My Teaching读后感摘抄

《My Teaching》是一本由Jacques Lacan著作，Verso出版的Paperback图书，本书定价：USD 16.95，页数：128，特精心收集的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。

《My Teaching》读后感(一)：后记（全书完）

BIO-BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES

by Jacques-Alain Miller

The first of these lectures was given in October 1967 at the Centre hospitaller du Vinatier in Lyon; the second in Bordeaux on 20 April 1967; and the third on 10 June 1967 at the Faculte de medecine, Strasbourg.

A stencilled tranｓｃｒｉｐｔ of the Lyon lecture was published by the CES de psychiatrie de Faculte de medecine, Lyon-I in 1981; it was republished, with my authorization, in the journal Essaim. Tranｓｃｒｉｐｔs of the other two lectures were circulated. The Asile du Vinatier, created by the law of 30 June 1838 that provided for a mental asylum in every departement, suffered for a long time from its negative image and was known as ‘I'Asile de Bron’. Reformed after the Liberation of France, it had already become the Centre hospitalier du Vinatier when Lacan visited it. The establishment is now the Khone-Alpes region's main psychiatric centre.

The philosopher Henri Maldiney, who was born in 1912 and who taught at the Universitede Lyonjbr a long time, had Jinks with the phenomenohgical movement. His w$rk concentrated mainly on poetry, the jine arts and Western and Chinese landscapes.

There was a large Lacanian,group in Strasbourg. It developed Jrom the mid-1950s onwards around Lucien Israel, a professor of psychiatry and a psychoanalyst. It was hiS> idea to invite Lacan to Strasbourg.

Lacan visited Bordeaux at the invitation of a number of interns at the Hopital psychiatrique (CHS) Chades-Verr&ns. The lecture took place in a municipal building opposite the establishmen.

BIO-BIBLIOGRAPHICAL笔记 by 雅克-阿兰·米勒

第一次讲座于1967年10月在里昂的Vinatier医院中心举行，第二次于1967年4月20日在波尔多，第三次于1967年6月10日在斯特拉斯堡医学院。

里昂讲座的打印稿于1981年由里昂医学院精神病学中心出版。经过我授权，这篇文章被重新发表在《Essaim》杂志上。另外两场讲座的讲稿也分发了。1838年6月30日法律规定在每个区提供精神病院，Asile du Vinatier在此法律下建立的，并长期遭受其负面形象，被称为‘I’Asile de Bron’。在法国解放后进行了改革，当拉康访问它时，已经成为了Vinatier医院中心。该机构现在是霍内-阿尔卑斯地区的主要精神病中心。

哲学家亨利·马尔迪尼(Henri Maldiney)1912年出生，长期在里昂大学任教，对现象学运动很感兴趣。他的作品主要集中在诗歌、绘画艺术和中西山水画。

在斯特拉斯堡有一个很大的拉康派团体。它是从20世纪50年代中期开始由精神病学教授和精神分析学家吕西安·伊斯雷尔(Lucien Israel)发展起来的。邀请拉康到斯特拉斯堡是他的绝妙主意。

拉康应Chades-Verr&ns精神病院实习生的邀请访问了波尔多。讲座是在政府对面的市政大楼里举行的。

《My Teaching》读后感(二)：第一篇第三节（待续）

The Place, Origin and End of My Teaching

我的讲学：处境、开始与结束

3

Why have I introduced the function of the subject as something distinct from anything to do with the psyche？

I cannot really give you a theoretical explanation, but I can show you how this has to do with the subject's function in language, and that is a double function.

There is the subject of the utterance [enonce]. That subject is quite easy to identify. / means the person who is actually speaking at the moment I say /. But the subject is not always the subject of the utterance, because not all utterances contain /. Even when there is no /— even when you say, 'It's raining' — there is a subject of the enunciation [enunciation], and there is a subject even when it can no longer be grasped in the sentence.

为什么我把主体的功能介绍为与心理有关东西的不同？

我不能给你一个理论上的解释，但我可以告诉你这与语言中的主体功能有什么关系，这是一个双重功能。

有言语[enonce]的主体。这个主体很容易识别。/是指在说/的那一刻实际说话的人。但主体并不总是言语的主体，因为并非所有言语都包含 /。即使没有/——即使你说“下雨了”——也有一个发音的主体，即使在句子中也无法掌握它，也有一个主体。

All this allow us to represent a lot of things. The subject that concerns us here, the subject not insofar as it produces discourse but insofar as it is produced [fait], cornered even [fait comme un rat], by discourse, is the subject of the enunciation.

This allows me to put forward a formula that I present to you as one of the most primordiaL It is a definition of what we call the 'element' in language. It has always been called the 'element', even in Greek. The Stoics called it 'the signifier'. I state that what distinguishes it from the sign is that 'the signifier is that which represents the subject for another signifier', not for another subject.

All I am thinking of doing this evening is to try to get you a bit interested. I don't think I can do anything more than plonk it in your hand and say to you: 'You try to make it function.' Besides, you have been given a few clues here and there, because I have pupils who, from time to time, show how it functions.

所有这些使我们能够表示很多东西。我们这里关心的主体，不是因为它产生话语，而是通过话语产生了主体[事实]，甚至被逼入绝境[既成事实]，是阐明的主体。

这使我能够提出一个公式，我将其作为最原始的公式之一呈现给你们，这是我们在语言中称为“元素”的定义。它一直被称为“元素”，即使在希腊语中也是如此。斯多葛学派称之为“能指”。我声明，它与符号的区别在于“能指是代表另一个能指的主体”，而不是另一个主体。

我今晚想做的只是让你们有点兴趣。我想我什么也做不了，只能把它放在你们手里，然后对你们说：“试着让它发挥作用。” 此外，你在这里和那里得到了一些线索，因为我的学生不时展示它是如何运作的。

The important point is that it requires the formal, topological admission, not that it matters much where it hangs out, of a certain table, if you like, that we will call 'Table 0’. They sometimes also call it ‘the Other’ around here, when they know what I'm talking about: the Other, which takes a capital 'O' too. To the extent that we can identify it in terms of the workings of the subject, this Other is to be defined as the site of speech. This is not where speech is uttered, but where it takes on the value of speech, or in other words where it inaugurates the dimension of truth. It is absolutely indispensable to the workings of what we are talking about.

重要的是，它需要正式的拓扑承认，而不是它挂在哪里很重要，某个表，如果你愿意，我们称之为“Table 0". 他们有时也称为"他者Other"，当他们知道我在谈论Other时，它也需要一个大写的‘O’。只要我们可以根据主体的运作来识别它，这个他者将被定义为言语的场所。这不是言语被说出来的地方，而是它具有言语价值的地方，换句话说，它开创了真理的维度。对于我们正在谈论的运作，它是绝对不可或缺的。

。。。

《My Teaching》读后感(三)：第一篇《我的讲学：处境、开始与结束》第二节 (待补充...)

The Place, Origin and End of My Teaching

我的讲学：处境、开始与结束

2

So you see, it's the opposite of what I was just saying. I told you that its place was an accident. At the end of the day, I was pushed into the hole we are talking about, and no one wants to stumble into that. The reason why I fight so seriously is that, once it has started, you can't stop just like that. Now, on the subject of the origin, well it certainly does not mean what it might suggest to you on first hearing, namely when and why it began. I am not talking to you about what they nobly call the origins of my thought or even my practice in theses from the Sorbonne and other Faculties of Arts. One wellintentioned individual wanted me to talk to you about Monsieur de Clerambault, but I won't talk to you about him, because that really would not do. 所以你看，这和我刚才说的正好相反。

我告诉过你它的处境是个意外。最后，我被推到了我们正在谈论的那个坑里，没有人想陷入那样的境地。我之所以如此认真地战斗，是因为一旦开始你就不能停止。

现在是关于开始的话题，当然不是意味着你第一次听到它时所想到的，也就是它的开始时间及原因。

我不是在和你们谈论人们崇高地称之为我思想的起源，甚至也不是我在索邦大学和其他艺术学院的论文中思想与实践的起源。有一个好心的人要我谈谈德克莱朗博先生，但我不跟你们谈论他，因为那实在不行。 Clerambault taught me things. (footnote 7 [Gactan Gatian de Clcrambauh (1872—1934), French psychiatrist. Lacan worked under him in the later 1920s, and his studies of erotomania and mental automatism were a significant influence on his early work.] ) He simply taught me to see what I had in front of me: a madman. As befits a psychiatrist, he taught me that by interposing a very pretty little theory between me and him, the madman: mechanicism, and that is the most worrying thing in the world when you think about it. When you are a psychiatrist, you always interpose something. So, what we have in front of us is a guy who has what Clerambault called 'mental automatism', or in other words a guy who cannot make a gesture without being ordered to, without being told: 'Look, he's doing that, the little rascal” If you are not a psychiatrist, if you simply have, let's say, a human, intersubjective, sympathetic attitude, it really must give you a hell of a shock when a guy comes along and tells you something like that. 克莱兰博教会了我很多东西。(脚注7 [Gactan Gatian de Clcrambauh(1872-1934)，法国精神病学家]。拉康在20世纪20年代后期在他手下工作，他对色情狂和精神自动性的研究对他早期的工作产生了重大影响。) 他只是教我认清我面前的是什么：一个疯子。作为一个精神科医生，他通过在我和他这个疯子之间插入一个非常小的理论来教我：机械论，仔细想想这是世界上最令人担忧的事情。当你是精神病医生时，你总是会介入一些事情。

所以，在我们面前的是一个家伙---Clerambault称之为“精神自动”，换句话说一个人没有被命令就不能做一个手势，没有被告知：“看，他这样做，这个小流氓。” 如果你不是一个精神病医生，如果你只是有，比方说，一个人道的、主体间性、同情的态度，当一个人来告诉你这样，必然给你一个可怕的冲击。 A guy who lives that way, who cannot make a gesture without someone saying: 'Look, he's stretching his arm out, silly bugger', well that really is something fabulous, but if you decree that it's the effect of a mechanism somewhere, of something that tickles your convolutions and, besides, something that no one has ever seen, you just see how you calm down. Clerambault taught me a lot about the status of psychiatrists. I've naturally retained what he taught me about what he called mental automatism. A lot of people have noticed the phenomenon since, and have described it in much the same terms, but that does not mean that it's not priceless when you hear it from the horse's mouth. Having said that, Clerambault was very clear-sighted because the fact remains that no one before him had noticed the nature of this mental automatism. Why？ Because psychiatrists veiled it even more heavily then. They sometimes even put so many 'faculties of arts' between themselves and their madmen that they could not even see the phenomenon. 这样生活的人，他做任何一个手势都会有人说：“看，他伸出了他的手臂，笨蛋”，这确实是一件了不起的事情，但如果你断定这是某种机制的结果，是某种让你感到兴奋的东西，而且，是一种没人见过的东西，你就会看到你是如何平静下来的。克莱兰博教会了我很多精神科医生的地位。

十分自然地，我保留了他教给我的他称之为“精神自动化”的东西。从那以后，很多人都注意到了这一现象，并用相同的术语来描述它，但这并不意味着当你从马的嘴里听到它时，它就不是无价的。话虽如此，克莱朗博的眼光还是很清楚的，因为事实是，在他之前没有人注意到这种精神上的自动行为的性质。为什么？因为精神科医生把它遮掩得更严了。他们有时甚至在自己和他们的疯子之间放置了太多的“艺术装置”，以至于他们甚至看不到这种现象。 Even today, we might see more, might describe hallucination in very different terms. Not really being a psychoanalyst is all it takes, and they are not psychoanalysts. And they are not exactly psychoanalysts to the extent that, even though they are psychoanalysts, they keep that noble distance between themselves and what even psychoanalysts still call mental patients. Oh, let's drop it. .....

《My Teaching》读后感(四)：前言（英文）

My Teaching JACQUES LACAN Translated by David Macev

《我的讲学》by 雅克.拉康 英译 David Macev

Contents Preface by Jacques-Alain Miller vii 1 The Place, Origin and End of My Teaching 2 My Teaching, Its Nature and Its Ends 3 So, You Will Have Heard Lacan Bio-Biblioaraphical Notes

目录 前言 by Jacques-Alain Miller 1. 我的讲学的处境、缘起与结束 2. 我的讲学，它的性质和它的结束 3. 故你将听说过拉康 关于作者与作品的一些说明 by Jacques-Alain Miller

Preface

It was 1967, and then 1968, before the month of May. Ecrits had been published in late 1966. Lacan was invited everywhere to talk about it. He sometimes accepted the invitations and went to various provincial towns. （Footnote 1 He also visited Italy, where he gave three lectures. The text, which was written in advance, is included in Autres Ecrits, Paris: Seuil, 2001, 329-359.）

前言 本书有关的讲座发生在1967年和1968年5月前。《Ecrits文集》在1966年下半年出版。拉康到处受邀介绍此书。他有时接受邀请，去了法国不同地区的城市。（脚注1：他也访问了意大利，在那里发表了三篇演讲。讲稿是事先写好的，并收入于《Autres Ecrits 其他文集》中，巴黎:Seuil, 329-359页。）

He found himself faced with audiences who were not familiar with what he called his 'same old story'. He improvised, described his difficulties with his colleagues, and expounded the concepts of psychoanalysis in the most accessible style. He was funny. For example: * We've always known about the unconscious. But in psychoanalysis, the unconscious is an unconscious that thinks hard. Just a minute, just a minute.' Sometimes it even sounded like a sketch by someone like Pierre Dae, Devos or Bedos （ Footnote 2 [ 'Pierre Dae' (1893- 1975), Raymond Devos (1922 2006) and Guv Bedos (1934—) are three well-known French comics.] ）： Psycho-analysts do not say that they know in so many words, but they imply that they do. ‘we do know a bit about it, but let's keep quiet about that. Let's keep it between ourselves.' We enter this field of knowledge by way of a unique experience that consists, quite simply, in being psychoanalyzed. After that, you can talk. Being able to talk does not mean that you do talk. You could. You could if you wanted to, and you would want to if you were talking to people like us, people who are in the know, but what's the point？ And so, we remain silent with those who do know and those who don't know, because those who don't know cannot know.

他发现他面对的观众并不熟悉他所说的“相同的旧故事”。他即兴演讲，描述了他与同行们的困难，并以最容易接受的方式阐述了精神分析的概念。他十分有趣的，例如他说: “我们一直了解无意识。但是在精神分析中，无意识是一种努力思考的无意识。等一等，等一等。” 有时他的描述听起来甚至像Pierre Dae, Devos 或 Bedos的风格（脚注2： 'Pierre Dae' (1893- 1975)，Raymond Devos (1922-2006) 和 Guv Bedos (1934-) 是三个著名法国喜剧家。）： 精神分析师不说很多话表明他们知道，但他们暗示他们的确知道。‘我们的确知道一些，但让我们保持沉默！让我们将此保持在我们之间！' 为了进入这一知识领域，我们经由一个特殊的经历，十分简单，包括了被精神分析的经历。之后，你可以说了。可以说并不意味着你就说了。你可以说。如果你想要说，你可以说； 或者，如果你说时面对着类似我们这样的人，即一些知道的人们，这时你可能想要说，但是问题在哪里？所以，我们对那些知道的人和那些不知道的人都保持沉默，因为那些不知道的人不可能知道。

Then came things that were more complex, but they were always introduced with the greatest simplicity. This volume brings together three lectures, which I have edited and which have not previously been published in book form. They are the following: • The Place, Origin and End of My Teaching' (Vinatier, Lyon, an asylum founded under the July Monarchy), The lecture is followed by a dialogue with the philosopher Henri Maldiney. • 'My Teaching, Its Nature and Its Ends' (Bordeaux). A lecture to psychiatric interns. • 'So, You Will Have Heard Lacan' (Faculty of Medicine, Strasbourg). The title is borrowed from the beginning of the lecture. Jacques-Alain Miller 还有更复杂的情况，但是总是用最终简洁的方式来介绍。本书包含了三个讲座，我进行了编辑，以前没有以书籍的形式发表过。三个讲座是： • “ 我的讲学的处境、缘起与结束” （里昂的Vinatier, 由July Monarchy 资助的避难所）， 讲座之后是与哲学家Henri Maldiney的对话。 • “我的讲学，它的性质和它的结束” （波尔多），给精神病实习医生的讲座。 • “故你将听说过拉康”（斯特拉斯堡医学院），标题取自讲座的开场白。

Jacques-Alain Miller

The Place, Origin and End of My Teaching 我的讲学的处境、缘起与结局 I do not think I will give you my teaching in the form of a pill; I think that would be difficult. Perhaps that will come later. That is always how it ends. When you have been dead long enough, you find yourself being summed up in three lines of a textbook — though where I am concerned, I'm not too sure which textbook it will be. I cannot foresee which textbooks I will figure in because I cannot foresee anything to do with the future of my teaching, or in other words psychoanalysis. We don't know what will become of this psychoanalysis. For my part, 1 do hope it becomes something, but it is not certain that that's the way it is heading. 我认为我不可能把我的讲学以药丸的方式给你们；我认为这是困难。

也许晚些时候这会发生。这总是它结束的方式。当你们已经死了足够时间，你们可以在教科书找到你自己，被三行文字所总结----虽然我关心在哪里，但我不太确定是什么教科书。我不能预见我将在什么教科书中出现，因为我无法预见我的讲学的未来，或者换句话说，也就是精神分析。我们不知道这个精神分析将会成为什么。对于我来说，我希望它成为什么，但我不确定它就会朝着这个方向发展。

You can see from that that my title, 'The Place, Origin and End of My Teaching', can begin to take on a meaning that is more than just summative. What I am trying to do is to let you in on something that is under way, that is in train, something that is unfinished and that will probably be finished only when I am finished, if I don't have one of those annoying accidents that make you outlive yourself. There again, I'm telling you I'm not heading in that direction.

It's like a well-constructed dissertation, with a start, a beginning and an end. 'Place', because we really do have to begin at the beginning.

你们可以看到，我的标题“我的讲学的处境、缘由和结束”可以具有一种意思，这不仅仅是总结性的。我正努力做的事，是让你们进入到某个半途中的事情中来，这事正在途中，还没有完成，有可能只有当我完成后才可能完成，如果我没有那些讨厌的事故使得你超越了你自己。再一次，我告诉你们，我没有朝着那个方向。

这像是一篇结构很好的论文，有起头，开始和结束。“处境”，因为我们真的必须从起始处开始。

1

In the beginning, there was not the origin. There was the place. There are perhaps two or three people here who have some idea about this same old story of mine. Place is a term I often use, because there are often references to place in the field that my discourses — or my discourse, if you prefer — deal with. If you wrant to know where you are in that field, it is advisable to have what other and more self-assured domains call a topology, and to have some idea of how the support on which what is at stake is inscribed was constructed. I certainly will not get that far this evening because I absolutely refuse to give you my teaching in the form of a little pill. 'Place' means something very different here from what it means in topology, in the sense of structure, where it is just a question of knowing whether a surface is a sphere or a ring, because what can be done with it is not at all the same. But that is not what this is about. * Place' can have a very different meaning. It simply means the place I have come to, and which puts me in a position to teach, given that there is such a thing as teaching.

开始的时候，没有原点。是处境。

这里也许有两三个人对我的这个老故事有所了解。地点是我经常使用的一个术语，因为我的话语处理的领域中经常有关于处境的引用。如果你想知道你在那个领域的位置，明智的做法是了解其他更自信的领域所称的拓扑结构，并对涉及到的内容的支撑是如何构建的有一些了解。

我今晚肯定不会讲那么多，因为我绝对拒绝以一粒小药丸的形式给你们讲课。“处境”在这里的意义与拓扑学中的意义非常不同，在结构意义上，只是知道一个表面是球面还是圆环的问题，因为用它可以做什么是完全不同的。但这不是重点。“处境”可以有非常不同的意思，简单地说是指我来到的地方，将我处于讲学的位置，因为有讲学这样的事。

《My Teaching》读后感(五)：第二篇第二节

2

It is obvious that what I teach has to do with what we call the psychoanalytic experience.

They want to transport all that into, I don't know, something that doesn't put it in any position to know, what they call by a nice name that sounds like a sneeze, a Weltanschauung. Far be it from me to be so pretentious. That's what I hate most. I'll never indulge in that, thank God. No Weltanschauung. And all the rest of those Weltanschauungen, I loathe them.

What I teach has to do with something very different, with technical procedures and formal details concerning an experience that is either very serious, or an incredible errancy, something mad, demented. And that is what it looks like from the outside. The basic thing about analysis is that people finally realize that they've been talking nonsense at full volume for years.

显然，我讲学的与我们称为精神分析的经验有关。

他们想把所有这些都转移到，我不知道，某种不让它处于任何位置的东西，他们用一个好听的名字叫它，听起来像一个喷嚏，一个世界观。我可不想这么矫情。这是我最讨厌的。感谢上帝，我永远不会沉溺于此。没有世界观。我讨厌所有其他的世界观。

我所讲学的是一些非常不同的东西，关于一种体验的技术程序和正式细节，这些体验要么非常严重，要么是令人难以置信的错误，一些疯狂、精神错乱的东西。这是其外观。关于分析，最基本的事情是人们最终意识到他们多年来一直在以最大的音量说废话。

For my part, I try to show, by starting out from what clarifies its raison d'etre^ why it lasts, why it goes on, why it ends up as something that is very often not at all what they think they have to announce to the outside world, what they claim to owe to the way it operates. It's obvious that this is a discursive operation, a discourse-operation. You'll say to mc that some people go through their whole analysis without saying anything. If that's the case, it's an eloquent silence.

We did not have to wait for analysis to take an interest in discourse. Indeed, discourse is the starting point for anything scientific. It's not enough to imagine philosophy in the register I was just telling you about, namely how beautiful thoughts were passed on down the ages. That is not what this is about. The purpose of philosophy is to specify the extent we can extract things that are certain enough to be described as science from a discourse-operation.

It's taken time for a science to emerge: our science, which has certainly proved its worth — though what it proves remains to be seen, though it has proved effective, It's all about perfecting the correct use of discourse, and nothing more.

对我来说，我试图从理清它“存在的理由”开始，来说明为什么它会持续，为什么它继续，为什么它最终不是他们认为他们必须向外界宣布的东西，为什么他们声称要归功于它的运作方式。很明显，这是一个话语式操作，一个话语操作。你们会对我说，有些人在整个分析过程中什么也没说。如果是这样的话，这是一个雄辩的沉默。

我们不必等到分析才对话语产生兴趣。的确，话语是任何科学的起点。仅仅把哲学想象成我刚才讲的那种知识是不够的，也就是说，美丽的思想是如何代代相传的。这不是这里所关心的。哲学的目的在于规定我们能在多大程度上从话语操作中提炼出足以被称为科学的确定事物。

一门科学的出现需要时间：我们的科学，确实证明了自身价值——尽管它证明了什么还有待观察，尽管它被证明是有效的，它只是完善了关于话语的正确使用，仅此而已。

And what about experience, you say？ The whole point is that experience is constituted as such only if we start out by asking the right question. We call that a hypothesis. Why a hypothesis？ A hypothesis is simply a question that has been asked in the right way. Something, in other words, begins to take a de facto form, and a fact [fait] always made up of [fait de] discourse. No one has ever seen a received fact. That is not a fact. It's a lump, something you bump into, all the things that can be said about something that is not already discursively articulated.

Psychoanalysis, which is an absolutely new example of discourse, leads us to take another little look at how we pose the problem of, for example, roots. It encourages us, for example, to investigate the phenomenon constituted by the appearance of a logic, its adventures and the strange things it ends up showing us.

你会说，那经验呢？关键在于，只有当我们从提出正确的问题开始时，经验才会构成。我们称之为假设。为什么是假设？假设只是以正确方式提出的问题。换句话说，某种东西开始采取事实的形式，而事实总是由事实话语构成的。没有人见过一个公认的事实。这不是事实。它是一团东西，你撞到的东西，关于某个事物的可以被说出来的所有东西，而这个事物还没有被话语清晰地表达出来。

精神分析是话语的一个全新例子，它让我们再看一看我们是如何提出问题的，比如说，根源。例如，它鼓励我们去研究由一种逻辑出现所构成的现象，其冒险和最终向我们展示的奇怪东西。

There was a certain Aristotle, and his position - what you believe after this declaration is of little importance — was not dissimilar to mine. We don't really have much idea of what, of whom he had to deal with. They were called, in a vague, confused way, sophists. We naturally have to be suspicious of these terms, and we have to be very careful. There is in fact a black-out on what people got from the sophists' oracle. Probably something effective, because we know that they paid them very well, in the same way they pay psychoanalysts. Aristotle certainly got something out of it, but it had absolutely no effect on the people he was talking to. That's how it was for him, and how it is for me. It's the same. What I say makes no difference to psychoanalysts who are already very settled in their ways. But we can continue, continue, and hope.

All the wonderful things we find in the Prior Analytics, the Posterior Analytics and the Categories are what we call logic. It's been devalued now because we are the ones who do real, serious logic, though we've not been doing it for long; since the mid-nineteenth century, about 150 years.

有个人叫亚里士多德，他的处境和我的没什么不同——在这个声明后你相信什么无关紧要。我们不太清楚他要和什么、和谁打交道。他们被含糊其辞地称为诡辩家。我们自然要对这些术语持怀疑态度，我们必须非常小心。事实上，人们从诡辩家的预言中得到的东西具有爆炸性。可能是一些有效的东西，因为我们知道人们给他们的报酬很高，就像他们给精神分析师的报酬一样。亚里士多德当然从中得到了一些东西，但对他的听众完全没有影响。他就是这样，我也是这样。这是一样的。我说的话对那些已经很固定的精神分析学家来说没有什么区别。但我们可以继续，继续，并满怀希望。

在先验分析，后验分析和范畴中，我们发现的所有美妙东西是我们所说的逻辑。它现在已经贬值了，因为我们是真正的、严肃的逻辑人，尽管我们这样做的时间不长；从19世纪中叶开始，大约150年。

Correct, strict, true logic is the logic that began with a certain Boole. It gives us the opportunity to revise a few ideas. We always believed that, when we had established a few good principles from the outset, everything we could derive from them would run smoothly and that we would always fall on our feet. The important thing was that a system should not be contradictory. That was all there was to logic. And then we notice that it is not like that at all. We discover lots of things that escape us. If by some chance a few people here and there have heard of a certain Godel, they may know that even arithmetic turns out to be a basket; I'm not saying it is double-bottomed, but there are lots and lots of holes in the bottom. Everything disappears through the hole in the bottom.

正确的、严格的、真实的逻辑是从某个布尔开始的逻辑。这给了我们机会修改一些想法。我们始终认为，只要我们从一开始就确立了一些好的原则，从这些原则中所能得到的一切就会顺利进行，我们就会永远站得住。重要的是一个系统不应该是矛盾的。这就是逻辑的全部。然后我们注意到完全不是那样的。我们发现了很多逃避我们的东西。如果有人有机会听说过某个哥德尔，他们可能知道，即使是算术也被证明是一个篮子；不是说它是双底的，但它的底部有很多很多洞。所有东西都从底部的洞里消失了。

That is interesting, and it is not impossible that taking an interest in it might not be without a formative value for someone like a psychoanalyst. But for the moment it gets us nowhere, because we have here a very particular problem that I call the age question. If you want to do logic, or anything else to do with modern science, you have to start before you have been completely cretinized, by culture of course. Obviously, we are always a little cretinized because there is no escaping secondary school. Of course, secondary school may have its value too, because those who survive it and still have a real scientific vivacity are cases apart, as anyone will tell you. My good friend Leprince-Ringuet, who was cretinized at the same time as me at school, escaped immediately, brilliantly and in lively fashion. It took psychoanalysis to get me out. It has to be said that not many people have taken advantage of it the way I have.

这很有趣，对精神分析学家这样的人来说，对它感兴趣并不是没有形式价值的。但就目前而言，它没有任何意义，因为我们有一个非常特殊的问题，我称之为年龄问题。如果你想研究逻辑学，或者其他与现代科学有关的东西，你必须在你被文化完全白痴化之前就开始。显然，我们总是有点傻乎乎的，因为中学是逃不掉的。当然，中学也可能有它的价值，因为正如任何人都会告诉你的那样，那些从中学毕业后仍然具有真正的科学活力的人是不同的。我的好朋友Leprince-Ringuet，他和我在学校的时候同时被白痴化了，他立刻逃了出来，聪明而活泼。是精神分析把我弄出来。不得不说，像我这样利用它的人并不多。

Logic is a fairly precise thing and requires some mental resilience that has not been completely worn down by all the stupid things they force down your throat. So I must have had it at a very early age. The only problem is that being very young is not the best condition to make a good psychoanalyst cither. And when someone with some experience does happen to enter the psychoanalyst's profession, it is too late to teach him the key things that would train him for its particular practice.

I mentioned logic to give you a target. There's more to it than that, but logic is exemplary if we take it at Stotie's level, because he obviously did try to inaugurate something. Of course those people, the sophists, were already using logic, and in quite astonishing, very brilliant, very effective ways, at one level of rationality. That they themselves did not give it its name obviously does not mean that that isn't what it was, that's for certain. They could not have been so good at enticing citizens, and non-citizens, and at giving them tips on how to win debates or on how to debate the eternal questions of being and non-being, if it didn't have a formative effect. Stotle tried to perfect a technique, what they call the Organon. He gave birth to a line, to a line of philosophers, and now you can see where that got him: his line has died out a little bit, now that philosophy has come down to meaning the history of thought. Which means we're having a bloody hard time of it. Fortunately there are still a few counterfeiters around to try to put you back on top of things. They're called phenomenologists.

Psychoanalysis gives us a chance, a chance to start again.

逻辑是一种相当精确的东西，需要一定的精神韧性，这种韧性还没有被硬塞进你喉咙里的所有愚蠢东西完全磨损。所以我肯定在很小的时候就有了。唯一的问题是，年轻并不是成为一名优秀精神分析学家的最佳条件。当一个有一些经验的人碰巧进入精神分析学家的职业时，教他一些关键的东西就太晚了，这些东西可以训练他从事这一特定的实践。

我提到的逻辑是给你一个目标。精神分析还有更多，但如果我们从斯多克角度来看，逻辑是典型的，因为他显然试图开创一些东西。当然，那些诡辩家，已经在运用逻辑了，而且是在理性的层面上，以非常惊人、非常聪明、非常有效的方式。他们自己没有给它起名字显然并不意味着它不是它本来的样子，这是肯定的。如果没有形式效果的话，他们不可能如此善于吸引公民和非公民，并在如何赢得辩论或如何辩论存在和非存在的永恒问题方面给出建议。斯多克试图完善一种技术，他们称之为欧加农。他开创了一条路线，引出一系列哲学家，现在你可以看到这条路线给他带来了什么：他的路线有点消失了，现在哲学已经归结为思想史。也就是说我们的日子不好过。幸运的是，仍然有一些造假者试图让你回到事情的顶端。他们被称为现象学家。

精神分析给了我们一个机会，一个重新开始的机会。