You are on page 1of 5

Logic of Phantasy 73

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:


The Logic of Fantasy 17
幻见的逻辑
Seminar 17: Wednesday, April 19, 1967

To pose the question at the level of the unconscious is a different kettle of fish (paire de manches) that I

already turned inside out - I mean the aforesaid sleeves - which I always do very quickly leaving no

place for ambiguity, when, in my text called The Freudian Thing, written in 1956 for Freud's centenary - I

made emerge this entity which says: "Me, the truth, I speak".

从无意识的层次提出这个问题,是我已经从里面翻转的一锅不同的鱼。我指的是前述的套书,我总是很快

地就澄清所有的曖昧。在我的文本「佛洛伊德的物自体」,写於1956年,作为佛洛伊德百年纪念。我突显这

个实体,他说:「我是真理,我在说话!」

The truth speaks. Since it is the truth, it has no need to say the truth.

真理在说话。因为它是真理,它不需要说出实话。

We hear the truth. And what it is saying can only be understood by someone who knows how to

articulate what it is saying. What it is saying. What it is saying where? In the symptom, namely, in

something that is going wrong.

我们听到真理。真理所说的话,只有懂得表达它所说的内容的人,才能够了解。真理所说的内容?它在哪里

说?在病癥里说,换句话说,真理在出毛病的地方说话。

This is the relation of the unconscious, in so far as it speaks, to the truth.

1
这就是无意识跟真理的关系,当它说话的时候。

It nevertheless remains that there is a question that I opened up, last year, at my first lecture which

appeared - when I say last year, I do not mean last October/November, the October/November before -

the one that was published in the Cahiers pour la psychanalyse, under the title of Truth and science.

The question remains open in it as to why - the statement by Lenin that introduces this journal - why "the

theory will conquer because it is true"?

可是,这里仍然存在着一个我展开的问题,出现在去年我第一次的演讲。当我说去年,我不是指去年的十

月及十一月,而是前一年的十月及十一月。那篇文章被刊登在「精神分析学月刊」,题目是「真理与科学」。这

个问题始终没有解决,关於为什麽「理论将会征服一切,因为它是真实?」这是列宁介绍这个刊物的陈述。

What I said earlier about the psychoanalyst, for example, does not immediately give to this statement a

very convincing sanction.

例如,我早先说到关於精神分析学,就没有马上认为,这个陈述能令人信服。

Marx himself on this matter, as on so many others, let slip something that does not fail to be an enigma.

Like many others before him, in effect, beginning with Descartes, he proceeded, as regards the truth,

according to a singular strategy that he states somewhere in these pungent words: "The advantage of

my dialectic is that I say things (4) little by little and, since they believe that I am finished, in rushing in to

refute me, they only display their stupidity". It may appear curious that someone from whom there

proceeds this idea that "the theory will conquer because it is true", should express himself in that way.

马克思自己对於这件事情,如同许多其它事情一样,凡是会牵涉到谜团的地方,他就存而不論。事实上,

就像他的前辈一样,关於真理,他先从笛卡尔开始,再继续下去,採用一个独特的策略,他在某个地方,

语出驚人地说:「我的辩证法的好处是,我按部就班地说事情,因为他们相信,当我一说完,他们就会急

着反驳我,他们只是展现他们的愚不可及。」耐人寻味的是,某个人竟然会以那种方式表达自己,因为从他

那里,这个观念延续而来:「理論将征服一切,因为它是真实的。」

Politics of the truth and, in a word, its complement, in the idea that, in short, only what I called earlier

"the number" - namely, what is reduced to being only number, namely, what is called in the Marxist

context "class consciousness", in so far as it is the class of number - cannot be mistaken! A curious

principle, nevertheless, on which all those who have the merit of having pursued Marxist truth in faith

have never varied.

这是真理的政治学,总括一句,这是真理的补充。总之,这个观念仅是我先前所谓的「数目」。换句话说,可

2
以被化简成为仅仅是一个数目,也就是马克思主义的「阶级意识」的内涵,绝对不会错误,因为那是数目形

成的阶级。可是,这是一个很奇特的原则。依照这个原则,所有忠实於追寻马克思主义的信仰的人,永远不

会变卦。

Why should class consciousness be so sure in its orientation, I mean, when it even knows nothing or

knows very little about the theory, when class consciousness functions, to listen to the theoreticians,

even at the uneducated level, if it is reduced properly to those who belong to the level defined on this

occasion by the term of "class excluded from capitalist profits"?

为什麽阶级意识对自己的定向竟然如此笃定?我的意思是,它对於这个理论,甚至什麽都不知道,或仅是

略有所知,当阶级意识运作时,听着理論家侃侃而谈的,甚至是一些没有受过教育的民众。在这个場合,

适当地被简化成为,「被资本主义利益排除的阶级」这个术语,所概括的民众。

Perhaps the question about the force of the truth is to be sought for in this field into which we are

introduced, the metaphorical one that we can - I repeat in a metaphor - call the truth-market, if, like the

last time, you can glimpse that the main-spring of the market is jouissance-value.

或许关於真理的力量的这个问题,应该在我们被介绍的这个领域寻找,在我们所谓的「真理市場」的比喻的

领域寻找。我重述一遍,那是比喻的用法。像上一次,你们能够瞥见这个市場的主流是「欢爽价值」。

Something is in effect exchanged, which is not the truth in itself. In other words, the kink between the

one who speaks to the truth is not the same depending on the point at which he sustains his jouissance.

事实上,某件东西被交换,不过,不是真理的本身。换句话说,对着真理说话的人,跟他维持他的「欢爽」

状态时的奇思異想,並不相同。

This indeed is the whole difficulty of the position of the psychoanalyst. What does he do? What does he

enjoy (de quoi jouit-il) at the place he occupies? This is the horizon of the question that I still have only

introduced, marking it at its splitting-point, with the term of desire of the psychoanalyst.

这确实是精神分析师的立场,全部的困难所在。他做了什麽?他在他所佔据的位置,他享受到什麽?这就

是我刚刚介绍的问题的视野,使用「精神分析师的欲望」这个术语,标示出它的分裂点。

The truth, then, in this exchange which is transmitted by a word, whose horizon is given to us by analytic

experience, is not in itself the object of exchange. As can be seen in practice, the psychoanalysts who

are here bear witness to it by their practice. Naturally they are not here bear witness to it by their

practice.. Naturally they are not here for nothing, they are here for the bit of truth that may fall from this

table, even indeed what they can make of it by faking a little.

3
因此,在这种透过文字传递的交换状态的真理,它本身並不是交换的客体,虽然它的视野,精神分析的经

验让我们宏观到。如同在咨商时常看的,精神分析师透过他们的现场工作,见证到这一点。当然,他们並不

是因为要做次见证,才来工作。当然,他们从事这样的工作,也不是一无所获。他们在这里获得这项偶尔从

工作中得来的真理,他们甚至佯装他们解释的内容。

Such is the necessity they are obliged to by the fact of a status that is fettered as regards the

jouissance-value attached to their position as psychoanalysts. I had, I can say, confirmation. I will

undoubtedly have it again. I am going to take an example.

作为精神分析师,他们的地位会跟「欢爽价值」息息相关,却必须受到束缚的这个立场,是如此的无可奈何。

我可以说,我有相当的确证。毫无疑问,我以后也还会再有。让我举个例子。

(5) Someone who is not a psychoanalyst, M Deleuze to name him, presents a book by Sacher Masoch:

Presentation do Sacher Masoch. He writes on masochism undoubtedly the best text that has ever been

written! I mean the best text, compared to everything that has been written on the theme in

psychoanalysis.

(第五)有一位哲学家,名字叫德勒兹,他並不是精神分析师。他给我看马叟克写的一本书叫「马叟克现身

说法」。他所描写的受虐狂,毫无疑问,是曾经被写过的最好的文本。我指的是,在精神分析学方面,针对

这个主题所写过的文本比较起来。

Naturally he has read these texts. He is not inventing his subject. He starts first of all from Sacher

Masoch, who has all the same his little word to say when masochism is involved! I know well that his

name has been shortened a little, that nowadays one says, "maso" (laughter). But in any case it is up to

us to mark the difference between "maso" and "masochist", or even "masochian" or "masoch" just by

itself. In any case, this text, to which we will certainly return, for, literally, I can say ... (as a subject on

which I dare not remained mute, since I wrote Kant avec Sade, but in which there is literally only a

glimpse, specifically on the fact that sadism and masochism are two strictly distinct paths, even if of

course, one should always locate both of them in the structure, that every sadist is not automatically

"maso", nor every "maso" a sadist who does not know it.

当然,他曾经阅读过这些文本。他並不是憑空杜撰他的主角。首先他从萨奇、马叟克开始。就受虐狂症而已,

马叟克仍然有些话要说。我很了解,他的名字后来被人缩写,现在我们都说「马叟」是受虐狂(笑声)。但是

不管怎样,我们有责任标示「受虐」跟「受虐狂者」,或「受虐狂症」或「受虐狂」之间本身的差異。无论如何,

这个文本,我们确定会回头谈論它,实质地谈论,我确定、、、(这个话题,我不敢保持沉默,因为我写过

「康德与萨德」,但是实质上我仅是瞥见这个明确的事实:虐待狂跟受虐狂是两个截然不同的途径,虽然我

们当然会在同一个结构里,同时找到它们两者的位置。但並不是每一位虐待狂同时就是受虐狂,也並不是

4
每一位受虐狂同时都是虐待狂,只是自己不知道。)

It is not like a glove that one turns inside out. In short, it could be that M Deleuze - I will swear it all the

more from the fact that he quotes me abundantly - has profited from these texts. but is it not striking that

this text really anticipates everything that I am, now, going to have effectively to say about it, along the

path that we have opened up this year. While there is not a single one of the analytic texts which do not

have to be completely taken up again and remade in this new perspective.

这不像是我们将一个手套从里面翻转。总之,很可能德勒兹从这些文本获益良多,我敢确定这一点,因为

他大量地引述我的话。但这不是很耐人寻味的吗?这个文本确实预期到,我现在将必须确实说到的所有内

容,沿着今年我们开展的途径。我们必须以这个新的观点,对於精神分析学的文本,一一重新地徹底地从

事检验。

雄伯译

springherohsiung@gmail.com

You might also like