On the specificity of the word in the clinical analytic
MARIEL MASTRIACOVO
examples would be superfluous everyday situations in which the entire value of the word wants to be comfortably covered in a referential function. Abundant cultural ways of living, to sustain social bonds to institutional practices that seem to deny all value, the symbolic commitment of talking exclusively human activity.
However, against this and for thinking about the function of speech in psychoanalysis, the cultural theme mented politically correct and flawed attempts to rescue the "point of view of the speaker" or accepted and disciplinary sentences such as "the man creates the world that lives by stating "(E. Benveniste) do not add much.
What is the specificity of the word put into circulation in the analytic?
In One difficulty for psychoanalysis Freud clearly found the reason for the lack or poor acceptance at that time had psychoanalysis [1] : the ego is not master in his own house, not only this but also , their response to that condition is, like psychiatry, shrug and turn to the pathologizing of the psychic. Freud discussed in the text against those discursive positions, ideological, ethical watering ego sustain the illusion of being able to explain everything is the work of men assuming that one can "do one "with what he says, what he does, denying all existence of conflicting drives and the unconscious. We can say preliminarily that the proposed clinical work of Freud seeks to break the tibia indulgence and self-tolerance (which may be very close to the most cynical impunity) of man to his way of life, and how they suffer.
Since the beginning of his teaching Lacan discussed with the conventional assumption that exists in natural terms, objectively, a subject-object. For example, in a seminar, where signification locutionis chapter takes up the dialogue between St. Augustine and his "child of sin", Adeodato. Thereafter is then argued that the subject-object, far from being natural is interrupted and at the same time made possible by language. In the seminar four this is reflected in the graph. Subject to address the subject is inevitably compelled to speak, with which the object provided away from your hand moves in the discourse. Thus, when the subject speech is divided between what he says and what it means, not only this but, in this "meaning" there is no unity, linearity or principle of identity that final order.
Freud emphasized in the project which is a condition of any possible representation in the unconscious logic of preexisting presence and the absence of objects in both perceptions. It is necessary to assume that after the state of necessity, urgency, internal alteration of helplessness served as a communication channel for foreign assistance. As long as someone is willing to read the internal derangement as requested, as a message to the Other, something happens to disrupt that state state. For there to be represented in the unconscious is necessary to have mnénicas tracks, which are formed as waste, waste from the experiences of pain and satisfaction.
field represented is constituted from its origins abutting an impassable limit: there is something on the order of the unrepresentable, what remains only last inaugural, waste. The object, together with all possible objectification of what happened is lost. Against this, the question might be what the relationship between this limit, the loss of the object, sense, Reality, Truth and unconscious representations in the work of analysis is called the roll. If we add secondary enforcement operations is not excessive then exhaustively say that the subject of the unconscious never stated in terms of completeness, coherence and cohesion but has cut, in the wreckage, stumbling, in jokes, in slip.
In Denial are a sign that realizes absurd ways, elusive, even humorous in that the unconscious has "never entered my mind to think about it, does representation often make their way into consciousness on condition of being denied. Denial is a rise of repression, but not an acceptance of what is repressed. In recall, repeat, elaborate Freud states that it is generally impossible for the memory of a special class of very important events for the children displayed. These events are revealed much earlier by other means. The review has no memory of the forgotten or repressed, but it lives again, not named, not what is in memory, the repeated transfer. The cure begins with such repetition, failure of infantile sexuality, Freud says, is dream is disfigured and resistencial refusal to recognize it. By way of repetition neurosis enters the field of action of healing: on what the patient experiences the analyst as real therapeutic work practice Freud say in this article. The patient's disease, far from ending with the entrance to the office or a brief therapy is a potential for the analyst to present to install the transference neurosis and the possibility of cure. Freud will say that the best way to question repetition and question the subject is in the handling of the transfer. It is in the device vulgar neurosis analysis is replaced by a transference neurosis which can be cured.
We then, symptoms, dreams and associations, repetitions, appearing in discourse and action of the patient. In Constructions in analysis Freud say about this raw material analysis which ensure that all the essentials of mental life is preserved. The analyst, like the anthropologist, will search for the remains, buried it clear that the analyst does not need to dive into any kind of psychic depths, unlike the anthropologist who knows where to dig to find, the analyst works for emergence of remains, it asks for, he says, but declines have on hand an accurate map with appropriate references to now ask, now silent, now draw this or that significant. We
this raw material the material on which are mounted, according to Miller, the two clinical dimensions: symptom and fantasy. Miller say in the text that the ethical foundations of the practice lie in to keep these two dimensions, which are not autonomous but not confirmed. Warns of the risks of a lapse analysis mainly through the symptoms, patients talk about their symptoms, they complain, they live, of them know more it entailed. The therapeutic effects that something will take another course symptomatic that something is rearrange and the patient suffers a bit less for their symptoms. Is it sufficient? Is it simply that someone calls for someone to talk? Is it "stop suffering" (as in religious calls) the proposal of the analysis?
Miller claimed the place and the analyst's desire, as singularities, not as ontological entities that can work for the neurotic complaint, the joyful telling the family novel "break" and invite "a walk on the side the swim, to go see what's behind the symptoms, although there there is nothing. Being good at your own skin, even if not a little thing, not the center, the goal of the work of analysis, it is at least one determinant of final analysis. This may be the bet against the grain of culture, power, established that the device hold analysis. Also
Constructions in analysis Freud notes that the dynamics of the analysis is held in a double work: the patient talks and it is thanks to this that some dreams, some remember, unconscious representations are deployed, the analyst, this raw material, constructed. Freud in this text points out the difference between interpretation and construction. Interpretation is applied to a single material, such as an association or parapraxis. It is a building when the analyst to the patient places a piece of his past history, he has forgotten. Freud asks in this article about what are the guarantees that an analyst has at the time of construction. Given this would not have general validity but the experience provides comforting information tell Freud: a building does not prejudice unfortunate historical truth of the patient or on the proper course of analysis. Now, the analyst speaks, gives a reading, provides a building and then? Finished? Say, it was concluded a minute, something of the truth has been said and this resolved it could move forward? Quite contrary to what might be expected, or expected from the ideals of the era, one who is paid for attending say something definitive, the word of the analyst does not conclude the work, relaunches. All the value of a building lies in the effects generated in the post subject to these the possibility of calculating a priori the analyst is rudimentary, or at least is not an exact calculation. Freud warns, do not accept a person not in treatment at face value but do not give free passage to yes. None of the patient's immediate reactions has value unless they are accompanied by indirect confirmations, eg an item in an association. So both the "no" "yes" are as such quite ambiguous. Regarding the "no" Freud makes an important remark: the refusal by the analysand to the analyst's construction in all fairness can be due to resistance, but also due to some other factor in the complex analytic situation. The patient may say "no" to something that the explicit content of the statement of the analyst is not present. Why deny the subject when he refuses to talk about what has not been said? There is an answer to this to explain all cases, all negative. But intriguing as this situation that Freud described in this article gave rise to this job poster.
Then the word of the analyst does not close, that does not complete the subject. Freud takes the path that starts at a construction should end in memories, but not always go so far. Yes there after certain interventions by the analyst with a patient's response to Freud in this paper highlights a strange phenomenon and at first incomprehensible. Ultraclear stories emerge about the subject to which the intervention of the analyst noted. Freud say, are the product of compromise between the repressed, as in activity for the presentation of the building, which has attempted important memory-traces into consciousness and resistance that have managed to move to adjacent objects, minor.
Remembering what Freud says in a child being beaten we can locate these productions of the work of analysis as representatives of the second scene it is possible to cosntuir in the analysis, which would account for the position against holding another subject. The notion of fantasy is presented as inevitable, even if not the central theme of this poster. Cobra from here a new sense that "walk on the side of the swim" that is invited Miller said the subject as already mentioned in the text. It seems paradoxical, the device is armed, inter alia, to talk about what is not possible to enunciate but after much work and a completely subtle, elusive, brief. Because at the end of the day who can respond in an accurate, conclusive, definitive position before desiring?
References:
E. Benveniste's Problems in General Linguistics, subjectivity in language
S. Freud S. Constructions in analysis
Freud, Project for a psychology for neurologists
S. Freud, S.
Denial Freud, Remembering, repeating, develop
S. Freud, A shortness of psychoanalysis
S. Freud, a child being beaten
JJ Lacan, Seminar 1, The topical JJ
imaginary Lacan Seminar 4, object relations
JA Miller, Two-dimensional clinical symptoms and ghost
[1] could say that in these times.
0 comments:
Post a Comment