Dear Sam how could we divide the subject to an enunciating and a grammatical one? Language cannot exist outside our bio-animalistic part. It is because we breathe and have vocal cords that we speak. It is because we have hands we write. Isn't language an enunciation?
I'm a gardener in South Australia, I've been learning about Lacan and I think your video lectures are fantastic. I've been listening to them while I'm at work. Thank you.
50:00 not sure if i am putting it right but If the absence of something makes it real like God, the oedipal father, or the mother when she goes out of the room then why the atrocities based on racism, genocide except holocaust are not part of our imaginary? Jews are real but Muslims are not, they are perceived as uncivilized.
To Jason's question about why the objects of the anal drive might be of a different order to the oral drive - perhaps because the original anal objects (shit) is something that we have and give. Whereas the oral drive has to do with the breast of another, something that we take. I don't know, but it was such a good question. Thank you so much for all the work you do.
this explication of the analytic discourse makes it seem as though the primary point of psychoanalysis is to develop a theory of the psyche rather than to make an intervention that brings about a change for the analysand. ive always thought of the S2 in the analytic discourse chiefly in terms of its relevance to the analysand. an understanding of S2 that is based around its utility to the analyst insofar as it can be made into a theoretical apparatus sounds more like university discourse
You know, I studied discipline for quite a while, and one thing I found a corelation in that the harsh disciplining is very related with Lacans description of masochism (take examples of Jocko Willink, David Goggins, Andrew Tate, Gary Vee or the hustle culture in general). As someone who has a tendency of to be more neurotic and struggle with maladaptive daydreaming, how can I develop this masochism-- or in this sense this discipline to have more self control within my life? I know this may sound twisted, but I am really curious how Lacan would help someone out who tends to struggle with self discipline. Cheers.
Hey there! I know it may seem a little random, but I have been studying your lecture and Lacan's tenth seminar for a while. Eventually I decided to make a video around lacans tenth seminar to sum it up to some extent and add an additional part. I don't want to come over as demanding, but I love your videos, and I wanted to ask whether you could come to tell whether my understanding in this video about him was accurate. You inspired me to start creating videos about lacan (and not only him myself), so I would love to know what you think. Here is the video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jh-ySt5-ias.html With best regard. Konzzs.
Thanks for tuning in, Konzzs! And way to make the most of our lecture series on S10! I was especially impressed by your use of one of the formulas I discussed. The only thing missing from your video, I would say, is a list of citations so that audience members can follow your leads. Lacan‘s seminar on anxiety, Lectures on Lacan, and any other materials you drew upon - all should be posted. Keep up the good work, and hope to see you in a live series one of these days!
@@lecturesonlacan Oh my god.... (laughing) Can't believe you actually responded. Thank you SO MUCH!!! for your sweet words man! I am so grateful that you came to do the work for responding and even watching the video. Can't put into words how grateful i am. You we're the one who transformed my understanding of psychology like forever, and your kindness and supportiveness is beyond words (it's in the imaginary hehe). I haven't found anyone who discussed Lacan as accurately as you. So... yeah. Thanks a lot. I deeply appreciate your time, and hope your work gets the recognition it deserves. I consider using quotations when they're helpful. Stay good. With love, Konzzs.
Thank you so much for this in-depth, profound but at the same time accessible discussion of Lacan’s thesis on learned ignorance and nature of knowledge.
My pleasure - I’m thrilled to know you found it useful! Stay tuned for more releases in the coming weeks, and I hope to see you in one of our live series someday!
Hahaha, thanks! Knowing you’re out there and enjoying these materials really makes my day. Holler when next you want to jump into another live session with the group - we’ve missed you!
The Semiotic is analogical, its doesn't has an order. The Symbolic is like a donut organised around this one symbol and is digital. You can name a feeling or digitalize a sound but something crucial will be lost in this process, reality itself, the thing. This loss is the condition for critique and the seek of truth. Thank you Sam for this episode! I miss mentions to the cat Lucifer.
Thank you for your interesting and thought-provoking comment - and for your kind words about Lucifer! I will pass them on to her, and look forward to the next chance I have to use her as an example. 😀
This whole end of analysis thing that you get into about halfway through this talk is very important. We have to let analysis end. I just ended a one year group and a 2 year group. It was painful, but it was the right thing to do. We cannot drag folks on and on and on. Thank you for bringing this idea to consciousness.
Thanks for your post! I am glad to hear this from you, especially given your clinical experience. The end of analysis has increasingly become a central topic for me, and increasingly so in our current lecture series on S19. In fact, I just posted the concluding commentaries to the group yesterday, and, not coincidentally, the final lecture was on the end of analysis - and the analyst, crucially, playing their part as what Lacan calls “a piece of crap“ in this process. So key!
I just want to say the function of the ego should be a hell of a lot more than standing in line and not shitting yourself are farting. We should be talking about that shit no pun intended.
OMG 😳 I used to do Preying Mantis kung fu but I said to myself you are becoming a killer so I stopped training and became a eurythmy and qigong practitioner
This is while I like to split the real in Actual (organic substrate) and Virtual (algorithmic potential). From there I see Literature as the discourse of the Imaginary and Psychoanalysis as the the (truth) discourse of the Real (from the actual to the virtual). Thank you Sam. As always, very nice explained 👏🪴
Well said! I think Lacan could have made more use of virtuality, for sure. And better use of its sibling, potentiality, as well. Dude was not too strong on classic modalities, unfortunately.
so @Lecturesonlacan i have a question..... is this ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL OF WHAT THE MAN THINKS? Like is it patriarchal in nature/paradigm? wtf does the woman think and the man think; i think female/male psychology are inherently different bc if they weren't then feminism in all its flavors wouldn't exist.
I’m never sure what anyone’s thinking, man or woman, but I have a sense of how Lacan approaches the so called sexes: they are subject positions, modes of enjoyment, structural operators. To be sexed one way or another is simply to be positioned in a certain way and, in accordance with this position, inclined to behave and enjoy and engage with others in a certain way.
I really love how you are characterizing the real versus the symbolic it really dovetails with Bollas’ characterizations. He sad that it took him 15 years to begin to understand Lucan.
In the beginning it all made a sense to me, but hearing L acan's explanation of the perverse again , I see that it's difficult for me to see this smplification of the law as the cause . Isnt it much more logical to see the Maso as repeating a bad experience from childhood? And the Sadist is also repeating it through the other. Ijust cant see how amlification brings anyone closer to the law.
Amplification of the law makes it louder, more readily heard and felt … all of which appeals to the pervert, whose relation to the law is quieter, weaker, less effective than most.
