Discourse of the Analyst

All occurrences

Where it appears in the corpus (194)

1. #01

   Capitalism and Desire: The Psychic Cost of Free Markets · Todd McGowan · p.268

   . THE P SYC HIC C ON STIT U TION OF PR I VATE SPAC E

   Theoretical move: This endnotes passage makes several load-bearing theoretical moves: it locates the analyst's function in identification with objet a (rather than the Other), marks the objet a's theoretical advance over the object of desire in Seminar X, and frames symptom-enjoyment as a political strategy of resistance to ideological interpellation, while grounding these claims in readings of Freud, Lacan, Arendt, Marx, and Habermas on the public/private distinction.

   He came to see identification with the objet a or desire of the Other, not the Other itself, as the essence of psychoanalytic practice.

2. #02

   Reading Lacan's Écrits: From 'The Freudian Thing' to 'Remarks on Daniel Lagache' · Derek Hook, Calum Neill & Stijn Vanheule (eds.) · p.211

   [The Direction of the Treatment and the Principles of its Power](#ch05.xhtml_tocbook-part-008) > I. Who analyzes today?

   Theoretical move: Lacan's critique of post-Freudian (especially ego-psychological) psychoanalysis is mobilized to argue that authentic analytic practice requires orienting from the symbolic axis (Other, lack, desire) rather than from imaginary ego-to-ego relations, with the L-schema formalizing why the analytic situation must be understood as four-positional rather than dyadic.

   the analyst surely directs the treatment, the treatment and not the patient. This he radically differentiates from a religious form of moral guidance

3. #03

   Embracing the Void: Rethinking the Origin of the Sacred · Richard Boothby · p.60

   Rereading Lacan (or, What Is the Other?) > The Disappearing Thing > The Thing about a Psychoanalyst

   Theoretical move: The analyst embodies both the little Other (das Ding) and the big Other (subject supposed to know) at different levels of the analytic encounter; the progress of analysis moves from the patient's identification of the analyst with the symbolic big Other toward the dissolution of that Other, ultimately returning the subject to the pre-symbolic abyss of das Ding as the core of the unconscious.

   In the structure of discourse appropriate to psychoanalysis, the analyst occupies the position of the objet a.

4. #04

   An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis · Dylan Evans

   <span id="9781134780112_Part14.xhtml_ncx_43"></span><span id="9781134780112_Part14.xhtml_page_0056"></span>***D*** > <span id="9781134780112_Part14.xhtml_ncx_54"></span><span id="9781134780112_Part14.xhtml_page_0069"></span>**discourse**

   Theoretical move: The passage systematically presents Lacan's theory of the Four Discourses as four possible social bonds founded in language, each defined by rotating four algebraic symbols (S1, S2, $, a) through four structural positions, with the discourse of the master as the generative base from which the others derive—and with the discourse of the analyst positioned as the structural inverse of mastery, making psychoanalysis inherently subversive.

   The position of the agent, which is the position occupied by the analyst in the treatment, is occupied by objet petit a; this illustrates the fact that the analyst must, in the course of the treatment, become the cause of the analysand's desire.

5. #05

   An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis · Dylan Evans

   <span id="9781134780112_Part23.xhtml_ncx_113"></span><span id="9781134780112_Part23.xhtml_page_0132"></span>***M*** > <span id="9781134780112_Part23.xhtml_ncx_125"></span>**moebius Strip**

   Theoretical move: The Möbius strip, as a topological figure, is deployed by Lacan to dissolve binary oppositions (inside/outside, signifier/signified, etc.) by demonstrating that apparently discrete terms are in fact continuous, and to model the possibility of traversing the fantasy without a localizable crossing point.

   Likewise, the discourse of the master is continuous with the discourse of the analyst.

6. #06

   An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis · Dylan Evans

   <span id="9781134780112_Part22.xhtml_ncx_104"></span><span id="9781134780112_Part22.xhtml_page_0122"></span>***L*** > <span id="9781134780112_Part22.xhtml_ncx_111"></span>**love**

   Theoretical move: Love is constituted as an imaginary, narcissistic, and fundamentally deceptive phenomenon whose relationship to transference, desire, and demand reveals both its structural opposition to and its entanglement with desire — love as metaphor versus desire as metonymy — while simultaneously functioning as an illusory substitute for the absent sexual relation.

   'the only thing that we do in the analytic discourse is speak about love' (S20, 77)

7. #07

   Seminar X · Anxiety · Jacques Lacan · p.349

   **xx** > **FROM THE** *a* **TO THE NAMES-OF-THE-FATHER**

   Theoretical move: Lacan concludes Seminar X by distinguishing mourning, melancholia, and mania through the functional difference between objet a and i(a), and then pivots to announce the Names-of-the-Father as the next seminar's project, arguing that the father is not a causa sui but a subject who has integrated his desire back into the irreducible a — the only passage through which desire can be authentically realised in the field of the Other.

   The analyst certainly ought to be the one who, however little, from some angle, from some line of approach, has merged his desire back into this irreducible a sufficiently to offer the question of the concept of anxiety a real guarantee.

8. #08

   Seminar X · Anxiety · Jacques Lacan · p.162

   **x** > **PUNCTUATIONS ON DESIRE**

   Theoretical move: Lacan argues that anxiety arises not from Hegelian mutual recognition (where the Other acknowledges or misrecognizes me) but from a temporal dimension in which the Other's desire puts my very Being in question by targeting me as the cause of desire (as *objet a*) rather than as its object — a structure that also defines the operative dimension of analytic transference.

   this temporal dimension is the dimension of analysis... the analyst's desire creates in me the dimension of expectation.

9. #09

   Seminar X · Anxiety · Jacques Lacan · p.64

   BookX Anxiety > **BEYOND CASTRATION ANXIETY**

   Theoretical move: Lacan triangulates anxiety by situating it within three intersecting themes—the Other's jouissance, the Other's demand, and the analyst's desire as it operates in interpretation—thereby framing the analyst's desire as the privileged and enigmatic terminus of an inquiry into the economy of desire that will orient the subsequent sessions.

   that sort of desire that is evinced in interpretation, and of which the analyst's incidence in the treatment is the most exemplary and the most enigmatic form

10. #10

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.288

    IN YOU MORE THAN YOU > IN YOU MORE THAN YOU

    Theoretical move: Lacan defines hypnosis structurally as the confusion of the ideal signifier (identification) with the objet a, and then uses this definition to articulate the analytic operation as precisely the maintenance of the distance between these two poles — with the analyst's desire functioning to isolate the a and enable a "crossing of the plane of identification" that ultimately transforms the fundamental fantasy into the drive itself, constituting the uncharted "beyond of analysis."

    It is from this idealization that the analyst has to fail in order to be the support of the separating a, in so far as his desire allows him, in an upside-down hypnosis, to embody the hypnotized patient.

11. #11

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.289

    IN YOU MORE THAN YOU > TO CONCLUDE

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the analyst's desire—as an unknown x oriented against identification—is the operative force that enables the subject's crossing of the plane of identification, thereby returning the subject to the plane of the drive and the reality of the unconscious; he further situates the voice and the gaze as the two privileged objects (objet a) through which science's encroachment on the human field can be illuminated.

    There is only one kind of psycho-analysis, the training analysis—which means a psycho-analysis that has looped this loop to its end.

12. #12

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.269

    FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE > THE FIELD OF THE OTHER

    Theoretical move: Lacan redefines the transference not as a shadow or repetition of past love, but as the living enactment of deception in the present, grounded in the meeting of the analyst's desire and the patient's desire — thereby linking the ethics of analysis to the question of the master/slave dialectic and the desire of the Other.

    the subject, in so far as he is subjected to the desire of the analyst, desires to betray him for this subjection, by making the analyst love him

13. #13

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.270

    FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE > FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that the analyst's desire is best mapped by analogy with the slave (not the master), and pivots to ground the ego ideal in the "single stroke" (einziger Zug) as the first signifier in the field of the Other/desire, distinguishing it from narcissistic identification and showing how Freud's identification topology opens onto the Lacanian subject.

    It is in the direction of some kind of kinship that we should turn our eyes to the slave, when it is a question of mapping what the analyst's desire is.

14. #14

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.247

    OF THE SUBJECT WHO IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW, OF THE FIRST DYAD, AND OF THE GOOD > THE FIELD OF THE OTHER

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Subject Supposed to Know is the constitutive condition of transference, and that Freud occupies a uniquely legitimate—and unrepeatable—position as the one analyst who genuinely held the knowledge he was supposed to know, making his function the permanent horizon against which every analytic position is measured.

    What does an organization of psycho-analysts mean when it confers certificates of ability, if not that it indicates to whom one may apply to represent this subject who is supposed to know?

15. #15

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.291

    IN YOU MORE THAN YOU > TO CONCLUDE

    Theoretical move: This concluding passage makes two theoretical moves: (1) it positions the analyst's desire as a desire for absolute difference — the condition under which limitless love outside the law becomes possible — and (2) it provides a translator's glossary that operationally defines key Lacanian concepts (desire/need/demand, jouissance, the three orders, objet petit a, Name-of-the-Father, knowledge) as relational and context-dependent rather than static definitions.

    The analyst's desire is not a pure desire. It is a desire to obtain absolute difference, a desire which intervenes when, confronted with the primary signifier, the subject is, for the first time, in a position to subject himself to it.

16. #16

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.173

    SEXUALITY IN THE DEFILES OF THE SIGNIFIER > THE TRANSFERENCE AND THE DRIVE

    Theoretical move: Lacan reinterprets the Breuer/Anna O. episode to demonstrate that "man's desire is the desire of the Other," arguing that Freud treated Breuer as a hysteric by locating Bertha's transference in the unconscious of the Other rather than Breuer's own desire—and then pivots this to claim that what truly determines the direction of psychoanalytic theory of transference is the desire of the analyst.

    I swing this extreme term in another direction. Indeed, I show precisely the opposite side when I say that it is the desire of the analyst.

17. #17

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.173

    SEXUALITY IN THE DEFILES OF THE SIGNIFIER > THE TRANSFERENCE AND THE DRIVE

    Theoretical move: Lacan pivots the standard account of transference away from the analysand's unconscious spontaneity and toward the desire of the analyst, arguing that every analyst's theory of transference is itself a readable symptom of the analyst's own desire — a move that simultaneously re-reads the Breuer/Anna O. episode through the formula "man's desire is the desire of the Other."

    it is the desire of the analyst… Is not the contribution that each individual, Freud apart, brings to the subject of the transference something in which his desire is perfectly legible?

18. #18

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan

    SEXUALITY IN THE DEFILES OF THE SIGNIFIER > THE TRANSFERENCE AND THE DRIVE

    Theoretical move: This transitional passage uses an analogy between Freud's followers and Socrates's disciples to set up the claim that a certain naivety or innocence among those around the analyst/philosopher best illustrates the transference — pivoting toward the next theoretical topic: the function of the analyst's desire.

    I will try to articulate for you the significance of the function of the analyst's desire.

19. #19

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.175

    SEXUALITY IN THE DEFILES OF THE SIGNIFIER > QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that modern science establishes a 'relation of non-relation' with the unconscious — a structural disconnection — and that this disconnection can only be understood at the level of desire, opening the question of the desire that subtends scientific discourse itself.

    despite the essential effect of the analyst's desire, we have a right to ask the question of the desire that lies behind modern science

20. #20

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.269

    FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE > THE FIELD OF THE OTHER

    Theoretical move: Lacan redefines transference not as a shadow of past love but as an active, present-tense deception whose structure reveals the constitutive link between the analyst's desire and the analysand's desire — a link that Hegel's master/slave dialectic claims to resolve but does not.

    the subject, in so far as he is subjected to the desire of the analyst, desires to betray him for this subjection, by making the analyst love him

21. #21

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.270

    FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE > FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that the analyst's desire should be mapped in relation to the slave (not the master) in the Hegelian dialectic, and then pivots to ground the ego ideal in the "single stroke" (einziger Zug) as a signifier in the field of the Other—distinguishing it from narcissistic identification and situating it as the kernel of the ego ideal within the field of desire.

    It is in the direction of some kind of kinship that we should turn our eyes to the slave, when it is a question of mapping what the analyst's desire is.

22. #22

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.275

    FROM INTERPRETATION TO THE TRANSFERENCE > THE FIELD OF THE OTHER

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the institutional politics of psychoanalytic qualification as a symptomatic illustration of the unconscious at work within analysts themselves, arguing that the attempt to reproduce university-style hierarchies of titles and authorization inside the analytic field is a structural contradiction that reveals the gap between the analytic field and the university field.

    there is one field, that of psychoanalysis, in which, in fact—if anywhere—the subject is there only to seek his qualification for free search governed by a demand for truth

23. #23

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.288

    IN YOU MORE THAN YOU > IN YOU MORE THAN YOU

    Theoretical move: Lacan defines hypnosis structurally as the confusion of the ideal signifier (identification) with objet petit a, and then distinguishes analytic desire precisely as the operation that maintains the maximal distance between identification and a — thereby positioning the analyst as an "upside-down hypnotist" whose desire separates rather than fuses these poles, culminating in the traversal of fundamental fantasy where fantasy becomes drive.

    It is from this idealization that the analyst has to fail in order to be the support of the separating a, in so far as his desire allows him, in an upside-down hypnosis, to embody the hypnotized patient.

24. #24

    Seminar XI · The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.289

    IN YOU MORE THAN YOU > TO CONCLUDE

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the training analysis is the only genuine analysis because it requires traversing the full loop of analytic experience (durcharbeiten), and that the analyst's desire—as an unknown x oriented against identification—is what enables the crossing of identification through the separation of the subject, ultimately making the drive present at the level of the unconscious; he further situates voice and gaze as the two privileged objects (objet a) whose modern technological proliferation illuminates the contemporary relation to science.

    it would be required of him to have specifically traversed the cycle of the analytic experience in its totality. There is only one kind of psycho-analysis, the training analysis

25. #25

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.256

    **Seminar 19: Wednesday 19 May 1965** > (18) In other words let us deceive ourselves together.

    Theoretical move: The analyst's desire is theorized not as a counterforce to the patient's defensiveness but as a ruse that inhabits the patient's own defensive structure—occupying the pole of sexual reality's impossibility—so that what constitutes the analysand's original fantasy can be separated out and the objet petit a revealed as the substitute for the missing sexual relationship; this operation is articulated through the Möbius strip topology of the unexpected.

    the desire of the analyst is in its operation. To lead the patient to his original phantasy, is not to teach him anything, it is to learn from him how to act

26. #26

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.279

    **Seminar 21: Wednesday 2 June 1965**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the failure of dialogue—especially sexual dialogue between men and women—to ground the anti-dialogic structure of psychoanalysis, then pivots to frame the seminar's programme as hinging on the analyst's relationship to truth and knowledge, triangulated through Frege's logic and Plato's *Sophist*, introducing a "tertiary function" as the structural condition for any genuine transmission.

    our programme for this year led us, in short, aimed essentially at a grasp of the function of the psychoanalyst starting from what grounds his own logic

27. #27

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.271

    **Seminar 20: Wednesday 26 May 1965**

    Theoretical move: By reading Plato's *Sophist* through the lens of non-being, falsity, and the simulacrum (*fantasma*), Lacan argues that the subject is constituted as a gap (*écart*) rather than as a knowing reference—and that this gap-structure makes the analyst homologous to the Sophist, just as the Subject Supposed to Know is revealed to be a phantasy.

    the Sophist, please God he exists, is nothing less having lost his references, in the gap that is constitutive of the simulacrum, than the analyst himself. His voice being nothing more than that of Theaetetus who replaces him here: 'Yes, That is how it is. Of course. Keep talking.'

28. #28

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.195

    **Seminar 14: Wednesday 31 March 1965**

    Theoretical move: The passage stages a theoretical dispute within Lacan's seminar over the structural role of the incest barrier, the Name-of-the-Father, and castration in grounding desire, with Safouan arguing that psychoanalysis leads not toward transgression but toward recognition of the limit as such, while Leclaire contests the appeal to Lacanian orthodoxy as a guarantor of correct interpretation.

    What becomes of the desire of the analyst in the ruin of the supreme good? And if the desire of the analyst, as Mr Lacan has said, in a sure and certain way, is a desire for maximum difference, a difference between what and what?

29. #29

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.262

    **Seminar 20: Wednesday 26 May 1965**

    Theoretical move: Leclaire argues that the analyst's position is irreducible—and perhaps inconceivable—because, unlike the logician who must suture discourse by assigning zero to the concept of non-identity-to-itself in order to save Truth, the analyst refuses suture: by remaining attuned to radical (sexual) difference and the non-identical-to-itself, the analyst occupies no fixed place and listens rather than constructs, making the analytic position structurally incompatible with any discourse that closes on truth.

    the position of the analyst is irreducible, the analyst listens... In this sense, everything that Miller brings us is extremely precious.

30. #30

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.237

    **Seminar 17: Wednesday 5 May 1965**

    Theoretical move: The analyst's position is defined not as a bearer of knowledge but as a structural marker — a "boundary mark" or "joist" — of the impossibility of sustaining knowledge, aligning the analytic function with the field of the impossible rather than with mastery.

    Might not the position of the analyst be summed up effectively in this something that we might call... fetishism, that the analyst would be something like the boundary mark or the joist of a knowledge that is impossible to sustain.

31. #31

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.109

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 3 February 1965**

    Theoretical move: The child's "omnipotence" over the adult has no magical source but derives from the fact that the child *is* the objet petit a for the desiring parent; the analyst's failure to locate this function means she herself is transformed into an object by the patient, and the question of her own jouissance in enduring ten years of intolerable tension reveals that counter-transference is structurally equivalent to a transference neurosis—a neurosis of the analyst grounded in a failure of the desire of the analyst.

    The analyst escapes into transference strictly in the measure that he is not just right as regards the desire of the analyst.

32. #32

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.67

    **Seminar 5: Wednesday 13 January 1965** > (10) [Various noises] You see that we are in a police state!

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the Freudian slip (parapraxis) operates not through any diffuse or motor stumbling but through a phonematic substitution at the level of the proper name, where the Name-of-the-Father functions as the structural pivot linking desire (including the desire to kill the father and Oedipal desire) to signification — and proposes that the desire of the analyst, topologically defined in relation to identification, must be the axis of analytic treatment.

    if, as we put forward at the end of last year, it is the desire of the analyst as such which is the axis of the analysis, we ought to know how to define this desire topologically in relationship with this pass

33. #33

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.100

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 3 February 1965**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that desire, understood topologically through the Klein bottle as a cut that reveals an a-cosmic surface, exposes the fundamental inadequacy of ego-psychological and developmental object-relations approaches to transference: the analyst risks being "deceived" (not merely deceiving) by reducing the structure of the subject to a normative developmental history of needs and traumatic incidence, thereby foreclosing the properly Freudian dimension of desire and the unconscious.

    the function of this famous desire of the analyst: to be the one who knows how to cut out some figures in this a-cosmic surface

34. #34

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.195

    **Seminar 14: Wednesday 31 March 1965**

    Theoretical move: The passage stages a clinical-theoretical dispute about the relationship between the incest barrier, the Name of the Father, castration, and desire: Safouan argues against conflating the conscious/unconscious barrier with the incest barrier, insisting that the Name of the Father (not transgression) is what orients the subject toward the unconscious and grounds desire through castration, while Leclaire counters that orthodoxy itself is the danger in such argumentation.

    what becomes of the desire of the analyst in the ruin of the supreme good? And if the desire of the analyst, as Mr Lacan has said, in a sure and certain way, is a desire for maximum difference, a difference between what and what?

35. #35

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.247

    **Seminar 17: Wednesday 5 May 1965** > **Seminar 18: Wednesday 12 May 1965**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the biological figure of meiosis and polar body expulsion as a speculative metaphor for the lost object, then pivots to argue that the analyst's position is no less excluded from knowledge of sexual difference than any other subject — and that psychoanalytic knowledge must be sharply distinguished from 'oriental' (e.g. Taoist) traditions that begin from the male/female signifying opposition, since analysis belongs to the Western tradition of the subject in relation to the missing signifier.

    the mistake, the paradox there would be in thinking of the psychoanalyst as being the one who has to furnish, who has to answer for the singular signifier because it is lacking.

36. #36

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.100

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 3 February 1965**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the topology of the Klein bottle to theorise desire as a "good cut" that reveals the a-cosmic, non-orientable surface of the subject, and then pivots to critique the object-relational/developmental reduction of transference, arguing that the analyst risks being deceived when transference is interpreted merely as a reproduction of parental experience rather than as a structural positioning of the subject at the locus of the Other.

    Do we have here then the function of this famous desire of the analyst: to be the one who knows how to cut out some figures in this a-cosmic surface

37. #37

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.279

    **Seminar 21: Wednesday 2 June 1965**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the failure of sexual dialogue as the paradigm for his claim that psychoanalysis is not a dialogue, then pivots to frame the seminar's programme around the relationship between truth and knowledge—grounded in Frege's logic and Plato's *Sophist*—as the proper route to defining the analyst's position.

    our programme for this year led us... aimed essentially at a grasp of the function of the psychoanalyst starting from what grounds his own logic... to define, the position of the analyst.

38. #38

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.67

    **Seminar 5: Wednesday 13 January 1965** > (10) [Various noises] You see that we are in a police state!

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the Freudian slip (parapraxis) is not merely a motor accident but a phonematic substitution that traces desire back to the Name-of-the-Father as the structural axis of both repression and identification, and that analysis must topologically define the desire of the analyst in relation to this pass through identification.

    it is the desire of the analyst as such which is the axis of the analysis

39. #39

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.237

    **Seminar 17: Wednesday 5 May 1965**

    Theoretical move: The passage locates the analyst's position not as a bearer of knowledge but as the very marker of knowledge's impossibility — a "fetishism" that installs the analyst as the boundary-point where knowledge fails to sustain itself, thereby defining the Real as the field of the impossible.

    Might not the position of the analyst be summed up effectively in this something that we might call, not at all the fatalism of knowledge but fetishism

40. #40

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.256

    **Seminar 19: Wednesday 19 May 1965** > (18) In other words let us deceive ourselves together.

    Theoretical move: The analyst's desire operates not as the imposition of knowledge onto the analysand but as a structural ruse that separates the analysand's defensiveness—directed not against the analyst but against the reality of sexual difference—into an ever-purer form of fantasy, with the objet petit a standing in for the impossible real of the sexual relation; the unexpected (figured topologically via the Möbius strip) is proposed as the operative mode of analytic desire against the field of anxious expectation.

    the ruse of the leader of the game, if the analyst can deserve his name, can only be the following, to make there end up from, to separate out from this defensiveness, a form that is always more pure.

41. #41

    Seminar XII · Crucial Problems for Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.271

    **Seminar 20: Wednesday 26 May 1965**

    Theoretical move: By reading Plato's Sophist through the problem of non-being, falsity, and the simulacrum (fantasma), Lacan argues that the gap (écart) constitutive of the simulacrum is also constitutive of the subject, and that the Sophist—precisely as the one who lacks a sure reference and operates through this gap—figures the analyst himself, who likewise occupies a place of non-knowledge in relation to the analysand.

    the Sophist, please God he exists, is nothing less having lost his references, in the gap that is constitutive of the simulacrum, than the analyst himself. His voice being nothing more than that of Theaetetus who replaces him here: 'Yes, That is how it is. Of course. Keep talking.'

42. #42

    Seminar XIII · The Object of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.253

    **Seminar 21: Wednesday 8 June 1966**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that topology is not an optional supplement to psychoanalytic formation but its very substance — the 'stuff into which the analyst cuts' — and uses the mathematician's disclosure that mathematical discourse conceals its own referent to illuminate the structural parallel with the psychoanalyst's position, where the unconscious (Urverdrangung) prevents any direct saying of what is spoken about; jouissance, caught in the net of language/the signifier, is identified as the hidden dimension that grounds desire and that only topology can begin to approach.

    the psychoanalyst is led to have a sort of discourse which returns to this fundamental necessity … it is to metaphors about the usage of money … the difference between a certain discourse which has a forced currency, within this circle, and on the other hand the way in which it has in short to show its value on the exchange markets of outside circles.

43. #43

    Seminar XIII · The Object of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.263

    **Seminar 21: Wednesday 8 June 1966**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that topology is not an optional supplement to psychoanalytic training but its very operative 'stuff' — the medium in which the analyst cuts the subject — and uses the mathematician's structural concealment of his object as a foil to show that the analyst's non-saying differs because an irreducible unconscious (Urverdrängung) prevents knowledge, while jouissance, caught in the net of language as sexual jouissance, is the hidden ground that desire defends against, pointing toward the death drive as the only genuine philosophical question.

    There is a little syndrome that the psychiatrists found a long time ago, which is called Ganser's syndrome. This inexact speaking which characterises the discourse of the analytic community

44. #44

    Seminar XIII · The Object of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.137

    **Seminar 10: Wednesday 9 February 1966**

    Theoretical move: Lacan reads Pascal's Wager as a topological model of the fantasy structure: the infinite field of the big Other, barred and reduced to pure alternation of existence/non-existence, is what causes the Objet petit a to 'fall' as the real cause of desire—and this structural logic defines the analyst's position as the partner who 'knows he is nothing', enabling the object to fall from the opaque field of belief/dream.

    the position of the analyst is to be defined; the partner, the respondent, the one starting from whom there is inaugurated the possibility of there entering into the world a golden order … the Other knows that he is nothing

45. #45

    Seminar XIII · The Object of Psychoanalysis (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.88

    Madame le Docteur Parisot

    Theoretical move: By close reading of Dante's *Purgatorio* and *Paradiso* (via Dragonetti), Lacan stages the structural opposition between narcissistic reflection—reason folding back on itself and converting transparency into shadow—and the analytic position, figured through Virgil/Beatrice, which redirects desire toward a truth that speaks through shame rather than through self-excusing expression; the passage culminates in the paradox of God's own narcissism as the limit-point of any fantasmatic transparency of desire.

    Perhaps one could link the place that Virgil occupies to that of the analyst.

46. #46

    Seminar XIII · The Object of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.136

    **Seminar 10: Wednesday 9 February 1966**

    Theoretical move: Lacan reads Pascal's Wager through the topology of the cross-cap and the barred Other to argue that the wager's stake is precisely the Objet petit a as cause of desire: wagering on God's existence installs the big Other under the bar (marking its non-existence as condition), and this structural move—not religious faith—is what psychoanalysis must reckon with to define the analyst's position relative to the subject's fantasy.

    it is here that the position of the analyst is to be defined; the partner, the respondent, the one starting from whom there is inaugurated the possibility of there entering into the world a golden order which is not submitted to the eternal lure of the false captures of being

47. #47

    Seminar XIII · The Object of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.263

    **Seminar 21: Wednesday 8 June 1966**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that topology is not an optional supplement to psychoanalytic training but its very operative material, and uses the structural parallel between mathematical discourse (which speaks what it cannot name) and psychoanalytic discourse (which cannot name what it speaks about due to the irreducible unconscious) to re-ground the function of language, desire, and jouissance as the hidden field from which the subject withdraws its object.

    The curious thing is that it is also necessary for psychoanalysts to speak, and that the result of this is not that they speak as the mathematician does, quite simply, what he does not say he is speaking about, but that he speaks about it inexactly.

48. #48

    Seminar XIV · The Logic of Phantasy (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.107

    the smallest whole number which is not written on this board > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 1 February 1967**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the formula *cogito ergo Es* to reframe the Freudian *Es* (Id) not as a variant ego but as a function grounded in the barred Other, arguing that the real Freudian discovery is an *object* (not a thought-system) whose status is identical with structure insofar as structure is real — illustrated topologically by the Möbius strip transforming into a torus.

    which supposes that there are analysts. Namely, subjects who can sustain in themselves something which gets as close as possible to this new status of the subject, the one which the existence and the discovery of the Freudian object determines.

49. #49

    Seminar XIV · The Logic of Phantasy · Jacques Lacan · p.276

    the smallest whole number which is not written on this board > **Seminar 24: Wednesday 21 June 1967**

    Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes the function of fantasy in neurosis from its function in perversion by mapping clinical structures onto spatial metaphors (bedroom, toilet, boudoir, wardrobe, parlour, bog, analyst's office), culminating in the claim that the analyst's office is the site where the sexual act is presented as foreclosure (Verwerfung), thereby anticipating the seminar on the psychoanalytic act.

    It is what is commonly called the analyst's office. The title that I will give to my lectures next year, will be, The psychoanalytic act.

50. #50

    Seminar XIV · The Logic of Phantasy · Jacques Lacan · p.268

    the smallest whole number which is not written on this board > **Seminar 24: Wednesday 21 June 1967**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that psychoanalytic interpretation is only non-suggestive insofar as it maintains a relation to truth, and that this same truth-structure reveals desire as constitutively unsatisfied — a subproduct of demand rather than a physiological phenomenon — while distinguishing desire from jouissance (erection as auto-erotic jouissance) to clarify the asymmetry between masculine and feminine sexual positions.

    in this analytic discourse designed to capture the truth, it is the interpretative interpretation … which orients the whole discourse. And the discourse that we have ordered as free discourse has as a function making room for it.

51. #51

    Seminar XIV · The Logic of Phantasy · Jacques Lacan · p.97

    the smallest whole number which is not written on this board > **Seminar 9: Wednesday 25 January 1967**

    Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes his concept of alienation sharply from both Marxist and idealist-philosophical senses, then develops the Objet petit a as the structural support of the subject's "I am not" — the analyst occupies the position of objet a in the analytic operation, while the breast-as-object exemplifies the fundamentally non-representable, jouissance-laden character of the partial object that supplies for the lack of Selbstbewusstsein.

    in the operation of analysis - in so far as it alone allows us to go far enough in this relationship of thinking to being at the level of the I… the small o, in the path that analysis traces out, is the analyst.

52. #52

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.88

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar** 7: **Wednesday 24 January 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the tetrahedron of alienation (the "either/or," "I am not/I do not think," etc.) to articulate the structure of the psychoanalytic act, arguing that the analyst's unique advantage is knowing from experience what is involved in the Subject Supposed to Know, and that the telos of the analytic act is to reduce that subject to the function of the objet petit a.

    what it is a matter at least of putting forward, of suggesting, is how it can preside at a certain renewal of what all the same remains...the way in which it can renew the function of the enlightened act.

53. #53

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.136

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 21 February 1968** > **Seminar 11: Wednesday 28 February 1968** > **Seminar 12: Wednesday 6 March 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that his formula "the unconscious is structured like a language" is not a claim to knowledge but a structural claim: the isomorphism between a discourse on the unconscious and a discourse on language is what validates psychoanalytic discourse, with the Subject Supposed to Know standing in as a placeholder for the unknowable, and the logic of fantasy grounded in a cogito-like logical asceticism that resists any domestication as mere "new negation."

    May heaven grant that I do not in any way give to the psychoanalyst a renewed alibi to the one that he has by being in the analytic discourse.

54. #54

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.105

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar 9: Wednesday 7 February 1968**

    Theoretical move: By deploying Aristotelian syllogistic logic—specifically the middle term—Lacan argues that the Objet petit a functions as the true middle term connecting the psychoanalysand-as-subject to the psychoanalyst-as-predicate, such that the psychoanalyst is defined not as a pre-given identity but as a production of the psychoanalysing task, sustained by the analyst's identification with the o-object in itself.

    The psychoanalyst is defined at this level of production... The one who is capable of maintaining himself at this level, namely, of only seeing the point at which the subject is at this task

55. #55

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.178

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 21 February 1968** > **Seminar 13: Wednesday 13 March 1968** > **Seminar 15: Wednesday 27 March 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the analyst's proper function is not mastery of knowledge about sexuality but rather occupancy of the place of the objet petit a—the structural void that conditions desire—and that the analyst's inability to sustain this position drives the institutional fiction of "private life," which insulates analytic hierarchy from the truth of the analyst's own structural impotence.

    he is teaching what? What is necessary for the taught who are already that, namely, to teach them, about the subjects in question, what they already know… every reference is the same to him; he will teach everything, anything whatsoever, except psychoanalysis

56. #56

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act (alt. translation) · Jacques Lacan · p.94

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar** 7: **Wednesday 24 January 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes the act from the doing in order to locate the analyst's position as a specific structural function: psychoanalytic practice, as a doing of pure speech, approaches the act through the 'signifier in act', and the analyst must occupy this corner of the barred subject supposed to know precisely by absenting himself from the doing—a structural self-effacement that risks collapsing into a 'hypochondriacal jouissance' if theorised away as mere equidistance from all schools.

    I cannot summon psychoanalysts too much to meditate on the specialness of the position which happens to be theirs, of having to occupy a corner completely different to the one where they are required, even if they are forbidden to act.

57. #57

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act · Jacques Lacan · p.178

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 21 February 1968** > **Seminar 13: Wednesday 13 March 1968** > **Seminar 15: Wednesday 27 March 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the analyst's proper function is not to be a subject of knowledge but to occupy the structural place of the objet petit a — the third term that conditions desire and determines what is at stake in the sexual act — and that the analyst's failure to sustain this position drives him to substitute fictional knowledge, institutional hierarchy, and the fiction of "private life" for genuine analytic discourse.

    the consistency of discourse. It is precisely because the analyst is not able, up to the present, to sustain to any degree a discourse about his position, that he creates for himself all kinds of other ones.

58. #58

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act · Jacques Lacan · p.103

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar 9: Wednesday 7 February 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses Aristotelian syllogistic logic—specifically the middle term—to argue that the Objet petit a functions as the logical middle term connecting the psychoanalysand (as vanishing subject) to the psychoanalyst (as product/predicate), while also theorizing that the analyst's position is constituted by an 'in itself' identification with the o-object, distinguished from narcissistic human relations by the exclusion of the 'I like you' (tu me plais).

    the psychoanalyst should already be the representation of what masks, obtrudes, stoppers this truth and which is called the o-object.

59. #59

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act · Jacques Lacan · p.181

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 21 February 1968** > **Seminar 13: Wednesday 13 March 1968** > **8 and 15 May 1968:** Notes

    Theoretical move: Lacan intervenes in the May 1968 context to argue that what is at stake in the student insurrection is not mere disorder but a structural phenomenon in which the relations between desire and knowledge are put in question — a terrain that psychoanalysts are uniquely positioned to address but consistently fail to occupy.

    He insists on the fact that his discourse is addressed uniquely to psychoanalysts, and to them alone… the responsibility of psychoanalysts.

60. #60

    Seminar XV · The Psychoanalytic Act · Jacques Lacan · p.94

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN** > **Seminar** 7: **Wednesday 24 January 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the gap between 'the act' and 'the doing' is the central problem of psychoanalytic practice, distinguishing the analyst's peculiar position—a doing of pure speech in which the subject absents itself so the signifier may operate—from mere activity, and linking this to the question of the Subject Supposed to Know, the logic of quantifiers, and the impossibility of meta-language.

    I cannot summon psychoanalysts too much to meditate on the specialness of the position which happens to be theirs, of having to occupy a corner completely different to the one where they are required

61. #61

    Seminar XVI · From an Other to the other · Jacques Lacan · p.193

    Seminar 12: Wednesday 26 February 1969

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses Freud's dream of the burning child as a pivot to argue that the proper analytic question is not "what does the dream mean?" but "where is the flaw (desire) in what is said?"—and then formalizes the relationship between Knowledge and Truth via the golden-ratio proportion (o/1-o = 1/o), establishing the objet petit a as the structural hinge that articulates desire, knowledge, and truth in the unconscious.

    The fact is that a discourse, at least the analytic one, the work of truth is more obvious because it is painful.

62. #62

    Seminar XVI · From an Other to the other · Jacques Lacan · p.11

    **Seminar 1: Wednesday 13 November 1968**

    Theoretical move: Lacan establishes the structural homology between Marx's surplus value and his own concept of surplus-jouissance (plus de jouir), arguing that the o-object (objet petit a) is produced as a remainder/loss at the very point where the subject is constituted by the inter-signifier relation — a loss strictly correlative to the renunciation of enjoyment under the effect of discourse.

    What are we doing in analysis, if not establishing, by the rule, a discourse of such a kind that the subject suspends what on it? Precisely his function as subject.

63. #63

    Seminar XVI · From an Other to the other · Jacques Lacan · p.152

    Seminar 10: Wednesday 5 February 1969

    Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes psychoanalytic discourse from philosophical discourse by insisting that the subject is primordially constituted as an effect of language (as 'o', the bet/zero), and uses a critical reading of Bergler's account of the superego to argue that Durcharbeitung (working-through) and the superego must be rethought together—not as a theatrical agency hitting the ego but as structurally related to identification, the ego ideal, and the limit-encounter in treatment.

    whoever in the future...wants to occupy a place that contributes in any way to this place of formation...would do well to be a psychoanalyst, if this is how there must be defined someone for whom there exists this question of the dependence of the subject with respect to the discourse that holds him

64. #64

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.46

    *[A porter appears]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the Discourse of the Hysteric underlies both philosophical discourse (Hegel as "the most sublime of hysterics") and analytic experience, and that the structure of psychoanalytic interpretation operates through a logic of the "half-said" — figured as either a riddle (stating without statement) or a quotation (statement invoking authorial authority) — with the analyst functioning as Objet petit a and cause of desire rather than Subject Supposed to Know.

    This moreover is the idea that certain people may have - they construct the electronic machine thanks to which the analyst has only to take a ticket to give them the answer. This is what is at stake in the discourse of the Analyst.

65. #65

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.15

    **THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN BOOK XVII** > **Seminar 1: Wednesday 26 November 1969**

    Theoretical move: Lacan introduces the four discourses as a structural apparatus, anchoring the Discourse of the Master in the S1→S2 relation and grounding this structure in the Freudian articulation of the signifier, jouissance, and surplus-jouissance, while aligning the slave's knowledge (S2) with the philosophical operation of extracting know-how from the slave as the inaugural move of philosophy itself.

    One is the discourse of the analyst.

66. #66

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.44

    *[A porter appears]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the transition from the ancient Master's discourse to modern capitalism/bureaucracy involves a displacement of knowledge (S2) into the dominant position, producing a new tyranny that occludes truth; and that psychoanalytic experience operates by introducing the Hysteric's discourse as a structural condition ("hystericisation") that exposes the non-self-knowing character of unconscious knowledge and the impossibility of sexual rapport.

    there is the discourse of the analyst, and this should not be confused with the discourse of the psychoanalysand, with the discourse effectively sustained in the analytic experience.

67. #67

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.128

    Seminar 8: Wednesday 11 March 1970

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Discourse of the Analyst is structurally derived from—and is the inversion of—the Discourse of the Master: where the Master's discourse masks the divided subject at the place of truth, the analyst's discourse installs the objet petit a in the commanding place, thereby liberating the Splitting of the Subject and the half-said truth it conceals. This structural comparison also diagnoses the Discourse of the University as science's imperative ("Keep on knowing"), driven by the Master Signifier concealed at the place of truth.

    it is the o-object itself that takes the place of the commandment. It is as identical to the o-object, namely, what presents itself to the subject as the cause of desire, that the psychoanalyst offers himself as a target

68. #68

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.249

    **ANALYTICON**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that revolution reproduces the discourse of the Master (as Freud's mass psychology demonstrates), and that genuine transformation requires clinging to the impossible-real rather than producing culture or chasing truth; the analytic discourse uniquely enables a "change of phase" in the circuit of the Master Signifier, albeit not its abolition.

    if you modify here my little schema in order to substitute that of analytic discourse, what you will see when the o for its part, has gone to the position on the top left, is what? It is something that is going to be produced on the bottom right It is the Si that you will rediscover there, namely, a new Master signifier.

69. #69

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.187

    Seminar 11: Wednesday 15 April 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses a dialogue with biblical scholar Caquot about Sellin's Moses to argue that Freud's Oedipus complex is a 'dream' requiring interpretation—a displacement-effect that short-circuits the real father's function (castration) by substituting the imaginary father's prohibition of enjoyment, while positioning the analyst's neutrality against the passionate 'fierce ignorance' of Yahweh as the paradoxical figure of the discourse of the Master.

    the analyst's position is indicated by the o-object on the top left — and it is the only sense that can be given to analytic neutrality

70. #70

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.251

    **ANALYTICON** > Seminar 14: Wednesday 10 June 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan draws a structural homology between Freud's three 'impossible professions' (governing, educating, analysing) and his own Four Discourses, arguing that the shift from the Discourse of the Master to its capitalist-University variant constitutes the key theoretical lens for understanding contemporary student unrest, while warning that "speaking out" can function as "dead meat" — mere signifier without discourse — unless grounded in proper discursive analysis.

    some part of what I am spelling out about the relationship between the Analyst's discourse and the Master's discourse could show the way in which it would be possible in some way to justify, to understand, what is happening

71. #71

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.119

    *[A porter appears]* > Seminar 7: Wednesday 18 February 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the Dora case to argue that Freud's substitution of the Oedipus complex for the truths offered by hysterical experience was a defensive idealization that masked the fundamental truth — audible in the hysteric's discourse — that the father/master is castrated from the start; this leads to a critique of the Oedipus myth as an unworkable, quasi-religious fiction that displaces the proper analytic relation between knowledge and truth.

    the discourse of the analyst at the site of what I earlier called that of the truth

72. #72

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.131

    Seminar 8: Wednesday 11 March 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that surplus-jouissance (plus-de-jouir) is the structural analogue of Marxian surplus value within the Discourse of the Master, and that the Discourse of the Analyst uniquely situates knowledge in the place of truth — a position occupied by myth and governed by the law of half-saying — thereby reframing the Oedipus complex as myth rather than clinical universal.

    taking things up again at the level of the Analyst's discourse, you should note that it is knowledge, namely, the whole articulation of the existing S2, everything that one can know, which is, in my way of writing - put in the place of truth.

73. #73

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.103

    *[A porter appears]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the Discourse of the Master structurally generates surplus-jouissance as the extracted 'tithe' from the slave's knowledge, and that Marx's critique of surplus value is the memorial of this prior extraction of enjoyment — a process whose secret lies in knowledge itself, not in labour, thereby subverting Hegel's claim that labour culminates in Absolute Knowledge.

    It is here, in a way, that the function of the analyst offers something like a dawn... It is certainly not to refashion this element into an element of mastery.

74. #74

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.69

    *[A porter appears]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that enjoyment (jouissance) is constitutively grounded in loss/entropy, and that this structural gap—formalized as surplus-jouissance (Mehrlust)—is what drives knowledge as a means of enjoyment, necessitating the Four Discourses as its articulation; simultaneously, truth is identified not with full-saying but with half-saying, its essence being the concealed fact of castration/impotence, which redefines the analyst's position and the analytic act.

    It is to the analyst and to him alone that there is addressed this formula... Wo Es war soll Ich werden. If the analyst is able to occupy this place on the top left that determines his discourse, it is because he is absolutely not there for himself.

75. #75

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.30

    **ANALYTICON** > **X:** You mean a relative deafness.

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses the Vincennes "Analyticon" confrontation to demonstrate in vivo how the Four Discourses operate: the University discourse produces students as surplus-value/Objet petit a, the Hysteric's discourse enabled the Marxian discovery of historical symptoms, and the gap/incompleteness structurally irreducible to each discourse refutes any totality ("nothing is all").

    The psychoanalyst initially only had to listen to what the hysteric was saying. What the hysteric says is pure gold...

76. #76

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.147

    Seminar 9: Wednesday 18 March 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan reinterprets the Freudian myth of the dead father (Totem and Taboo, Oedipus) to argue that the murder/death of the father does not liberate but rather founds the prohibition on jouissance; the structural operator is the equivalence between the dead father and jouissance, and it is castration—transmitted from father to son—rather than death per se that is the true key to the master's position and to succession.

    although it emerges, is experienced, in the very position of the analyst in the subjective process of the function of castration, is there not something here that nevertheless hides it, veils it

77. #77

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.87

    *[A porter appears]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that language uses subjects rather than being used by them — enjoyment is the motor of discourse — and that truth stands in a sisterly relation to forbidden enjoyment, a relation legible only from within the discourse of the Hysteric. He frames this against Sade's theoretical masochism (the second death), Freud's discourse on the unconscious as self-speaking knowledge, and a sustained critique of Ego Psychology as a regression to the discourse of the Master.

    the one that I am trying to bring as close as possible to the discourse of the Analyst it ought to find itself at the very opposite of any will for mastery

78. #78

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.20

    **ANALYTICON**

    Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes the four discourses (Master, Hysteric, University, Analyst) and argues that psychoanalytic knowledge cannot be transmitted like ordinary university knowledge, because the being of the psychoanalyst—what is produced when a psychoanalysand commits to becoming an analyst—is the real question, a point left open in his seminar on the psychoanalytic act.

    it is with this that the discourse of the psychoanalyst takes shape (se dessine). Except that there would have to be some psychoanalysts.

79. #79

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.56

    *[A porter appears]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan introduces and distinguishes the Four Discourses (Master, Hysteric, Analyst, University) by identifying the structural "dominant" place each discourse organizes around — locating the objet petit a as what occupies the dominant place in the Discourse of the Analyst — while simultaneously critiquing how University discourse systematically reverses his formula ("language is the condition of the unconscious") and thus distorts analytic discourse.

    I say that it is substantially constituted by the o-object, by the o-object in so far as here, in the articulation of what I give as regards the structure of a discourse... it is substantially that of the o-object in as much as this o-object precisely designates what, in the effects of discourse, presents itself as the most opaque

80. #80

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.265

    **ANALYTICON** > Seminar 14: Wednesday 10 June 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the impossibility structuring each of the Four Discourses is grounded in the problem of surplus-jouissance: ancient thought (Aristotle, Stoics) could not account for it, Hegel re-staged it, Marx made it calculable as surplus-value thereby stabilising the Master Signifier, while the University discourse symptomatically produces the student as objet petit a — miscarriage of the cause of desire. The key to any revolutionary step lies not in the subject but in questioning what enjoyment is, a question made possible only by the entry of the signifier and its mark of death.

    nobody has made the remark - it is rather curious that what it produces is nothing other than the Master's discourse, since it is Si that comes to occupy the place of production.

81. #81

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.222

    X: *[On revolutionaries and the proletariat]* > Seminar 13: Wednesday 20 May 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that psychoanalytic discourse reveals a single foundational affect—the subject's capture as object in discourse—and that this, rather than dialectical ontology, is the proper frame for rereading the Cartesian cogito, the Master Signifier, castration, and the impossibility of the sexual relation, all grounded in the unary trait as language's inaugural effect.

    This is where the analyst posits himself. He posits himself as cause of desire. An outstandingly original or even paradoxical position that is ratified by a practice.

82. #82

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.214

    X: *[Inaudible]*

    Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes analytic discourse from philosophical discourse by grounding it exclusively in psychoanalytic experience, and argues that the structural feature of analytic discourse — its perpetual displacement from meaning — is the very condition that makes it the obverse complement to scientific discourse, which systematically excludes anxiety.

    That is precisely why my discourse is an analytic discourse. The structure of analytic discourse is to be like that.

83. #83

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.158

    Seminar 9: Wednesday 18 March 1970

    Theoretical move: Castration is redefined as the real operation produced by the impact of the signifier on the sexual relationship — not a fantasy — and this reframing allows Lacan to articulate how jouissance separates the master-signifier from knowledge-as-truth, completing the structural account of the Discourse of the Analyst and grounding the hysteric's desire as the historical source of Freud's master-signifiers.

    If we take the schema of the discourse of the analyst, the obstacle put up by enjoyment is found where I drew the triangle, namely, between what can be produced, in whatever form, as master-signifier, and the field that knowledge has at its disposition in so far as it posits itself as truth.

84. #84

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.104

    *[A porter appears]* > Seminar 7: Wednesday 18 February 1970

    Theoretical move: The Discourse of the Master is identified as the structural inverse of the Analytic Discourse (symmetry with respect to a point, not a line or plane), and the Master Signifier is shown to determine castration by transmitting itself toward the means of enjoyment (knowledge); this move simultaneously distinguishes the unconscious as a disjointed, mythical knowledge irreducible to scientific discourse.

    the discourse of the Master has only a single counterpoint, the Analytic discourse… its symmetry… is not with respect to a line, nor with respect to a plane, but with respect to a point.

85. #85

    Seminar XVII · The Other Side of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.235

    X: *[On revolutionaries and the proletariat]* > Seminar 13: Wednesday 20 May 1970

    Theoretical move: Lacan introduces the neologism *lathouse* (from the Greek root of *aletheia*, its aorist form gesturing toward concealment rather than disclosure) to name the objects of consumer-technological civilization that cause desire — distinguishing these from the *alethosphere* — and then pivots to define the analyst's position as a *lathouse*: the one who must inhabit the impossible (not merely the impotent) relation to truth, where the Real is precisely what is impossible in any formalised field.

    The ideal psychoanalyst would be the one who commits this absolutely radical act, of which the least that can be said is that to see it being done is anxiety provoking.

86. #86

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.174

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 May 1971** > - We can't hear you!

    Theoretical move: Lacan drives a wedge between the Oedipus myth (dictated by the hysteric's dissatisfaction, privileging law over enjoyment) and *Totem and Taboo* (an obsessional-neurotic construction that places enjoyment at the origin, then law), arguing that the psychoanalytic discourse must move beyond mythic interpretation toward a more rigorous combinatorial of desire's causation.

    The psychoanalytic discourse is established by this restoration of her truth to the hysteric... in revealing to us here his contribution to the analytic discourse, he proceeds no less from neurosis than from what he picked up from the hysteric.

87. #87

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.136

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 May 1971**

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that writing is equivalent to jouissance within the discourse of the analyst, and that the non-inscribability of the sexual relationship is the fundamental failure at the heart of language—a failure that the letter (as in Poe's purloined letter) stages by feminising those under its shadow and by making truth structurally dependent on fiction.

    the functions are only determined starting from a certain discourse. So then, at this level of functions determined by a certain discourse, I can establish the equivalence that writing is enjoyment

88. #88

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.61

    **Seminar 4: Wednesday 17 February 1971**

    Theoretical move: Writing is theorized as the necessary condition for logic and for questioning the symbolic order, while the Phallus is recast not as a missing signifier but as an obstacle to the sexual relationship—what establishes jouissance as the condition of truth in analytic discourse.

    The discourse of the Analyst, I have to tell you, because in short you have not heard it, the discourse of the Analyst is nothing other than the logic of action.

89. #89

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.187

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 May 1971** > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 16 June 1971**

    Theoretical move: Lacan advances the argument that all language functions through metaphor and metonymy with the phallus as the sole Bedeutung (denotation) that language gestures toward but never reaches, and uses Frege's Sinn/Bedeutung distinction to reframe the paternal metaphor: the Name of the Father is efficacious not as a signifier producing sense alone, but as a name that summons someone to speak — revealing the Father as ultimately a numeral (a position in a series) rather than a presence, and castration as the reduction to number.

    if I write the analytic discourse for you as 0/S2, namely, the analyst over the knowledge he has from the neurotic, who questions the subject to produce something

90. #90

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.165

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 May 1971** > - We can't hear you!

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that the hysteric's desire—structurally unsatisfied because it emphasises the invariance of the unknown—functions as a formal schema for the logic of the Not-all (pas-toute), such that 'a woman' can only emerge by sliding beyond the hysteric's phallic semblance; simultaneously, Lacan grounds the unconscious-structured-like-a-language thesis in the irreducible division between jouissance and semblance, and links truth to half-saying rather than full articulation.

    an effect of the Aufklärung, which is scarcely believable, is it not, linked to the coming onto the scene, however awkwardly it was done, of the discourse of the analyst

91. #91

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.5

    **Seminar [l:\Vednesday](file://l:/Vednesday) 13 January 1971**

    Theoretical move: Lacan opens Seminar XVIII by arguing that discourse is a structure irreducible to any speaking subject, that the subject is necessarily alienated and split within it, and that the question of "a discourse that might not be a semblance" can only be posed from within the artefact of discourse itself — there being no metalanguage, no Other of the Other, and no true of the true from which to judge it.

    it is rather you who will be in it, by the pressure of your numbers... someone, starting from the analytic discourse, places himself with respect to you in the position of an analysand.

92. #92

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.21

    **Seminar [l:\Vednesday](file://l:/Vednesday) 13 January 1971** > **Seminar 2: Wednesday 20 January 1971**

    Theoretical move: Lacan designates the unnamed "top-left" place in the Four Discourses as the place of the *semblance*, establishing that the semblance is not the contrary of truth but its strictly correlative dimension (*demansion*), and that scientific discourse reaches the real only through the algebraic articulation of semblance—where the real appears as the impossible hole in that semblance.

    finally when surplus enjoying occupies it, I speak about the discourse of the Analyst

93. #93

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.79

    *Lacan writes on the board: "L 'achose"*

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that 'l'achose' (the thing-as-absent) can only be approached through writing (l'écrit), not speech, because the thing's place is always marked by the absence of the o-object (castration), and topology—exemplified by the Graph of Desire—is irreducibly a written form that the spoken word cannot substitute for.

    last year, in trying to situate in its structure what characterises the discourse of the analyst.

94. #94

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.176

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 May 1971** > **Seminar 10: Wednesday 16 June 1971**

    Theoretical move: Lacan argues that every discourse is structured as a semblance, and that the four discourses—particularly analytic discourse—circle around the fundamental impossibility of the sexual relationship, a void that is managed (but never resolved) through the composition of jouissance and castration; surplus-jouissance, as the Freudian analogue of Marxian surplus value, names the point where the semblance of discourse is anchored to this constitutive gap.

    the discourse of the Analyst, if I used them, these discourses have the property of always having their organising point... of starting with a semblance

95. #95

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.60

    **Seminar 4: Wednesday 17 February 1971**

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses a close reading of a Mencian formula on language and nature to argue that what emerges from the effects of discourse is nothing other than the function of cause insofar as it is surplus-jouissance (li/profit), while also positioning writing as the indirect but constitutive reference for language, against logical-positivist demands for graspable meaning.

    another thing of its link to what I am teaching, to what I am teaching in conformity with what I articulate, what last year I articulated, as the discourse of the analyst

96. #96

    Seminar XVIII · On a Discourse That Might Not Be a Semblance · Jacques Lacan · p.154

    **Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 May 1971**

    Theoretical move: Lacan demonstrates that the logic of quantification (universal/particular, affirmative/negative) is not merely a formal apparatus but carries the mark of the sexual impasse: the impossibility of writing the sexual relationship without a third term (the phallus), and the asymmetry between the masculine "all" (grounded in a mythical exception) and the feminine "not-all" (sustained only as a discordant statement, as 'a-woman' rather than 'every woman'), with Hysteria named as the neurosis that articulates this truth of failure.

    a discourse which might not be a semblance, the hommoinzin.

97. #97

    Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.154

    accommodate yourselves.

    Theoretical move: Lacan deploys the quantifying logic of "not-all" to correct the Oedipal myth of the primal father, then pivots to argue that the sexual non-relationship is what generates desire as a language-effect, before closing with a meditation on the analyst's intolerable position as objet petit a (semblance) in the analytic discourse—a position only made liveable through logic.

    it is at the place of the semblance that analytic discourse is characterized by situating the o-object... the mainspring of what I always tried to get people to sense as the resistance of the analyst, to really fulfilling his function.

98. #98

    Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.129

    Seminar 9: Wednesday 10 May 1972

    Theoretical move: Lacan uses mathematical logic (Boole, Frege, Cantor) to argue that Truth can only "half-say" itself — that 0 is not the negation of 1 but the mark of a constitutive lack, such that the impossibility of reaching 2 from 0 and 1 formally mirrors the impossibility of the sexual relationship and the inaccessibility of the Real; the analyst's position as semblance of Objet petit a grounds a non-initiatory knowledge of truth that is structural, not esoteric.

    leaving the field free to the discourse of the analysand. That the analyst should understand the discourse of the analysand seems in effect to be preferable... It must of course be emphasised that it is as small o that he occupies this position of the semblance.

99. #99

    Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.76

    Seminar 5: Wednesday 9 February 1972

    Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Objet petit a emerges not from any single term (demand, refusal, offer) but from their triadic knotting—a Borromean-style structure where each term only holds meaning through the others, and the "it's not that" at the heart of every demand is precisely the irreducible gap that generates the object of desire in analytic discourse.

    who does not see the fundamental character, for analytic discourse, of such a concatenation? ... what grounds the discourse of the analysand, is precisely that, I am asking you to refuse me what I am offering you

100. #100

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.179

     J Lacan - Pierce as astronomer > Seminar 12: Wednesday 21 Jane 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that discourse is always discourse of semblance, and that the Four Discourses—grounded in the tetrad of semblance, truth, enjoyment, and surplus-jouissance—are held together not by their content but by the formal necessity of the number four and its vectors; the analytic discourse is distinguished by placing the objet petit a in the position of semblance, thereby intervening in the gap between body and discourse.

     it is because the analyst en corps, sets up the little o-object in the place of the semblance, that there is something that exists called the analytic discourse.

101. #101

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.137

     Seminar 9: Wednesday 10 May 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan grounds the sexual non-relation and the logic of sexuation in the mathematical real, arguing that the One (Y a d'l'un) does not found a binary complementarity between man and woman because the not-all prevents any consistent application of the principle of contradiction to gender; simultaneously, he insists that the analyst must hold the position of the little o-object as semblance, and that the mathematical real—which resists both truth and meaning—is the proper anchor for analytic discourse.

     what is at stake now is the psychoanalytic discourse and it is a matter of ensuring that the one who plays the function of small o in it holds a position...of a semblance

102. #102

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.81

     Seminar **6:** Wednesday **8** March 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that enjoyment is always "from the Other" but never sexual (there is no sexual relation), and that the Other must be barred — emptied out — to become the locus where the sexuation formulae and knowledge are inscribed; this move connects the barred Other S(Ø) to lalangue, fantasy, repetition (Nachträglichkeit), and the necessity of writing for psychoanalysis to be possible at all.

     As a result, I already said it on several occasions, I am at the place, the same one, and this is what is educative about it, I am at the place of the analysand.

103. #103

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.12

     Seminar 1: Wednesday 8 December 1971

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the phallus is the signified of sexual discourse (not the signifier), that transsexualism and the common error both mistake the signifier for the organ, and that the non-existence of the sexual relationship requires a new logic built on the 'not-all', existence/quantification, and modality rather than naturalist or Aristotelian categories.

     this amputates for the female homosexual, the analytic discourse... this discourse, it is a fact, casts them, the little darlings, into total blindness about what is involved in feminine enjoyment

104. #104

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.50

     Seminar 4: Wednesday 19 January 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that logical necessity is not prior to but produced by discourse itself, and that this production retroactively posits its own ground as 'inexistent' — a structure illustrated by the symptom (truth as inexistent) and the automaton/repetition (jouissance as inexistent), both grounded in Frege's zero, and culminating in the claim that the Phallus as Bedeutung (denotation/reference) is what anchors signification to discourse's necessity.

     the product of the emergence of this new discourse, that the production in the sense of proof can be announced before you here

105. #105

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.141

     Seminar 9: Wednesday 10 May 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses the formula *Yad'lun* ("there is One") to disarticulate the One of mathematical existence from the One of individuality or class-attribute, arguing that set theory's separation of element-membership from universal predication is precisely what can ground the analyst's practice beyond the "witticism" level at which all discourse about the sexual relationship otherwise remains.

     I recommend to those who want to hold the position of the analyst...to ensure that there are fewer imbecilities in your discourse - I am talking about analysts.

106. #106

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.108

     Seminar 8: Wednesday 19 April 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan introduces 'Yad'lun' (there is something of the One) as the foundational concept linking set theory's existential quantifier to the analytic discourse's production term (S1), arguing that the Real One—distinct from natural individual existence and from reality—is accessible only through the Symbolic, and that this re-reading of Plato's Parmenides confirms the analytic discourse's priority over scientific discourse.

     something that not by chance is inscribed as the signifier indexed 1 that finds itself at the level of production in the analytic discourse.

107. #107

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.126

     Seminar 9: Wednesday 10 May 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes the unary trait (support of imaginary identification via the mirror stage) from the *Yad'lun* (there-is-One), while arguing that the Not-all grounds both the crowd and the question of Woman; he then re-situates the Subject Supposed to Know as a pleonasm pointing to the analyst's legitimate occupation of the position of semblance with respect to jouissance.

     he occupies *the position* of a semblance. He occupies it legitimately because with respect to enjoyment... there is no other tenable solution.

108. #108

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.95

     Seminar **6:** Wednesday **8** March 1972 > Seminar 7: Wednesday IS March 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan introduces the neologism "Yad'lun" (there is One / il y a de l'Un) as a foundational ontological proposition, distinguishing the One as a structural feature of analytic discourse from both the Platonic dyadic Eros and the Freudian death-drive pairing, while showing that analytic experience turns on the analysand's encounter with division within the One rather than a fusion of two.

     in analytic discourse can represent the emergence and it would be a matter perhaps for you of making something of it

109. #109

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.20

     Seminar 2: Wednesday 15 December 1971

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses the impossibility of writing the sexual relationship as the anchor for a theory of the Real, the Matheme, and the function of language, arguing that what cannot be written (the sexual non-rapport) is precisely what drives both logic/mathematics and the floundering of metaphysics (exemplified by Aristotle's confusion of the One and Being), while positioning the matheme as the only genuine mode of transmission.

     what cannot be done except by starting from the articulation that I have given of the analytic discourse. This is what leads us to think that castration cannot in any way be reduced to an anecdote

110. #110

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.37

     Seminar 2: Wednesday 15 December 1971

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses the logic of quantifiers (∃x and its negations) to ground sexuation and castration in a structural-logical necessity rather than anecdote, positioning the Real as that which affirms itself through the irreducible impasses of logic (Gödel), and insisting that castration cannot be reduced to myth or trauma but constitutes the impossible foundation of any articulation of sexual bipolarity in language.

     This is what leads us to think that castration cannot in any way be reduced to an anecdote...properly what cannot be done except by starting from the articulation that I have given of the analytic discourse.

111. #111

     Seminar XIX · …or Worse · Jacques Lacan · p.182

     J Lacan - Pierce as astronomer > Seminar 12: Wednesday 21 Jane 1972

     Theoretical move: Lacan substitutes Peirce's schema with his own articulation of analytic discourse, identifying the *objet petit a* as the sole representamen in analysis — the analyst embodies this object as semblance/waste-product so that the analysand can be born to interpreting speech; the passage closes by reframing the analytic relation as fraternal brotherhood rooted in shared subjection to discourse, while warning that bodily fraternity without symbolic mediation gives rise to racism.

     who are we brothers of in every discourse except the analytic discourse?

112. #112

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.92

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge > I ASK YOU TO REFUSE WHAT I AM OFFERING YOU.

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the absence of the Other (as heteros) from the sexual relationship is not gendered but structural, grounded in the logic of Zero and One; the sexuation formulas are then developed through a critique of Aristotelian universals and quantification, establishing that the Universal (phallic function) requires the exception ('at-least-one') as its foundation, and that Eros as fusion toward the One is a dangerous mythological delusion with no analytic warrant.

     It is curious that it is only with the analytic discourse that a Universal can find, in the existence of the exception, its true foundation

113. #113

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.97

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge > **4 1 \* May 1972**

     Theoretical move: The passage advances the claim that the analytic discourse operates by reproducing neurosis through a model that isolates the master signifier, and that psychoanalysis differs from ideology only insofar as it maps out, rather than veils, the jouissance organised by the signifier's positional effects in a discourse.

     For the analytic discourse, this 'of fact' implicates me sufficiently in these effects for it to be said that they are due to me, that they are designated by my name.

114. #114

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.146

     The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst > **1 Jane 1972**

     Theoretical move: Lacan grounds the necessity of the paternal exception (the One who is not castrated) as the logical precondition for all thought about human relations, then maps the modal square (necessity, contingency, possibility, impossibility) onto the sexuation formulas, arguing that the Real occupies the place of the impossible and that the 'Not-all' expresses contingency—reordering Aristotle's modal logic through the lens of the analytic discourse.

     in the experience set up by the analytic discourse, it is absolutely necessary to posit that there exists One for whom castration, is sent packing

115. #115

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.25

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the objet petit a is not a localized object but the very tetrahedral structure of the four discourses, and that each discourse constitutively prevents its own agent from comprehending it — the analyst included — because it is castration (as a gap) that guarantees the Real from which all discourse stems.

     I was only able to articulate these three discourses in a *mathème* because the analytic discourse had emerged.

116. #116

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.61

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the phallus is the singular meaning (Bedeutung) through which language signifies, that this phallic function structurally prevents any harmonious sexual relation, and that the objet petit a — as metonymical cause of desire — is what determines the speaking being as a divided subject within discourse, with the semblance-pole (analyst's position) and enjoyment-pole standing as the two irreducible terms of the quadripode.

     The discourse of the analyst, is the same thing. We speak about the analyst, he is the o-object as I have often underlined... it is that of the semblance.

117. #117

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.24

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that mathematical incomprehension is not a flight from truth but an over-sensitivity to it, and uses this to pivot toward the claim that there is no sexual relationship for speaking beings — because sexual enjoyment (jouissance) can only be approached through lalangue and castration, never directly articulated, requiring the mathème as its proper formalization.

     It is what by means of language, I understand by the function of psychoanalysis... which finds itself not being able to be articulated in a copulation... except by requiring to encounter something which only has a dimension from the lalangue and which is called castration.

118. #118

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.42

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses a Klein bottle topology and a playful six-verse poem to demonstrate that the relation between man and woman passes through love, then substitutes the world for the sexual partner, and terminates at a wall that is not a cut but the locus of castration — the point where truth and knowledge are held apart. This topological demonstration grounds the claim that the discourse of capitalism forecloses castration, and that it is only the analytic discourse (emerging from logic, the four discourses, and language) that re-introduces castration as the hinge between truth and knowledge.

     the o-object in person, namely, this position into which one cannot even say that the analyst brings himself: he is brought, he is brought there by his analysand

119. #119

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.38

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses a Klein bottle topology and a playful six-verse poem to demonstrate that the relation between man and woman passes through love, then substitutes the world for the sexual partner, and terminates at a wall that is not a cut but the locus of castration — the point where truth and knowledge are held apart. This topological demonstration grounds the claim that the discourse of capitalism forecloses castration, and that it is only the analytic discourse (emerging from logic, the four discourses, and language) that re-introduces castration as the hinge between truth and knowledge.

     it is the relationship of something to which I give a lot of importance, namely, logic...I was able along this path to do what? To give at least the reason for walls.

120. #120

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.7

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the psychoanalyst's knowledge is constitutively bound to ignorance (not as deficit but as passion), and polemically distinguishes his own claim — that the unconscious is structured like a language (grammar and repetition, hence logic) — from misreadings that conflate this with lalangue-as-dictionary or that opportunistically promote "non-knowledge" as a flag, thereby obscuring that psychoanalysis is fundamentally a matter of knowledge.

     the tangible frontier between truth and knowledge, is precisely where analytic discourse is held.

121. #121

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.28

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that what specifies the human animal is its anomalous, 'limping and amputated' relationship to enjoyment—a structural disjunction between copulation and jouissance—and that this very disjunction, rather than any biological reduction, is what grounds the possibility of mathemes and science, with lalangue as the medium through which this deficit-conditioned appearance leads to knowledge.

     it is not, of course, any less important to articulate in its relationship to truth. And the most interesting thing...is the relationship that this discourse has to enjoyment

122. #122

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.132

     The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst > **1 Jane 1972**

     Theoretical move: Lacan deploys set theory and the logic of the 'yad'l'un' (there is One) to ground the four formulas of sexuation, arguing that existence is constituted through a "saying not" (the exception that founds the universal), and that psychoanalysis is the only discourse in which blackguardism (corruption of desire) necessarily produces stupidity—making the mathème the privileged vehicle for approaching knowledge about truth.

     the object at the place of the semblance, is a position that can be held.

123. #123

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.80

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge > I ASK YOU TO REFUSE WHAT I AM OFFERING YOU.

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the formulas of sexuation cannot be read through standard propositional logic (negation, conjunction, disjunction) because the phallic function governs both sexes asymmetrically: the masculine side is structured by a universal ('All x') grounded in an exception ('there exists an x that negates φx'), while the feminine side is 'not-all' within the phallic function, which opens onto a dual, properly feminine jouissance irreducible to phallic jouissance—and it is precisely this asymmetry that marks the non-existence of the sexual relationship.

     a style of discourse which is absolutely not that of the Hysteric, but the one that I inscribed in terms of a quadripodic division as being the analytic discourse and that what emerges from this discourse, is the dimension never up to now evoked about the phallic function.

124. #124

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.120

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge > Pascal's Triangle

     Theoretical move: By working through Pascal's triangle and set theory (the empty set as element, pure difference as sameness), Lacan argues that the One operative in analytic theory is not the One of similitude/Platonic universality but the One of pure difference that grounds repetition — the S1 produced at the level of surplus-jouissance in the analytic discourse.

     what is at stake in analytic theory? Analytic theory sees the One being highlighted at two of its levels... to consider the schema that I gave of the analytic discourse

125. #125

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.123

     The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst > **1 Jane 1972**

     Theoretical move: Lacan situates the psychoanalyst's complex, horror-laden relationship to knowledge as the central theoretical problem, arguing that the discourse of the analyst places its practitioner in a structurally difficult position where knowledge about truth—mapped onto the four-discourse schema—is simultaneously perceived and repudiated, with foreclosure (Verwerfung) operating not only in psychosis but as a rationally legitimated social force.

     the discourse that conditions him - what is called, since me, the discourse of the psychoanalyst - in a position that we could say is difficult.

126. #126

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.52

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses the topology of the tetrahedron to ground the Four Discourses as a structural necessity derived from the properties of four points in space, then pivots to the question of the function of speech as the unique form of action that posits itself as truth—establishing the epistemological basis for the knowledge of the psychoanalyst.

     The discourse of the analyst contributes, in effect, to a certain contemporary state of thought, an order by which there can be illuminated other discourses which had emerged much earlier.

127. #127

     Seminar XIX bis · The Knowledge of the Psychoanalyst · Jacques Lacan · p.70

     The Psychoanalyst's Knowledge

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the analyst's knowledge is constituted by a "scrap of knowledge" drawn from the subject's own jouissance—unconscious knowledge that is not "supposed" but emerges from slips, dreams, and the analysand's work—and locates this within the Four Discourses structure where S2 occupies the place of truth and $ occupies the place of enjoyment, distinguishing scientific (mathematical/topological) writing from the zone of discourse where meaning is always partial and borrowed from another discourse.

     It is the numbers that know... the analytic discourse which, when you wish really to understand it for what it is, is shown to be linked to a curious adaptation.

128. #128

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.147

     **¹⁰⁷x** > The rat in the maze

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that llanguage is primary and precedes language (which is merely scientific knowledge's "harebrained lucubration" about llanguage), that the unconscious is a knowing-how-to-do-things with llanguage that exceeds what any speaking being can articulate, and that the Lacanian hypothesis — that a signifier represents a subject to another signifier — is structurally necessary to the functioning of llanguage itself.

     That enigma is presented to us by the unconscious, as it is revealed by analytic discourse.

129. #129

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.45

     **II** > **The function of the written¹**

     Theoretical move: The letter is constituted as a radical effect of discourse — it precedes the signifier historically and functionally — and analytic discourse is distinguished by its capacity to produce a different reading of signifiers than what they signify, a capacity instantiated most purely in Joyce's work where the signifier stuffs the signified.

     Emerging from analytic discourse, the letters I bring out here have a different value from those that can emerge from set theory.

130. #130

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.101

     **VII** > A love letter *(une lettre d'amour)* > **Knowledge and truth**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that truth can only be "half-told" (mi-dire) because jouissance constitutes a structural limit on avowal, and that the phallic function is not necessary but merely contingent—it has "stopped not being written" through analytic experience without entering the register of the necessary or the impossible—thereby re-situating knowledge, truth, and the real within the schema of analytic discourse and the three registers.

     In the little writing (gramme) I gave you of analytic discourse, a is written in the upper left-hand corner, and is supported by S2, in other words, by knowledge insofar as it is in the place of truth.

131. #131

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.52

     **II** > Love and the signifier

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the signifier is characterized by contingency rather than eternity, and that this contingency (figured through creationism, the *ex nihilo*, and the Copernican/Newtonian revolution) grounds his central claim that love compensates for the absence of the sexual relationship — a relation only accessible through the function of the phallus as that which is articulated on the basis of absence. The "revolution" Lacan values is not a change of center but the shift from "it turns" to "it falls," marking the real subversion of the signified's routine.

     it is not analytic discourse which is so difficult to sustain in its decentering and has not yet made its entrance into common consciousness - that can in any way subvert anything whatsoever.

132. #132

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.105

     **VII** > A love letter *(une lettre d'amour)* > **Knowledge and truth**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that knowledge is grounded in the Other as a locus of the signifier, and that its true nature lies in the identity between the jouissance of its acquisition and its exercise — not in exchange value but in use — while the analyst, by placing objet petit a in the place of semblance, is uniquely positioned to investigate truth as knowledge; this culminates in a meditation on the not-all, the Other's not-knowing, and the link between jealouissance, the gaze, and das Ding as the kernel of the neighbor.

     the analyst, of all [those whose] orders of discourse are sustained currently... is the one who, by putting object a in the place of semblance, is in the best position to do what should rightfully be done, namely, to investigate the status of truth as knowledge.

133. #133

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.22

     On Feminine Sexuality The Limits of Love and Knowledge > COMPLEMENT

     Theoretical move: Lacan reframes his seminar's opening address on love as actually being about 'stupidity' (la bêtise), and argues that analytic discourse, uniquely among discourses, does not flee stupidity but rather approaches and produces it—grounding this in the non-existence of the sexual relationship as the indisputable truth that conditions the discourse.

     That is not quite the way analytic discourse is established, which I formulated to you as a with S2 below it, and as what that questions on the side of the subject - in order to produce what, if not stupidity?

134. #134

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.60

     **II** > Love and the signifier

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the signifier introduces the One into the world and that the subject is nothing but the effect that slides between signifiers; love aims at this subject as such, while desire is aroused by the sign of the subject — thereby distinguishing sign from signifier and articulating their differential relation to jouissance.

     That effect is what Freud teaches us about, and it is the starting point of analytic discourse, namely, the subject.

135. #135

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.30

     **II** > To Jakobson > **What is the signifier?**

     Theoretical move: Lacan redefines the signifier topologically by insisting on the bar between signifier and meaning-effect, introduces 'signifierness' (signifiance) as the excess of the signifier over signification, and pivots from asking about 'a signifier' to the signifier 'One' (Un), arguing that the unconscious structured like a language displaces the Cartesian cogito by making the subject the one who utters stupidities rather than the one who thinks.

     the foundation of the symbolic dimension that only analytic discourse allows us to isolate as such

136. #136

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.20

     On Feminine Sexuality The Limits of Love and Knowledge > On jouissance

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that feminine sexuality is constituted by a logical "one by one" (une par une) structure that derives from the Other rather than from bodily substance, making sexual jouissance "compact" and the feminine sexed being "not-whole"—a claim illustrated through the Don Juan myth and grounded in a topology that refuses any reference to being or substance.

     Through analytic discourse, the subject manifests himself in his gap, namely, in that which causes his desire.

137. #137

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan

     **¹⁰⁷x** > Rings of string

     Theoretical move: The passage establishes a structural articulation between writing, jouissance, and the Real: what is written encodes the conditions of jouissance, the Other must be barred (S(Ø)) because it is founded on the One-missing, and mathematization alone can reach a Real that is not fantasy — identified ultimately as the mystery of the speaking body and the unconscious.

     Mathematization alone reaches a real - and it is in that respect that it is compatible with our discourse, analytic discourse

138. #138

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.37

     **II** > **The function of the written¹**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the written (l'écrit) is not of the same register as the signifier, and uses this distinction to ground the specific function of analytic discourse: letters (a, A, $) name loci and functions rather than merely signify, while the unconscious is what is *read* beyond speech — a move that simultaneously critiques ontology (the master's discourse) for its illegitimate hypostatization of the copula "to be."

     we must situate the function of the written in analytic discourse… analytic discourse is a new kind of relation based only on what functions as speech

139. #139

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.16

     On Feminine Sexuality The Limits of Love and Knowledge > On jouissance

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that sexual jouissance is structurally defined by an impasse—the impossibility of the sexual relationship—and uses topological concepts (compactness, open sets, finity) to articulate how phallic jouissance constitutes an obstacle to jouissance of the Other, while the Not-all marks the female pole's irreducible remainder. Love is revealed as narcissistic, and its object-like substance is in fact the objet petit a as remainder in desire.

     That is what analytic discourse demonstrates in that, to one of these beings qua sexed, to man insofar as he is endowed with the organ said to be phallic... woman's sexual organ is of no interest except via the body's jouissance.

140. #140

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.26

     **II** > To Jakobson

     Theoretical move: Lacan carves out "linguistricks" (linguisterie) as a domain distinct from Jakobson's linguistics proper, arguing that the consequences of "the unconscious is structured like a language" exceed linguistics and belong to a separate field grounded in the psychoanalytic discourse; he then deploys the Four Discourses to show that love—as opposed to jouissance of the Other—is the sign of a shift between discourses, with the emergence of analytic discourse marking every such transition.

     Analyst's Discourse … impossibility … A … Si

141. #141

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.118

     **IX**

     Theoretical move: Lacan redefines the unconscious as the site where being, by speaking, enjoys and wants to know nothing about it — thereby challenging Aristotelian/traditional science's equation of thought with its object — and uses this to position analytic discourse against both behaviorism and Christianity, while aligning his own practice with the 'baroque' as the aesthetic/ethical mode that sides with the sleeve rather than the winning hand of classical thought.

     In order to relegate the truth to the lowly status it deserves, one must have entered into analytic discourse.

142. #142

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.126

     **IX**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that every wisdom tradition—Taoism, Buddhism, mythology, Christianity—fails to satisfy the "thought of being" except at the price of castration, positioning psychoanalytic discourse as a contingent, non-mathematical pathway toward an economy of jouissance that science and religion alike cannot reach.

     What we can see on the basis of analytic discourse is that we may have a slight chance of finding out something about it, from time to time, by pathways that are essentially contingent.

143. #143

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.12

     On Feminine Sexuality The Limits of Love and Knowledge > On jouissance

     Theoretical move: Lacan grounds Seminar XX's inquiry by defining jouissance as "what serves no purpose," distinguishing it from love (which is always mutual and demands more), positioning the superego as the imperative of jouissance ("Enjoy!"), and asserting that jouissance of the Other's body is not the sign of love — thereby opening the problem of what, beyond necessity or sufficiency, can answer with jouissance.

     That is the discourse that underpins (supporte) my work... Our path, that of analytic discourse, progresses only due to this narrow limit, this cutting edge of the knife

144. #144

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.53

     **II** > Love and the signifier

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that analytic discourse breaks with the cosmological presupposition of a unified world-substance by privileging the letter and writing over lived meaning-effects; love is posited as what "makes up for" the non-existent sexual relationship, and the unconscious is clarified as structured *like* (not *by*) a language—specifically like the assemblages of set theory, which are constituted (not merely designated) by letters.

     What is produced in the articulation of the new discourse that emerges as analytic discourse is that the function of the signifier is taken as the starting point

145. #145

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.44

     **II** > **The function of the written¹**

     Theoretical move: There is no prediscursive reality — every reality is founded by discourse — and the non-existence of the sexual relationship is the negative foundation on which all writing (and analytic discourse specifically) rests; the bar in the Saussurean formula is the graphic index of this impossibility, marking that the written is precisely what cannot be understood, while man and woman exist only as signifiers articulated through the phallic and not-all positions respectively.

     Were there no analytic discourse, you would continue to speak like birdbrains, singing the 'current disk'... 'there's no such thing as a sexual relationship' - a formulation that can only be articulated thanks to the entire edifice of analytic discourse.

146. #146

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.175

     **Seminar 9: Wednesday 20 March 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes the true from the real by arguing that truth can only be "half-said" (because jouissance constitutes its limit), while the real is accessible only through the impasse of formalisation; the mathemes (objet a, S(Ø), $) are introduced as written supports that, unlike speech, can designate the limits where the symbolic encounters the real—culminating in the claim that the phallic function is a contingency (ceases not to be written) rather than a necessity or impossibility.

     In the schema, the little formula (gramme) that I gave you of analytic discourse, the o is written on the top left and is sustained by this Si, knowledge in so far as it is at the place of truth.

147. #147

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.100

     Semina r **5:** Wednesday **16 January 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses the "Copernican revolution" as a foil to argue that genuine subversion lies not in changing a centre but in substituting a new formal principle ('things fall', expressed as Newton's law of gravity written down) — an argument that privileges the function of the written over imaginary, sphere-centred thinking, while reframing the phallus, the Other, love, and the sign as the year's key compass-points.

     it is not analytic discourse, which is so difficult to sustain in its decentring, which has yet to make its entry into common consciousness, which can in any way subvert anything whatsoever.

148. #148

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.69

     What is the signifier? > What is a signifier?

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the signifier cannot be collectivised through semantic or lexical predication alone, and that its proper "substance" is Jouissance — the body enjoys itself only by corporalising itself in a signifying way, making enjoyment-substance the third term beyond thinking substance and extended substance, and reframing the subject of the unconscious as the one who speaks stupidities rather than thinks.

     it is the foundation of the symbolic. We maintain it whatever may be the dimensions that analytic discourse alone allows us to evoke in it.

149. #149

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.260

     (3) Naturally since I made a small mistake

     Theoretical move: Lacan uses the Borromean knot topology to ground the asymmetry between the One and the Other (woman as "less One"), arguing that mathematisation alone accesses the Real—defined as the mystery of the speaking body and the unconscious—while distinguishing the Real from both fantasy and traditional reality.

     Mathematisation alone reaches a real, and this is why it is compatible with our discourse, the analytic discourse

150. #150

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.102

     Semina r **5:** Wednesday **16 January 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan advances the claim that analytic discourse, grounded in the letter rather than in lived experience or phenomenal appearance, compels an abandonment of the ontological "world" in favour of *par-être* (being-to-one-side), and that mathematics—specifically set theory's use of the letter—provides the orientation point for reading the effects of language precisely where the sexual relationship is absent.

     what is produced, what is produced as such in the articulation of this new discourse which emerges as the discourse of the analyst, the discourse of analysis, is the following: it is that the foundation, the start is taken in the effect, as such, of what is involved in the signifier.

151. #151

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.18

     **Seminar 2: Wednesday 12 December 1972**

     Theoretical move: The passage uses the concept of "stupidity" (la bêtise) as the constitutive condition of analytic discourse and the *encore* drive, while Recanati's intervention develops a Peircean semiotic account of repetition—arguing that repetition is grounded in an irreducible impossibility (the hole between object and representamen), which structurally mirrors Lacan's claim that there is no sexual relationship as the unspeakable truth conditioning analytic discourse.

     I formulated it with the small o and from S² underneath and from what that questions on the side of the subject to produce what? It is quite obviously that this is set up within it, within stupidity, and why not?

152. #152

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.62

     **Seminar 3:** Wednesday **19 December 1972**

     Theoretical move: Lacan introduces the neologism *linguisterie* to mark the irreducible difference between linguistics (Jakobson's domain) and what psychoanalysis does with language—specifically the claim that "the unconscious is structured like a language"—while simultaneously arguing that psychoanalytic discourse is the foundational condition of possibility for all four discourses and that love is the sign of a change of discourse, not of the Other's jouissance.

     there is always some emergence of psychoanalytic discourse in every passage from one discourse to another.

153. #153

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.162

     Semina r **5:** Wednesday **16 January 1973** > **Seminar 7: Wednesday 20 February 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan articulates the structural connection between the barred Woman (not-all), the barred Other S(Ø), and Other jouissance, arguing that what ancient metaphysics designated as the Supreme Good (Aristotle's unmoved mover) is in fact a mythical placeholder for the enjoyment of the Other—and that psychoanalysis must dissociate the imaginary small o from the symbolic barred O to accomplish what psychology has failed to do: the splitting that reveals the sexual non-relationship at the foundation of all knowledge.

     By interpreting it according to what our function is in analytic discourse, namely to record, to punctuate what can be said to be going, going towards failure in the formulation of the sexual relationship

154. #154

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.238

     J.Lacan-... of this? > **Seminar 11 : Wednesday 8 May 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that analytic discourse diverges from scientific discourse precisely because the 'economy of enjoyment' cannot be rendered as a mathematical device, yet mythology, the Counter-Reformation, and Baroque art all attest to historically contingent attempts to regulate jouissance — attempts that are 'founded in the gap proper to the sexuality of the speaking being' and that analytic discourse may partially continue.

     This indeed is why the discourse of the analyst is distinguished from scientific discourse.

155. #155

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.110

     Semina r **5:** Wednesday **16 January 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan revisits Logical Time to show that intersubjective inference is structured around the objet petit a (the third term that reduces the dyad to One + o), then pivots to distinguish sign from signifier, grounding the subject as an effect of the signifier chain; the second seminar session opens by establishing that the speaking being's needs are contaminated by an "other satisfaction" rooted in the unconscious structured like a language, which Lacan links retrospectively to the Ethics of Psychoanalysis and ultimately to the universals of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful.

     certainly not designed, from the point of view of the discourse of the analyst, to appear full of the promise of good encounters, or of happiness, as they say.

156. #156

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.79

     **Seminar 4: Wednesday 9 January 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that writing (the letter) belongs to a fundamentally different register than the signifier, and uses this distinction to theorize the specific function of writing within analytic discourse—particularly how mathemes (S(O), objet a, Φ) operate as letters that mark lack and loss within the locus of the Other, rather than as signifiers in the linguistic sense.

     What is at stake up to a certain point is to discern what the office of analytic discourse is and to make it too, if not official, at least officiating.

157. #157

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.181

     **Seminar 9: Wednesday 20 March 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the analyst's discourse is uniquely positioned to examine the truth of knowledge by placing the objet petit a in the place of semblance; he then develops a theory of knowledge as grounded in the Other (as locus of the signifier), where knowledge must be 'paid for' through use/enjoyment rather than exchange, and where the Letter reproduces without reproducing the same being—culminating in the claim that the Other's structural not-knowing constitutes the not-all, linking feminine sexuality, unconscious, and castration.

     it is indeed the analyst who, by putting the small o object in the place of the semblance, is in the most appropriate position for doing what it is right to do

158. #158

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.93

     **Seminar 4: Wednesday 9 January 1973**

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Letter is an effect of discourse and that analytic discourse is defined by the supposition that the subject of the unconscious can read (and learn to read) — a supposition illustrated through Joyce's technique of signifier-telescoping, which Lacan aligns structurally with the slip, and through the contrast between a bee's behaviour and the human act of reading an omen.

     we are in the register of analytic discourse, that what is at stake in analytic discourse, is always that you give a different reading than what it signifies to what is stated as signifier.

159. #159

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.4

     **Seminar 1: Wednesday 21 November 1972**

     Theoretical move: Lacan opens Seminar XX by grounding the impossibility of the sexual relation in the structural gap between jouissance (phallic enjoyissance) and love: love aims at making One but can only produce narcissistic identification, while enjoyment of the Other's body is neither necessary nor sufficient as a response to love, with the Not-all (pas-toute) marking woman's asymmetrical position relative to phallic jouissance.

     Our path, that of analytic discourse, only progresses within this narrow limit, on this knife-edge, which means that elsewhere things can only get worse.

160. #160

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.226

     J.Lacan-... of this? > **Seminar 11 : Wednesday 8 May 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan redefines the unconscious against the Aristotelian premise that "being thinks," positing instead that being-in-speaking *enjoys* and wants to know nothing about it — thereby making jouissance, not knowledge-drive, the motor of the unconscious — and then traces how this claim restructures the relation between truth, science, Christianity, and the barred subject.

     one must have entered into the analytic discourse. What analytic discourse dislodges puts the truth in its place but does not shake it.

161. #161

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.136

     Semina r **5:** Wednesday **16 January 1973** > **Seminar 7: Wednesday 20 February 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan advances the argument that what supplements the absent sexual relationship is not a dyadic fusion but a singular "there is something of the One" — irreducibly solitary — and that love (including transference as love) is the operative name for this supplement; the big Other, far from being abolished, must be reckoned with precisely as the site that mediates between the sexes in the absence of a sexual relationship, a point that also grounds his endorsement of courtly love as a "feint" for the missing relation.

     what is involved in discourse, in the analytic discourse, in terms of its approach to the truth and of its paradoxes

162. #162

     Seminar XX · Encore: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge · Jacques Lacan · p.90

     **Seminar 4: Wednesday 9 January 1973**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that ontology is a product of the accentuation of the copula "to be" within philosophical/master discourse, that there is no pre-discursive reality (all reality is grounded in discourse), and that the sexual relationship cannot be written — a claim sustained by the bar in the Saussurean algorithm and the letter as a radical effect of discourse.

     if there is a discourse that demonstrates this to you it is that the woman will only ever be taken — this is what the analytic discourse brings into play — quoad matrem.

163. #163

     Seminar XXII · R.S.I. · Jacques Lacan · p.2

     **Introduction**

     Theoretical move: In this opening session, Lacan frames the symptom as belonging to the Real, introduces the question of analytic identity and set-formation (can analysts "make a set"?), and links imbecility in the analytic discourse to the ethics of each discourse — previewing the year's central thesis that non-dupes err by refusing to play the game of a discourse's structure.

     the analytic discourse is something that stirs you, I mean which stirs you.

164. #164

     Seminar XXII · R.S.I. · Jacques Lacan · p.136

     **Introduction** > **Seminar 9: Tuesday 8 April 1975**

     Theoretical move: Lacan argues that the Imaginary is structurally "stuck" in the sphere-and-cross figure (a pre-topological image of the body), and that the Borromean knot represents the proper topological instrument for escaping this captivity — linking the knot's discovery to the analytic discourse as a new social bond and to the Freudian "hole" in the universe, while insisting that truth can only be half-said.

     I was, like that, gripped one day by the Borromean knot, it is altogether linked to this order of event or advent, as you wish, that is called the analytic discourse, and in so far as I defined it as a social bond emerging in our day.

165. #165

     Seminar XXIII · The Sinthome · Jacques Lacan · p.151

     Seminar 9: Wednesday 16 March 1976

     Theoretical move: Lacan advances the Real as fundamentally unbound and orientating-without-meaning, distinguishes a more radical foreclosure than that of the Name-of-the-Father, and ties the Death Drive to the Real itself, while the matheme (and the Borromean knot as topological device) are offered as instruments for reaching "bits of Real" that resist symbolic embroidery.

     analytic discourse like the others. You yourselves think of nothing but erasing the traces of this discourse of mine, since it is I who began by giving this discourse its status.

166. #166

     Seminar XXIV · L'insu que sait de l'une-bévue s'aile à mourre · Jacques Lacan · p.102

     **Seminar 9: Wednesday 15 March 1977**

     Theoretical move: Lacan distinguishes sense (double-sens, meaning-effect rooted in the duplicity of the signifier) from meaning (a purely empty knotting of word to word), and uses torus topology to articulate the relations between Symbolic, Real, and Imaginary—arguing that anxiety is the symbolically real, the symptom is the only real thing that preserves sense, and that there is no sexual relationship except incestuous, with castration as the only truth.

     my stammerings the last time about the discourse that I call analytic… I certainly imagined the order in which the letters turned

167. #167

     Seminar XXIV · L'insu que sait de l'une-bévue s'aile à mourre · Jacques Lacan · p.100

     **Seminar 8: Wednesday 8 March 1977**

     Theoretical move: The passage pivots on the relation between the Real, the universal, and sense: Lacan argues that the Real is defined by the exclusion of all sense and by impossibility (what does not cease not to be written), yet psychoanalysis as a practice depends on words having import — a tension he navigates by revisiting the Four Discourses, specifically the Discourse of the Analyst, to show how the barred subject holds the place of Truth through Knowledge, while the gap between S1 and S2 marks an irreducible incompletion.

     I remind you that the place of semblance where I put the object…that the place of semblance is not where I articulated that of the Truth.

168. #168

     Seminar XXIV · L'insu que sait de l'une-bévue s'aile à mourre · Jacques Lacan · p.78

     So then what is this lack? > **Seminar 6: Wednesday 8 February 1977**

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Passe cannot be transmitted by a speaking subject alone (the *passant*) because the locus of enunciating from which S(Ø) is emitted cannot itself be said; only a topological writing—a graphical arrangement that articulates the subject of the enunciated and the subject of enunciating in a transmissible way—can function as the true Passer, which is why Lacan's seminars and graphs perpetually recreate the conditions of division.

     the king who is supposed to be R4, in the position of the analyst, is for his part capable of recognising the locus from where Bozef speaks

169. #169

     Seminar VII · The Ethics of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.309

     **XIV** > **XXII**

     Theoretical move: Lacan advances a theory of the beautiful as the signifier of a limit-point between life and death, situating it alongside a shame-function (Aidōs) as barriers to jouissance, before concluding that analysis ends not at the Sovereign Good but at the experienced desire of the analyst — a desire that cannot desire the impossible — and that drive arises as the effect of the signifier's mark on need.

     What the analyst has to give, unlike the partner in the act of love, is something that even the most beautiful bride in the world cannot outmatch, that is to say, what he has. And what he has is nothing other than his desire

170. #170

     Seminar VII · The Ethics of Psychoanalysis · Jacques Lacan · p.300

     **XIV** > **XXII**

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the analyst's ethical task is inseparable from the question of desire's realization—which can only be posed from the standpoint of a "Last Judgment"—and that sublimation, properly understood via the metonymic structure of the drive and the signifier, is not a new object but the change of object as such, grounding the subject's access to its own relationship with death.

     I said somewhere that an analyst has to pay something if he is to play his role... Finally, he has to pay with a judgment on his action.

171. #171

     Seminar VIII · Transference · Jacques Lacan · p.411

     **M EDICAL H A R M O N Y** > **THE RELATIONSHIP BETW EEN ANXIETY A N D DESIRE** > **M O U R N IN G THE LOSS OF THE ANALYST**

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the analyst's desire is structured around a fundamental mourning — the recognition that no object (objet petit a) is of greater value than any other — and that this insight, shared with Socrates, connects melancholia, fantasy, the ego-ideal, and the ethics of love into a single topological point where desire meets its limit.

     What Socrates knew and what the analyst must at least glimpse is that at the level of little a, the question is entirely different from the question of access to some ideal.

172. #172

     Seminar VIII · Transference · Jacques Lacan · p.246

     **M EDICAL H A R M O N Y** > **D E M A N D A N D DESIRE IN THE ORAL A N D A N A L STAGES** > <span id="page-232-0"></span>**PSYCHE A N D THE CASTRATION COMPLEX**

     Theoretical move: The analyst's desire must take the form of "nescience qua nescience" — not ignorance but the structural position of holding lack without filling it — such that the only sign the analyst can give is the sign of the lack of a signifier, which alone opens the analysand to the unconscious; this is grounded in the phallus as signifier structuring the entire economy of desire through the tension between being and having.

     You see here the beginning of the path that I am attempting to open up toward what the analyst's desire must be. In order for the analyst to have what the analysand lacks, he must have nescience qua nescience.

173. #173

     The Triumph of Religion · Jacques Lacan · p.64

     I. Governing, Educating, and Analyzing

     Theoretical move: The passage uses Freud's triad of "impossible" positions—governing, educating, analyzing—to argue that the analytic function is historically novel and structurally distinct, and that its very novelty casts a "glancing light" on the other two functions; this asymmetry is precisely what Lacan's Four Discourses formalize.

     The arrival of the analyst at his proper function allowed us to cast a glancing light on what the other functions are.

174. #174

     A Voice and Nothing More · Mladen Dolar · p.172

     Silence

     Theoretical move: The analyst's silence does not simply oppose lalangue but is its structural flip side: by creating a void in which the analysand's speech resonates through the loop of the Other, silence dispossesses the voice, returning the message of desire as the voice of the drive, and this trajectory—from subject-supposed-to-know through fantasy to the object voice—is the path of analysis itself, culminating in la passe.

     To respond to the voice and respond for it is the starting point of analytic discourse, and its point is to keep the space open for this break in the continuity of 'bodies and languages.'

175. #175

     The Singularity of Being: Lacan and the Immortal Within · Mari Ruti · p.68

     2. *The Rewriting of Destiny* > *The Agency of the Signifi er* > *The Analyst as Daimon*

     Theoretical move: Analysis functions as an "interpellation beyond ideological interpellation" by repositioning the analyst as the enigmatic cause of desire, replacing fantasmatic fixations with a transferential relation that reorganizes the analysand's existential orientation and opens new possibilities of singularity.

     the analyst encourages it to pursue life directions that might have been previously foreclosed or unimaginable. Instead of paralyzing the subject, the analyst's enigmatic desire galvanizes layers of inner potentiality

176. #176

     Subject Lessons: Hegel, Lacan, and the Future of Materialism · Russell Sbriglia & Slavoj Žižek (eds.) · p.173

     Alenka Zupancˇ icˇ

     Theoretical move: Zupančič argues that Lacan and Deleuze diverge precisely where they are closest—on repetition—because for Lacan emancipation is not achieved by the centrifugal force of difference/repetition itself (Deleuze), but requires the production of a new signifier (S1) from within the analytic discourse, a signifier that names the foundational "hole" and thereby shifts the subject's relation to the signifying order.

     All in all, the operation of the analytic discourse is to fashion a model of the neurosis. Why? Well, to the extent that it takes out the rib of jouissance.

177. #177

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.155

     THE PHALLUS: ONE OF W~ S PARTNERS > **The Analyst's Discourse**

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Discourse of the Analyst, structured around objet petit a as agent, necessarily hystericizes the analysand by placing the divided subject on the 'firing line', forcing Master Signifiers produced through association into dialectical relation with the signifying chain — a process whose motor force is the analyst's pure desirousness.

     Object (a), as cause of desire, is the agent here, occupying the dominant or commanding position. The analyst plays the part of pure desirousness (pure desiring subject), and interrogates the subject in his or her division

178. #178

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.10

     **THE LACANIAN SUBJECT** > Pour Heloise

     Theoretical move: Fink's preface argues that the Lacanian subject has two faces—fixated symptom and subjectivization—mirrored by two faces of the object (objet petit a as Other's desire and as letter/signifierness), and that this non-parallel, "Gödelian" structure grounds a theory of sexual difference and underwrites psychoanalysis as an autonomous discourse irreducible to science.

     The Analyst's Discourse

179. #179

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.151

     THE PHALLUS: ONE OF W~ S PARTNERS > <span id="page-147-0"></span>**The** Four Discourses

     Theoretical move: The Four Discourses are introduced as structural matrices governing different social bonds, with the Master's Discourse functioning as the primary or originary discourse from which the other three are generated by quarter-turn rotations; each discourse's positions (agent, truth, other, product/loss) assign different roles to the same four mathemes (S1, S2, $, a), making discourse a structural — not psychological — category.

     the analyst's discourse only came into being at the end of the nineteenth century, and it was the analyst's discourse that eventually allowed the hysteric's discourse to be grasped.

180. #180

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.213

     <span id="page-191-0"></span>*Glossary of Lacanian Symbols* \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_ > There's No Such Thing as a Sexual Relationship

     Theoretical move: This endnote apparatus consolidates and defends Fink's interpretive positions on Lacan's formulas of sexuation, the non-existence of the sexual relationship, the structure of the signifier, and the Other jouissance—correcting common misreadings while flagging key conceptual distinctions (existence vs. ex-sistence, the bar of negation, the role of the phallus, S1/S2, and object a).

     An interesting conclusion is that one could go so far as to say that the analyst, qua analyst, is sexless. The same holds true for the master.

181. #181

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.156

     THE PHALLUS: ONE OF W~ S PARTNERS > **The Social Situation of Psychoanalysis**

     Theoretical move: Fink argues that the power struggles endemic to psychoanalytic institutions are not inherent to analytic discourse itself, but result from analysts adopting other discourses (master's, university, etc.) once institutionalization begins — thereby distinguishing the Discourse of the Analyst as a pure clinical form from the sociopolitical compromises forced upon psychoanalysis as a social practice.

     it does not seem to be inherent to analytic discourse as such… the latter results from the adoption of other discourses by analysts as soon as institutionalization begins

182. #182

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.219

     <span id="page-191-0"></span>*Glossary of Lacanian Symbols* \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_ > <span id="page-216-0"></span>**Chapter 9**

     Theoretical move: This passage consists of scholarly endnotes for chapters on the Four Discourses, Psychoanalysis and Science, and an Afterword — it is largely bibliographic and referential, but contains several load-bearing theoretical asides: that the specific ordering of mathemes in the Four Discourses is constitutive (not merely combinatorial), that object (a) is the remainder left over after science's symbolization of the real, and that there is always a limit to formalization.

     getting involved in teaching, analytic discourse leads the analyst to the analysand's position, which requires the adoption of the hysteric's discourse.

183. #183

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.161

     <span id="page-156-0"></span>Psychoanalysis and Science > **Science, the Hysteric's Discourse, and Psychoanalytic Theory**

     Theoretical move: Fink argues that psychoanalysis must be disaggregated into distinct facets—practice, theory/teaching, and institutional associations—each of which operates under a different discourse (analytic, hysteric's, master's, or university), and that this plurality of discourses is structurally necessary rather than aberrant, because every praxis deploys different discourses depending on context.

     Psychoanalytic practice, in other words, in the analytic setting, adopts analytic discourse—in the best of cases, that is, for many analysts clearly adopt something more along the lines of the university discourse.

184. #184

     The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance · Bruce Fink · p.233

     <span id="page-231-0"></span>**Index**

     Theoretical move: This is the index of Bruce Fink's *The Lacanian Subject*, listing key concepts, proper names, and page references — a non-substantive navigational apparatus with no original theoretical argumentation.

     analytic, 28, 129-31, 135-36, 142

185. #185

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.307

     Copernicus, Darwin, Freud . . . and Many Others > The Historicity of the Four Discourses

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that power is constitutively obscene—its "truth" is that it always already functions as an illegal excess—and uses this diagnosis to press the question of whether a structurally new Master Signifier (Lacan's *vers un signifiant nouveau*) is possible, or whether every revolution merely returns to the same obscene supplement, a structural problem shared by Badiou's and Miller's frameworks.

     today's hegemonic discourse is no longer that of the Master, but that of the Analyst, with a (the superego injunction to enjoy) occupying the place of the agent—in what, then, does the job of the analyst consist?

186. #186

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.304

     Copernicus, Darwin, Freud . . . and Many Others > The Historicity of the Four Discourses

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the discourse of the Analyst and the discourse of perversion share the same upper-level formula (a–S/), such that the crucial difference lies in the radical ambiguity of objet petit a (as fantasmatic lure vs. the Void behind it); consequently, today's civilization functions as a perverse social link, and psychoanalysis—as the only discourse permitting non-enjoyment—points toward a different collective social bond beyond the Master's discourse.

     the formula of the discourse of perversion is the same as that of the analyst's discourse: Lacan defines perversion as the inverted fantasy, that is, his formula of perversion is a–S/, which is precisely the upper level of the Analyst's discourse.

187. #187

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.263

     Copernicus, Darwin, Freud . . . and Many Others > interlude 2

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that Lacanian analysis has surrendered its sociopolitical critical edge by seeking institutional recognition, while Hardt and Negri's biopolitical theory of the multitude commits a parallel theoretical error: by neglecting the dialectical role of capitalist *form*, they reproduce the ultimate capitalist fantasy of frictionless self-revolutionizing production, leaving the notional structure of revolutionary rupture in darkness.

     from Lacan's notion of analysis as subversive of identifications, we are obtaining analysts who function as a kind of mental repair service, providing ersatz identifications

188. #188

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.379

     The Academic Rumspringa, or, the Parallax of Power and Resistance > Of Eggs, Omelets, and Bartleby's Smile

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that the Bartleby-gesture of pure withdrawal ("I would prefer not to") constitutes not a preparatory stage but the permanent ontological foundation of revolutionary politics—a parallax shift from the gap between two somethings to the gap between something and nothing, which simultaneously empties the superego supplement from the Law and reduces metaphysical difference to the immanent void within reality itself.

     the discourse of the analyst who, while occupying this place of supposed knowledge, keeps it empty

189. #189

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.299

     Copernicus, Darwin, Freud . . . and Many Others > The Historicity of the Four Discourses

     Theoretical move: The passage argues that Lacan's four discourses map the historicity of European modernity—with the Master's discourse coding absolute monarchy, University/Hysteria coding biopolitics and capitalist subjectivity, and the Analyst's discourse coding emancipatory politics—while complicating Miller's claim that contemporary civilization itself operates as the Analyst's discourse, and then pivoting to show how global reflexivization paradoxically generates brute, "Id-Evil" immediacy resistant to interpretation.

     the Analyst's discourse stands for the emergence of revolutionary-emancipatory subjectivity that resolves the split into university and hysteria: in it, the revolutionary agent (a) addresses the subject from the position of knowledge which occupies the place of truth

190. #190

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.261

     Copernicus, Darwin, Freud . . . and Many Others > interlude 2

     Theoretical move: Žižek argues that the anti-Semitic figure of the Jew mystifies constitutive social antagonism by displacing it onto an external limit, and that Milner's "Jewish exception" logic inadvertently reproduces this displacement; the properly Lacanian response is a "not-all" Europe in which everyone becomes an exception (objet petit a), dissolving the need for a constitutive Other — and he extends this critique to Jacques-Alain Miller's therapeutic-political proposal, which he reads as a socially conservative "compassionate cushion" that profits from the disarray of identifications rather than challenging the anonymous systems that produce it.

     Miller recently wrote that it is the duty of the psychoanalyst to participate in the debates of the city … psychoanalysts should aspire to become recognized talking partners in the dialogue and the decisions to be taken by politicians and administrators

191. #191

     The Parallax View · Slavoj Žižek · p.124

     The Birth of (Hegelian) Concrete Universality out of the Spirit of (Kantian) Antinomies > Too Much Life!

     Theoretical move: Žižek argues that shame, castration, and the "undead" lamella are not opposed but structurally co-produced: the noncastrated remainder (lamella/objet petit a) is not what escapes castration but precisely what castration generates as its own surplus, collapsing the distinction between lack and excess into a Möbius-strip parallax.

     the wager of the discourse of the analyst is precisely that one can establish a social link based directly on this creaturely excess, bypassing the Master-Signifier

192. #192

     The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche's Philosophy of the Two · Alenka Zupančič · p.195

     <span id="page-186-0"></span>Notes > Part I: Nietzsche the Metapsychologist > Part II: Noon

     Theoretical move: This passage is a notes/bibliography section (endnotes for Parts I and II of the book), providing citations to Nietzsche, Lacan, Badiou, Deleuze, and others. It is non-substantive as a theoretical argument in itself, though several quoted passages gesture at key conceptual nodes (truth, jouissance, the not-all, analytical discourse).

     In order to relegate the truth to the lowly status it deserves, one must have entered into analytical discourse.

193. #193

     The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche's Philosophy of the Two · Alenka Zupančič · p.118

     <span id="page-33-0"></span>part i

     Theoretical move: Zupančič argues that truth-as-perspective (in Nietzsche) and analytic discourse (in Lacan) share a structurally homologous status: both are constituted not by a new stable position but by the irreducible gap or decentering produced in the *shift* between perspectives/discourses, figured as a "Two" of pure disjunction rather than either the One or the multiple.

     Lacan maintains that whenever there is a shift from one discourse to another (i.e. whenever we change discourse), the analytic discourse emerges.

194. #194

     What Is Sex? · Alenka Zupančič · p.135

     Object-Disoriented Ontology > Death Drive II: Lacan and Deleuze

     Theoretical move: Against Deleuze's thesis that repetition itself selects/expels difference through centrifugal force, Zupančič-via-Lacan argues that only the production of a new signifier (S1) — generated from the subject's enjoyment-in-talking within analytic discourse — can effect a genuine separation at the heart of the drive's repetition, thereby triggering a new subjectivation that repression alone cannot accomplish.

     this separation is possible only through a third term, produced in the course of analysis: S1, a new signifier (situated at the place of 'production' in the analytic discourse)