without the signifier at the beginning, it is impossible for the drive to
be articulated as historical. And this is all it takes to introduce the dimension
of the ex nihilo into the structure of the analytical field.
假如开始时没有这个能指，冲动不可能被表达为历史的。这就是它所需要的一切，为了介绍从空无中创造的这个维度，进入精神分析领域的结构。
The second reason may seem paradoxical to you; it is nevertheless essential:
the creationist perspective is the only one that allows one to glimpse the
possibility of the radical elimination of God.
第二个理由，你们可能觉得矛盾。可是，重要的是，创造主义的观点是唯一的观点，让我们能够瞥见上帝的急速隐退的可能性。
It is paradoxically only from a creationist point of view that one can envisage
the elimination of the always recurring notion of creative intention as
supported by a person. In evolutionist thought, although God goes unnamed
throughout, he is literally omnipresent. An evolution that insists on deducing
from continuous process the ascending movement which reaches the summit
of consciousness and thought necessarily implies that that consciousness and
that thought were there at the beginning.
仅是从创造主义的观点，这是矛盾的，我们能够拟想，由个人所支持的创造性意图，作这个总是重复出现的观念的隐退。在进化论的思想，虽然上帝匿名地到处走动，他实质上是无所不在。有一个进化论坚持从连续的过程推论这个上昇的运动，它到达意识与思想的巅峰。这个进化论必然暗示着，意识及那个思想，从一开始，就在那里。
It is only from the point of view of an absolute beginning, which marks the origin of the signifying chain as a distinct order and which isolates in their own specific dimension the memorable and the remembered, that we do not find Being [Vetre] always implied in being [l'étant], the implication that is at the core of evolutionist thought.
仅是从绝对的开始的观点，它标示着能指化的锁链的起源，作为区别的秩序。在它们自己的明确的维度，这个绝对的开始孤立出这个可记忆及被记忆的东西。我们并没有发现「生命实存」总是被暗示在「生命的存在」里。这个暗示处于进化论思想的核心。
It isn't difficult to make what is called thought emerge from the evolution
of matter, when one identifies thought with consciousness. What is difficult
to make emerge from the evolution of matter is quite simply homo faber,
production and the producer.
要将所谓的思想的东西，从物质的进化里出现，并不困难。当我们将思想认同与意识。困难的事情是，要从物质的进化让它出现的东西，仅仅是「人作为创造者」，产品及制造者。
Production is an original domain, a domain of creation ex nihilo, insofar as
it introduces into the natural world the organization of the signifier. It is for
this reason that we only, in effect, find thought - and not in an idealist sense,
but thought in its actualization in the world - in the intervals introduced by
the signifier.
产品是一个原创的领域，从空无中创造的领域。因为它介绍能指的组织进入自然的世界。因为这个理由，我们实际上发现思想处于由这个能指介绍的过渡。所谓思想并不是理想主义的意义，而是它在这个世界实现的思想。
This field that I call the field of the Thing, this field onto which is projected
something beyond, something at the point of origin of the signifying chain,
this place in which doubt is cast on all that is the place of being, on the chosen
place in which sublimation occurs, of which Freud gives us the most massive
example - where do the view and notion of it emerge from?
我所谓无意识物象的领域，某件超越的东西被投射进入这个领域。某件东西处于能指化的锁链的起源点，在这个地方，对于生命实存的地方的一切东西都被哦投与怀疑，在昇华发生的被选择的地方。弗洛依的给予我们这个最巨大的例子—关于它的这个观点跟观念从何而来呢？
It is also the place of the work that man strangely enough courts; that is
why the first example I gave you was taken from courtly love. You have to
admit that to place in this beyond a creature such as woman is a truly incredible
idea.
也就是这个工作的地方，人们耐人寻味的孜孜追求。那就是为什么我给予你们的第一个例子，是从骑士之爱获得。你们必须承认，将一个诸如女人这样的动物放置在这个超越的地方，确实是一个难以相信的观念。
Rest assured that I am in no way passing a derogatory judgment on such
beings. In our cultural context, one isn't exposed to any danger by being
situated as absolute object in the beyond of the pleasure principle. Let them
go back to their own problems, which are homogeneous with our own, that
is to say, just as difficult. That's not the issue.
请大家安心，我丝毫没有要传达一个武断的判断，对于这样的人们。在我们的文化的内涵，我们无法被暴露于任何的危险，由于被定位作为绝对的客体，在快乐原则的超越那里。让它们回归到它们自己的问题，这些问题跟我们自己的问题是同质性的。换句话说，同样的困难。问题并不是在那里。
If the incredible idea of situating woman in the place of being managed to
surface, that has nothing to do with her as a woman, but as an object of
desire. And it is that which has given rise to all the paradoxes of the famous
courtly love that have caused so many headaches, because those concerned
associate it with all the demands of a form of love that obviously has nothing
to do with the historically specific sublimation in question.
假如定位女人在生命实存的位置的这个匪夷所思的观念，成功地浮上表面，那跟她作为女人没有丝毫的关系，除了就是作为欲望的客体。这就是产生所有的矛盾，对于这个著名的骑士之爱。这些矛盾曾经引起如此多的头疼，因为那些相关的人们，将它跟爱的形式的各种要求联想在一块。显而易见地，这种爱的形式，跟受到质疑的历史渊源明确的昇华，并没有丝毫关系。
The historians or poets who have attacked the problem cannot manage to
conceive how the fever, indeed the frenzy, that is so manifesdy coextensive
with a lived desire, which is not at all Platonic and is indubitably manifested
in the productions of courtly poetry, can be reconciled with the obvious fact
that the being to whom it is addressed is nothing other than being as signifier.
历史学家或诗人曾经处理这个问题，他们无法成功地构想，这个激情，的确是狂热，如此明显地跟生命的欲望共同存在。这种欲望根本就不是柏拉图图式的爱，并且无可置疑地在骑士之爱诗篇的作品里展示出来。它无法跟这个显见得事实相调和：骑士之爱诗篇诉说的生命实存，实实在在就是作为能指的生命实存。
The inhuman character of the object of courtly love is plainly visible. This
love that led some people to acts close to madness was addressed at living
beings, people with names, but who were not present in their fleshly and historical reality - there's perhaps a distinction to be made there. They were
there in any case in their being as reason, as signifier.
骑士之爱的对象的超凡特性，是显而易见。这种爱引导人们採取迹近于疯狂的行动，它的诉说的对象是活生生的人，有名字的人们，但是她们并没有存在于她们具有肉身及历史的现实界里。或许，我们应该这里做一个区别。无论如何，她们在那里，以她们的生命实存，作为理性，作为能指。
雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
http://springhero.wordpress.com
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
精神分析伦理学
XVI The death drive
第16章 死亡冲动
CREATIONISM AND EVOLUTIONISM
创造主义与进化主义
WOMAN AS EX NIHILO
女人作为从空无中创造
If everything that is immanent or implicit in the chain of natural events
may be considered as subject to the so-called death drive, it is only because
there is a signifying chain. Freud's thought in this matter requires that what
is involved be articulated as a destruction drive, given that it challenges
everything that exists. But it is also a will to create from zero, a will to begin
again.
假如在自然事件的锁链里内在具有及暗含的一切，可能被主体视为是所谓的死亡冲动，那仅是因为有一个能指化的锁链。对于这件事情，弗洛依德的思想要求，所被牵涉的东西应该被表达，作为一种毁灭性的冲动，假如考虑到，它挑战到存在的一切事物。但是这也是一种从零开始创造的意志，重新开始的意志。
This dimension is introduced as soon as the historical chain is isolated, and
the history presents itself as something memorable and memorized in the
Freuthan sense, namely, something that is registered in the signifying chain
and dependent on its existence.
这个维度被介绍，当历史的锁链被孤立出来。历史呈现它自己，作为某件可记忆及被记忆的东西，在弗洛依德的意义。换句话说，某件东西被铭记在能指化的锁链，并且依靠它的存在。
That's what I am illustrating by quoting the passage from Sade. Not that
Freud's notion of the death drive is not a notion that is scientifically unjustifiable,
but it is of the same order as Sade's Pope Pius VI. As in Sade, the
notion of the death drive is a creationist sublimation, and it is linked to that
structural element which implies that, as soon as we have to deal with anything
in the world appearing in the form of the signifying chain, there is
somewhere - though certainly outside of the natural world - which is the
beyond of that chain, the ex nihilo on which it is founded and is articulated
as such.
那就是我正在说明，凭借引述萨德的这个段落。倒不是因为弗洛依对于死亡冲动的观念，并不是在科学是能够自圆其说的观念。而是它跟萨德的皮尤思六世，属于相同的秩序。如同在萨德，死亡冲动的观念是一个创造主义的昇华，它跟那个结构性因素息息相关。那个结构性因素暗示着：当我们必须处理世界上的任何东西以能指化的锁链的形式出现，有某个地方—虽然确实是在自然世界的外面—那就是那个锁链的超越的东西，这个从空无中创造。它以从空无中创造作为基础，并且依照这个样子被表达。
I am not telling you that the notion of the death wish in Freud is not
something very suspect in itself - as suspect and, I would say, almost as
ridiculous as Sade's idea. Can anything be poorer or more worthless after all than the idea that human crimes might, for good or evil, contribute in some
way to the cosmic maintenance of the rerum concordia discors?
It is even doubly suspect, since it amounts in the end to substituting a
subject for Nature - and that is how I read Beyond the Pleasure Principle.
我并没有告诉你们，在弗洛依德，死亡愿望的观念本身并不是可疑的东西，作为可疑者。我不妨说，它几乎就像萨德的观念那样的荒谬。毕竟，难道还有任何东西会比这个观念更加贫瘠及没有价值吗？这个观念是：人类的犯罪，无论是善良或是邪恶，都会以某种方式促成宇宙的维持「空气、土、火、水等四元素的平衡」。这甚至是双重的可疑，因为最后它相等于是以一个主体来替代自然。那就是我阅读「超越快乐原则」的心得。
However we construct this subject, it turns out to have as its support a subject
who knows, or Freud, in effect, since he is the one who discovered the
beyond of the pleasure principle. Nevertheless, Freud is consistent with himself
in also pointing, at the limit of our experience, to a field in which the
subject, if he exists, is incontestably a subject who doesn't know in a point
of extreme, if not absolute, ignorance. One finds there the core of Freudian
exploration.
无论我们如何建构这个主体，它结果会拥有一个知道的主体，作为它的支持。实际上，这个主体就是弗洛依德，因为他是发现超越快乐原则的这个人。可是，弗洛依德对自己是一贯的，当他也指向一个领域，在我们精神分析经验的极限。在那个领域，主体假如存在的话，他无可置疑的是一个不知道的主体，在极端无知的点，即使不是绝对的无知。我们在那里发现弗洛依德探险队核心。
I don't even say that at this point of speculation things still have a meaning.
I simply want to say that the articulation of the death drive in Freud is neither
true nor false. It is suspect; that's all I affirm. But it suffices for Freud that
it was necessary, that it leads him to an unfathomable spot that is problematic,
since it reveals the structure of the field. It points to the site that I
designate alternatively as impassable or as the site of the Thing. Freud evokes
there his sublimation concerning the death instinct insofar as that sublimation
is fundamentally creationist.
我甚至没有说，在这个沉思的这个点，事情依旧拥有意义。我仅是想要说，在弗洛依德，死亡冲动的表达既不是真实，也不是虚假。它是可疑的。那就是我所肯定的一切。但是对于弗洛依德，这样就足够了。它是必要的，它引导他到一个深不可测的问题棘手的地点，因为它显示这个领域的结构。它指向这个地点，我轮替地指明是不可通过，或是作为无意识物象的地点。弗洛依德在那里召唤他的昇华，关于死亡本能。因为那个昇华基本上是创造主义。
One also finds there the essential point of the warning whose tone and note
I have given you on more than one occasion: beware of that register of thought
known as evolutionism. Beware of it for two reasons. What I have to tell you
now may seem dogmatic, but that's more apparent than real.
我们也在那里发现，这个警告的基本的要点，我曾经在不仅一个场合，给予它的语调及注释。请小心注意，众所周知的进化主义的思想的铭记。因为两个理由，请小心注意。我现在必须告诉你们的东西，可能显得武断，但是那是比真实更加明显。
The first reason is that, however much the evolutionist movement and
Freud's thought may share in terms of contemporaneity and historical affinities,
there is a fundamental contradiction between the hypotheses of the one
and the thought of the other. I have already indicated the necessity of the
moment of creation ex nihilo as that which gives birth to the historical dimension
of the drive. In the beginning was the Word, which is to say, the signifies
第一个理由是，无论进化论的运动及弗洛依德的思想是多么类同，在当代及历史的亲密性。有一个基本的矛盾，处于前者的假设与后者的思想之间。我已经指示从空无中创造的运动的必要性，作为诞生冲动的历史的维度。在宇宙的开始是「文字」，换句话说，这些能指化的东西。
Without the signifier at the beginning, it is impossible for the drive to
be articulated as historical. And this is all it takes to introduce the dimension
of the ex nihilo into the structure of the analytical field.
假如开始时没有这个能指，冲动不可能被表达为历史的。这就是它所需要的一切，为了介绍从空无中创造的这个维度，进入精神分析领域的结构。
The second reason may seem paradoxical to you; it is nevertheless essential:
the creationist perspective is the only one that allows one to glimpse the
possibility of the radical elimination of God.
第二个理由，你们可能觉得矛盾。可是，重要的是，创造主义的观点是唯一的观点，让我们能够瞥见上帝的急速隐退的可能性。
It is paradoxically only from a creationist point of view that one can envisage
the elimination of the always recurring notion of creative intention as
supported by a person. In evolutionist thought, although God goes unnamed
throughout, he is literally omnipresent. An evolution that insists on deducing
from continuous process the ascending movement which reaches the summit
of consciousness and thought necessarily implies that that consciousness and
that thought were there at the beginning.
仅是从创造主义的观点，这是矛盾的，我们能够拟想，由个人所支持的创造性意图，作这个总是重复出现的观念的隐退。在进化论的思想，虽然上帝匿名地到处走动，他实质上是无所不在。有一个进化论坚持从连续的过程推论这个上昇的运动，它到达意识与思想的巅峰。这个进化论必然暗示着，意识及那个思想，从一开始，就在那里。
It is only from the point of view of an absolute beginning, which marks the origin of the signifying chain as a distinct order and which isolates in their own specific dimension the memorable and the remembered, that we do not find Being [Vetre] always implied in being [l'étant], the implication that is at the core of evolutionist thought.
仅是从绝对的开始的观点，它标示着能指化的锁链的起源，作为区别的秩序。在它们自己的明确的维度，这个绝对的开始孤立出这个可记忆及被记忆的东西。我们并没有发现「生命实存」总是被暗示在「生命的存在」里。这个暗示处于进化论思想的核心。
It isn't difficult to make what is called thought emerge from the evolution
of matter, when one identifies thought with consciousness. What is difficult
to make emerge from the evolution of matter is quite simply homo faber,
production and the producer.
要将所谓的思想的东西，从物质的进化里出现，并不困难。当我们将思想认同与意识。困难的事情是，要从物质的进化让它出现的东西，仅仅是「人作为创造者」，产品及制造者。
Production is an original domain, a domain of creation ex nihilo, insofar as
it introduces into the natural world the organization of the signifier. It is for
this reason that we only, in effect, find thought - and not in an idealist sense,
but thought in its actualization in the world - in the intervals introduced by
the signifier.
产品是一个原创的领域，从空无中创造的领域。因为它介绍能指的组织进入自然的世界。因为这个理由，我们实际上发现思想处于由这个能指介绍的过渡。所谓思想并不是理想主义的意义，而是它在这个世界实现的思想。
This field that I call the field of the Thing, this field onto which is projected
something beyond, something at the point of origin of the signifying chain,
this place in which doubt is cast on all that is the place of being, on the chosen
place in which sublimation occurs, of which Freud gives us the most massive
example - where do the view and notion of it emerge from?
我所谓无意识物象的领域，某件超越的东西被投射进入这个领域。某件东西处于能指化的锁链的起源点，在这个地方，对于生命实存的地方的一切东西都被哦投与怀疑，在昇华发生的被选择的地方。弗洛依的给予我们这个最巨大的例子—关于它的这个观点跟观念从何而来呢？
It is also the place of the work that man strangely enough courts; that is
why the first example I gave you was taken from courtly love. You have to
admit that to place in this beyond a creature such as woman is a truly incredible
idea.
也就是这个工作的地方，人们耐人寻味的孜孜追求。那就是为什么我给予你们的第一个例子，是从骑士之爱获得。你们必须承认，将一个诸如女人这样的动物放置在这个超越的地方，确实是一个难以相信的观念。
Rest assured that I am in no way passing a derogatory judgment on such
beings. In our cultural context, one isn't exposed to any danger by being
situated as absolute object in the beyond of the pleasure principle. Let them
go back to their own problems, which are homogeneous with our own, that
is to say, just as difficult. That's not the issue.
请大家安心，我丝毫没有要传达一个武断的判断，对于这样的人们。在我们的文化的内涵，我们无法被暴露于任何的危险，由于被定位作为绝对的客体，在快乐原则的超越那里。让它们回归到它们自己的问题，这些问题跟我们自己的问题是同质性的。换句话说，同样的困难。问题并不是在那里。
If the incredible idea of situating woman in the place of being managed to
surface, that has nothing to do with her as a woman, but as an object of
desire. And it is that which has given rise to all the paradoxes of the famous
courtly love that have caused so many headaches, because those concerned
associate it with all the demands of a form of love that obviously has nothing
to do with the historically specific sublimation in question.
假如定位女人在生命实存的位置的这个匪夷所思的观念，成功地浮上表面，那跟她作为女人没有丝毫的关系，除了就是作为欲望的客体。这就是产生所有的矛盾，对于这个著名的骑士之爱。这些矛盾曾经引起如此多的头疼，因为那些相关的人们，将它跟爱的形式的各种要求联想在一块。显而易见地，这种爱的形式，跟受到质疑的历史渊源明确的昇华，并没有丝毫关系。
The historians or poets who have attacked the problem cannot manage to
conceive how the fever, indeed the frenzy, that is so manifesdy coextensive
with a lived desire, which is not at all Platonic and is indubitably manifested
in the productions of courtly poetry, can be reconciled with the obvious fact
that the being to whom it is addressed is nothing other than being as signifier.
历史学家或诗人曾经处理这个问题，他们无法成功地构想，这个激情，的确是狂热，如此明显地跟生命的欲望共同存在。这种欲望根本就不是柏拉图图式的爱，并且无可置疑地在骑士之爱诗篇的作品里展示出来。它无法跟这个显见得事实相调和：骑士之爱诗篇诉说的生命实存，实实在在就是作为能指的生命实存。
The inhuman character of the object of courtly love is plainly visible. This
love that led some people to acts close to madness was addressed at living
beings, people with names, but who were not present in their fleshly and historical reality - there's perhaps a distinction to be made there. They were
there in any case in their being as reason, as signifier.
骑士之爱的对象的超凡特性，是显而易见。这种爱引导人们採取迹近于疯狂的行动，它的诉说的对象是活生生的人，有名字的人们，但是她们并没有存在于她们具有肉身及历史的现实界里。或许，我们应该这里做一个区别。无论如何，她们在那里，以她们的生命实存，作为理性，作为能指。
雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
http://springhero.wordpress.com
> 我来回应