拉康思想研究Ethic 121
Ethic 121
The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
精神分析?理?
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
IX On creation ex nihilo
第九章: ??空?中?造
INTRODUCTION TO CATHARISM
?化作用的介?
THE DRIVE, AN ONTOLOGICAL NOTION
??，一种本体?的?念
The whole of ancient philosophy is articulated around that point. If Aristotelian
philosophy is so difficult for us to think, that is because it must be
thought in a style that never omits the fact that matter is eternal, and that
nothing is made from nothing. In consideration of which, it remains mired
in an image of the world that never permitted even an Aristotle - and it is
difficult to imagine in the whole history of human thought a mind of such
power - to emerge from the enclosure that the celestial surface presented to
his eyes, and not to consider the world, including the world of interhuman
relations, the world of language, as included in eternal nature, which is fundamentally
limited.
整?的古代哲?被表?，就是??那??。假如?里斯多德哲?是如此困??我?理解，那是因?它的思?方式一定???有忽略??事?：物?是永恒的。?有?西是由空?中?造。考?到??，我始?深陷于世界的意象的泥淖。??世界??不容??里斯多德???封?中出?-我?很?想像，在人?的整??史中，?有如此杰出的心?-??天空的表面，在他的眼中，是封?。??世界也??不容?他????世界是?言的世界，包括人??系的??世界，作?被包括在永恒的特性里面，?种永恒的特性基本上是有限的。
Now if you consider the vase from the point of view I first proposed, as an
object made to represent the existence of the emptiness at the center of the
real that is called the Thing, this emptiness as represented in the representation
presents itself as a nihil, as nothing. And that is why the potter, just like
you to whom I am speaking, creates the vase with his hand around this emptiness,
creates it, just like the mythical creator, ex nihilo, starting with a hole.
?在，假如你??我首先建?的???考?花盆，作?一?被制作的客体，?了代表空洞的??存在，在所?的「物象」的?在界的核心，??空洞在再?中被代表，呈?它自己作?一?「空?」。那就是?什么?位陶匠，就像我正在??到你?，他用他的手?造??花盆，????空?，?造它，就像神秘的?造者，?空?中?造，?一?空洞?始。
Everyone makes jokes about macaroni, because it is a hole with something
around it, or about canons. The fact that we laugh doesn't change the situation,
however: the fashioning of the signifier and the introduction of a gap or
a hole in the real is identical.
每?都?通心面或是?谷的笑?，因?它是一??有某件?西??它的空洞。可是，我?嘲笑它?的??事?，并?有改?情?。能指的?造及?在界的差距或空洞是雷同的。
I remember that one evening when I was dining at the home of a descendant of one of those royal bankers who welcomed Heinrich Heine to Paris just over a century ago, I astonished him by telling him - he remains astonished up to this day, and is still clearly not ready to get over it - that modern science, the kind that was born with Galileo, could only have developed out of biblical or judaic ideology, and not out of ancient philosophy or the Aristotelian tradition. The increasing power of symbolic mastery has not stopped enlarging its field of operation since Galileo, has not stopped consuming around it any reference that would limit its scope to intuited data; by allowing free rein to the play of signifiers, it has given rise to a science whose laws develop in the direction of an increasingly coherent whole, but without anything being
less motivated than what exists at any given point.
我?得，有天晚上，我正在那些皇家的?行家的后代的家里吃晚餐，一百多年前，他??迎黑瑞奇、海因到巴黎。我?他?大吃一惊地告?他-直到今天，他依?感到惊奇，并且仍然?有清楚地准?要克服??惊奇。?代科?，??伽利略?生的?种科?，本??能?圣?或?太教的意?形??展，而不是?古代哲?或?里斯多德的???展。自?伽利略以?，符?象征掌控的越?越多的力量，并?有停止?展它的?作?域，并?有停止??它消耗任何?限制它的直?的??的??。?借自由操控能指的?作。它已??生一种科?，??科?的法?朝?越?越一?性的整体?展，引?的?机??在在就是在任何特定的?存在的?西。
In other words, the vault of the heavens no longer exists, and all the celestial
bodies, which are the best reference point there, appear as if they could
just as well not be there. Their reality, as existentialism puts it, is essentially
characterized by facticity; they are fundamentally contingent.
?句??，天空的穹?不再存在，所有的天体在那?是最好的指??，?在?得好像它?很可能并不在那里。它?的??界，如同存在主?所表?的，基本上是由????表?特性：它?基本上是偶然性。
It is also worth noting that in the end what is expressed for us in the
energy / matter equivalence is that one final day we may find that the whole
texture of appearance has been rent apart, starting from the gap we have
introduced there; the whole thing might just disappear.
?是值得注意到，最后，?于我?，所被表?的?西，在??能源与物?的相等，那就是，最后一天，我?可能??，表象的整??料已?被撕裂?，?我?在那里介?的那?差距?始。整?的?西就是?消失。
The introduction of this fabricated signifier that is the vase already contains
the notion of creation ex nihilo. And the notion of the creation ex nihilo
is coextensive with the exact situation of the Thing as such. It is effectively
relative to this that through the ages, and especially those ages that are closest
to us, those that have formed us, the articulation or the balance of the moral
problem is situated.
花盆的??被建构的能指的介?，包括?空?中?造的???念。?空?中?造的???念，跟「物象」本身的确?情?共同存在。?有效地跟??相?，几?世代以?，特?是那些靠近我?的世代，那些曾?形成我?的世代，道德??的平衡被定位。
A passage in the Bible that is marked by a tone of gay optimism tells us
that when the Lord completed his famous six-day creation, at the end he
contemplated the whole and saw that it was good. You could say the same
thing of the potter when he has made his vase - it's good, it's right, it holds
together. In other words, it's always fine from the side of the work.
圣?的一?段落，?示?快?的??主?，告?我?，?上帝完成他著名的六天的?造，?束?，他沉思?全部，然后看出，情?不?。你?能??相同的事情，?于??陶匠，?他已?完成他的花盆。?不?，?好，?花盆?下?西。?句??，?工作的????，那?是?不?。
Yet everybody knows what may emerge from a vase or what can be put in
one. And it is obvious that the optimism is in no way justified by the way
things function in the human world, nor by what is born of its works. Thus
it is around the question of the benefit or the cost of a work that the crisis of
consciousness has crystallized, which in the West at least was in the balance
for centuries and which ended in the period I referred to the other day, when
I quoted a classic passage from Luther - a man who long tormented Christian
consciousness, to the point of affirming that no merit should be attributed
to any work.
可是，?所周知，?花盆可能出?的?西，或是能?被放?去的?西。?而易?地，?种??主?根本?法自?其?，在人?世界事情?作的?子。根据它的工作所?生的?西，也?法?人??。因此，??利益的????，或作品的耗?，意?的危机具体成形。在西方，至少，在几世??的平衡，它?束于我前天提到的???期。?我引用?丁、路德的一?古典的段落--他??人?久折磨基督徒的「良心」，甚至肯定：?有功?????于任何作品。
注?：
3 This is one of the occasions when the single French word "conscience" implies
both "consciousness" and "conscience."
有?，法文的「良心」具有「意?」与「良心」的???。
It is by no means a heretical position without validity; there are good grounds
for such a position. So as to orient you in the flood of sects that consciously
or unconsciously broke away over the question of evil, the simple tripartition
which emerges from the example of the vase, as we articulated it, is excellent.
In his troubled search for the source of evil, man finds himself faced with
the choice of these three because there are no others.
???不是???据的异端邪?的立?。?于??一?立?，理由很充分。?了定位你的方向，在?多教派里，它?有意?或?意?地?避，?于邪?的??。?花盆的例子，出?的??的三??隔是非常优秀的，如同我?表?它。在他的受到困扰的?求邪?的?源，人??他自己面??三?之?的????，因??有其他可??。
There is the work, and this is the position of renunciation which other
bodies of traditional wisdom than our own have adopted. Every work is of
and by itself harmful, and it engenders the consequences that it gives rise to,
that is to say, at least as many negative as positive ones. This position is
formally expressed in Taoism, for example, to the point where it is barely
tolerated for one to use a vase as a spoon - the introduction of the spoon into
the world is already the source of a whole flood of dialectical contradictions.
Then there is matter. We find ourselves here faced with those theories that
you have, I assume, heard something about, the theories of the sect called
the Cathars - a name whose origin is unknown to us.
作品，除了我?自己的智慧外，其他的??智慧的体系曾?採用捨?的立?。每?作品本?及本身都是有害的。它?生它生?的?些?果。?句??，至少，?面的?果跟正面的?果一?多。??立?正式地被表?，在老子的道德?。譬如，甚至到?它几乎?法被容忍的地步，?我?使用花盆?著?匙-?匙被介?到??世界，已?是整堆的??法矛盾的?源。因此物?存在。我???我?自己在此面?你?曾?听??的那些理?。所?的卡特里教派的那些理?-?一?名字的起源，我?一?所知。
This is something I need to develop a little.
有某件?西我需要稍微?展。
雄伯?
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
http://springhero.wordpress.com
The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
精神分析?理?
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康
IX On creation ex nihilo
第九章: ??空?中?造
INTRODUCTION TO CATHARISM
?化作用的介?
THE DRIVE, AN ONTOLOGICAL NOTION
??，一种本体?的?念
The whole of ancient philosophy is articulated around that point. If Aristotelian
philosophy is so difficult for us to think, that is because it must be
thought in a style that never omits the fact that matter is eternal, and that
nothing is made from nothing. In consideration of which, it remains mired
in an image of the world that never permitted even an Aristotle - and it is
difficult to imagine in the whole history of human thought a mind of such
power - to emerge from the enclosure that the celestial surface presented to
his eyes, and not to consider the world, including the world of interhuman
relations, the world of language, as included in eternal nature, which is fundamentally
limited.
整?的古代哲?被表?，就是??那??。假如?里斯多德哲?是如此困??我?理解，那是因?它的思?方式一定???有忽略??事?：物?是永恒的。?有?西是由空?中?造。考?到??，我始?深陷于世界的意象的泥淖。??世界??不容??里斯多德???封?中出?-我?很?想像，在人?的整??史中，?有如此杰出的心?-??天空的表面，在他的眼中，是封?。??世界也??不容?他????世界是?言的世界，包括人??系的??世界，作?被包括在永恒的特性里面，?种永恒的特性基本上是有限的。
Now if you consider the vase from the point of view I first proposed, as an
object made to represent the existence of the emptiness at the center of the
real that is called the Thing, this emptiness as represented in the representation
presents itself as a nihil, as nothing. And that is why the potter, just like
you to whom I am speaking, creates the vase with his hand around this emptiness,
creates it, just like the mythical creator, ex nihilo, starting with a hole.
?在，假如你??我首先建?的???考?花盆，作?一?被制作的客体，?了代表空洞的??存在，在所?的「物象」的?在界的核心，??空洞在再?中被代表，呈?它自己作?一?「空?」。那就是?什么?位陶匠，就像我正在??到你?，他用他的手?造??花盆，????空?，?造它，就像神秘的?造者，?空?中?造，?一?空洞?始。
Everyone makes jokes about macaroni, because it is a hole with something
around it, or about canons. The fact that we laugh doesn't change the situation,
however: the fashioning of the signifier and the introduction of a gap or
a hole in the real is identical.
每?都?通心面或是?谷的笑?，因?它是一??有某件?西??它的空洞。可是，我?嘲笑它?的??事?，并?有改?情?。能指的?造及?在界的差距或空洞是雷同的。
I remember that one evening when I was dining at the home of a descendant of one of those royal bankers who welcomed Heinrich Heine to Paris just over a century ago, I astonished him by telling him - he remains astonished up to this day, and is still clearly not ready to get over it - that modern science, the kind that was born with Galileo, could only have developed out of biblical or judaic ideology, and not out of ancient philosophy or the Aristotelian tradition. The increasing power of symbolic mastery has not stopped enlarging its field of operation since Galileo, has not stopped consuming around it any reference that would limit its scope to intuited data; by allowing free rein to the play of signifiers, it has given rise to a science whose laws develop in the direction of an increasingly coherent whole, but without anything being
less motivated than what exists at any given point.
我?得，有天晚上，我正在那些皇家的?行家的后代的家里吃晚餐，一百多年前，他??迎黑瑞奇、海因到巴黎。我?他?大吃一惊地告?他-直到今天，他依?感到惊奇，并且仍然?有清楚地准?要克服??惊奇。?代科?，??伽利略?生的?种科?，本??能?圣?或?太教的意?形??展，而不是?古代哲?或?里斯多德的???展。自?伽利略以?，符?象征掌控的越?越多的力量，并?有停止?展它的?作?域，并?有停止??它消耗任何?限制它的直?的??的??。?借自由操控能指的?作。它已??生一种科?，??科?的法?朝?越?越一?性的整体?展，引?的?机??在在就是在任何特定的?存在的?西。
In other words, the vault of the heavens no longer exists, and all the celestial
bodies, which are the best reference point there, appear as if they could
just as well not be there. Their reality, as existentialism puts it, is essentially
characterized by facticity; they are fundamentally contingent.
?句??，天空的穹?不再存在，所有的天体在那?是最好的指??，?在?得好像它?很可能并不在那里。它?的??界，如同存在主?所表?的，基本上是由????表?特性：它?基本上是偶然性。
It is also worth noting that in the end what is expressed for us in the
energy / matter equivalence is that one final day we may find that the whole
texture of appearance has been rent apart, starting from the gap we have
introduced there; the whole thing might just disappear.
?是值得注意到，最后，?于我?，所被表?的?西，在??能源与物?的相等，那就是，最后一天，我?可能??，表象的整??料已?被撕裂?，?我?在那里介?的那?差距?始。整?的?西就是?消失。
The introduction of this fabricated signifier that is the vase already contains
the notion of creation ex nihilo. And the notion of the creation ex nihilo
is coextensive with the exact situation of the Thing as such. It is effectively
relative to this that through the ages, and especially those ages that are closest
to us, those that have formed us, the articulation or the balance of the moral
problem is situated.
花盆的??被建构的能指的介?，包括?空?中?造的???念。?空?中?造的???念，跟「物象」本身的确?情?共同存在。?有效地跟??相?，几?世代以?，特?是那些靠近我?的世代，那些曾?形成我?的世代，道德??的平衡被定位。
A passage in the Bible that is marked by a tone of gay optimism tells us
that when the Lord completed his famous six-day creation, at the end he
contemplated the whole and saw that it was good. You could say the same
thing of the potter when he has made his vase - it's good, it's right, it holds
together. In other words, it's always fine from the side of the work.
圣?的一?段落，?示?快?的??主?，告?我?，?上帝完成他著名的六天的?造，?束?，他沉思?全部，然后看出，情?不?。你?能??相同的事情，?于??陶匠，?他已?完成他的花盆。?不?，?好，?花盆?下?西。?句??，?工作的????，那?是?不?。
Yet everybody knows what may emerge from a vase or what can be put in
one. And it is obvious that the optimism is in no way justified by the way
things function in the human world, nor by what is born of its works. Thus
it is around the question of the benefit or the cost of a work that the crisis of
consciousness has crystallized, which in the West at least was in the balance
for centuries and which ended in the period I referred to the other day, when
I quoted a classic passage from Luther - a man who long tormented Christian
consciousness, to the point of affirming that no merit should be attributed
to any work.
可是，?所周知，?花盆可能出?的?西，或是能?被放?去的?西。?而易?地，?种??主?根本?法自?其?，在人?世界事情?作的?子。根据它的工作所?生的?西，也?法?人??。因此，??利益的????，或作品的耗?，意?的危机具体成形。在西方，至少，在几世??的平衡，它?束于我前天提到的???期。?我引用?丁、路德的一?古典的段落--他??人?久折磨基督徒的「良心」，甚至肯定：?有功?????于任何作品。
注?：
3 This is one of the occasions when the single French word "conscience" implies
both "consciousness" and "conscience."
有?，法文的「良心」具有「意?」与「良心」的???。
It is by no means a heretical position without validity; there are good grounds
for such a position. So as to orient you in the flood of sects that consciously
or unconsciously broke away over the question of evil, the simple tripartition
which emerges from the example of the vase, as we articulated it, is excellent.
In his troubled search for the source of evil, man finds himself faced with
the choice of these three because there are no others.
???不是???据的异端邪?的立?。?于??一?立?，理由很充分。?了定位你的方向，在?多教派里，它?有意?或?意?地?避，?于邪?的??。?花盆的例子，出?的??的三??隔是非常优秀的，如同我?表?它。在他的受到困扰的?求邪?的?源，人??他自己面??三?之?的????，因??有其他可??。
There is the work, and this is the position of renunciation which other
bodies of traditional wisdom than our own have adopted. Every work is of
and by itself harmful, and it engenders the consequences that it gives rise to,
that is to say, at least as many negative as positive ones. This position is
formally expressed in Taoism, for example, to the point where it is barely
tolerated for one to use a vase as a spoon - the introduction of the spoon into
the world is already the source of a whole flood of dialectical contradictions.
Then there is matter. We find ourselves here faced with those theories that
you have, I assume, heard something about, the theories of the sect called
the Cathars - a name whose origin is unknown to us.
作品，除了我?自己的智慧外，其他的??智慧的体系曾?採用捨?的立?。每?作品本?及本身都是有害的。它?生它生?的?些?果。?句??，至少，?面的?果跟正面的?果一?多。??立?正式地被表?，在老子的道德?。譬如，甚至到?它几乎?法被容忍的地步，?我?使用花盆?著?匙-?匙被介?到??世界，已?是整堆的??法矛盾的?源。因此物?存在。我???我?自己在此面?你?曾?听??的那些理?。所?的卡特里教派的那些理?-?一?名字的起源，我?一?所知。
This is something I need to develop a little.
有某件?西我需要稍微?展。
雄伯?
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
http://springhero.wordpress.com
> 我来回应