Logic of Phantasy 9

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉岡

Lacan Seminar 14: The

Logic of Fantasy 4
Seminar 4: Wednesday, December 6, 1966

You were able, the last time we met here, to hear what Jacques-Alain Miller put to you. I was not able to

add many observations to it by reason of time.

上一次你们在这里的时候，你们能够听见亚伦、米勒对你们提出的问题。由於时间关系，我不能多做评论。

I think that you were able to notice in this presentation - marked by a sure knowledge of what, properly

speaking, was inaugurated, we can say, on the whole, as modern logic, by the work and the labour of

Boole - (it is perhaps not a matter of my last lecture, let us say, who had not been able either to have it

communicated to him, since I myself only got the text two days ago, found himself then, by the path and

the presentation that he chose ... and you were able also to sense very well, I think, that at the moment

that I announced him at my last lecture, I was not too sure of the subject that he had chosen. These

remarks have their interest, precisely, because of the extraordinary convergence, let us say, or again if

you wish reapplication of what ha was able to state before you, no doubt, of course, knowing what he

was about, namely, knowing what are the principles and, as I might say, the axioms around which, for

the moment, my development is turning ...).

我认为，你们能够在这个演讲中注意到，确实地知道，适当地说，由於布林的辛勤努力，他替现代逻辑大

体上，做了开启的功夫。（这或许不是我上一次演讲的内容，我当时没有办法跟你们沟通这些，因为我自

己只有在两天前才拿到那个文本，透过他选择的管道及讲演。我认为，你们能够清楚感觉得到，在我上一

次的演讲中，我宣布他，我並不十分确定他所选择的题目。这些谈话确实拥有它们的興趣，因为特别的汇

聚，或是假如你们希望从新应用他所能够你们表述的内容，当然，你们知道那些内容是什麽，换句话说，

你们知道，那些原理是什麽，如我所说，我的理论正在应用的那些定理。）

It is nevertheless striking, that with the help of Boole - in whom, of course, there is absent this major

articulation that no signifier is able to signify itself - that in starting from Boole's logic ... namely, from

1
this turning point at which, in a way, one sees, by having wanted to formalist classical logic, that this

formalisation itself allows there to be brought to it not simply major extensions, but is revealed to be the

hidden essence on which this logic had been able to orient itself and to construct itself, while believing it

was following something which was not really its foundation, while believing that it was following what

we are going to try to (2) circumscribe today in order, in a way, to set it apart from the field in which we

are going to proceed, in so far as we have announced: the logic of phantasy.

可是，耐人寻味的是，由於布林的帮助，在他身上，当然是欠缺这个主要的表达：没有意符能够使自己意

符化。从布林的逻辑开始，换句话说，从这个转捩点开始，我们看到，由於想要将古典主义形名化，这个

形名主义本身不但容许它接纳主要的延伸，而且让逻辑能够定位及建构自己时，所隐藏的本质被显露出来。

在另一方面，它相信它遵照並非它的基础的某件东西，它相信它遵照我们今天所设法要界定秩序的东西。

在某方面，它是为了使它脱离我们正要继续探讨的这个领域，也就是我们所宣布的这个领域：幻见的逻辑。

The surprising ease with which, from fields left blank in the logic of Boole, Miller rediscovered the

situation, the place, where the signifier in its proper function is in a way elided, in this famous (-1),

whose exclusion he admirably separated out in the logic of Boole - the fashion in which, by this very

elision, he indicated the place where what I am trying to articulate here is situated, is here something

which I believe, has its importance, not at all that I am complimenting him on it here, but which allows

you to grasp the consistency, the straight line, in which there is inserted this logic that we are obliged to

found in the name of the facts of the unconscious and which, as is to be expected, if we are what we

are, namely, rationalists - what must be expected, is, of course, not at all that the previous logic `should

be in some way overturned, but that it should rediscover there its proper foundations.

这是令人驚奇的容易，从布林逻辑留下空白的领域，米勒重新发现这个情况，这个位置，发挥适当功用的

意符，在某方面，会有所省略，在这个著名的负一（-1），他将它的排除功用，在布林逻辑里，令人赞赏

地区分开来。用这种省略，他指示我正在表达的这种东西的位置，那是我相信有其重要性的东西。我现在说

这些，目的根本不是在恭维他，而是要让你们理解这个一贯性，直线性。在这里，我们不得不創立的这个

逻辑被插入，以无意识的名义。所能被预期的是，假如我们是我们目前这个样子，换言之，假如我们是理

性主义者，所必需被期望的，当然根本不是，前述的逻辑应该用某种方式翻转，而是，它应该在那里重新

发现它适当的基础。

Moreover you were able to see it being marked, in passing, that in this point which requires for us the

bringing into play of a certain symbol, this something which corresponds to this (-1) which Boole does

not use, or forbids himself to use, not being sure whether this (-1) is the best to use. For what is proper

to a logic, to a formal logic, is that it operates, and what we have to bring out this year are new operators

whose shadow, in a way, has already been profiled in the fact that, depending on the ears to which I was

addressing myself, I already tried to articulate in a manageable fashion - manageable for what had to be

handled, which was nothing other, on that occasion, than analytic praxis - but what, this year, we are

2
taking to its limits, to its edges properly speaking, obliges us to give more rigorous formulations to

circumscribe what we are dealing with, and which deserves in some aspects to be taken, to be

undertaken, in the most general articulation which is given to us at the moment in the matter of

logic, namely: what is centred on the function of sets.

而且，你们能够看到它偶尔地标示。对我们而言，这个时刻要求某些符号的运作，对应於这个负一的符号，

布林逻辑没有使用的，或是他禁止他自己使用，因为他並不确定，是否这个负一就是最好的用途。一个逻

辑的本体，一个正式逻辑的本体，就是在於它的运作。今年我们所要显露的内容，就是新的运作者。它们的

阴影，在某方面，已经在这个事实中显露轮廓：依照我正在演讲的听众的水平而定，我已经以一个可处理

的方式，设法表达，而这个方式可处理，是因为它必须要被处理。在那个场合，那道道地地就是精神分析

的本体。但是，今年，我们将讲到它的极限的部分，适当来说，将讲到它的边缘部分。这将使我们不得不极

力陈说，为了要限制我们所要处理的东西，在某些方面，应该被接纳，应该被从事的东西。我们将用最深

入浅出的表达方式，来谈论逻辑的事情，换句话说，就是专注於讨论集合的功用

I leave this subject, of what Miller brought us then the last time, less as an articulation of what I am

developing before you, than as confirmation, assurance, a framework in the margin. It is not without

interest to highlight for you that in designating, in Sartre, under the name of "thetic self-consciousness",

the fashion in which, in a way, he occupies the place where this logical articulation resides - which is our

task this year - what is involved here is indeed only what is called a substitute (tenant-lieu) - very

properly - namely: that which, what we have to occupy ourselves with, we analysts, only in a fashion

that is strictly equivalent to the way in which we occupy ourselves with other substitutes, when we have

to handle what is an effect of the unconscious.

我离开米勒上一次带给我们的这个主题，不是因为我要表达我正要展示在你们面前，而是作为一种肯定、

确定，一种边缘的架构。我颇感到興趣，想要跟你们强调，哲学家薩特所指明的「专断的自我意识」。他以这

个意识的方式，据有他的逻辑表达的位置。这就是我们今年的工作。我们这里所牵涉到的，确实仅是所谓的

「一种替代」，恰当地说，就是我们必须专注据有的位置，我们精神分析师，使用的这种方式，相当等於是

我们专注从事其它的代替，当我们必须处理无意识的情怀。

(3) This is the reason why one can say that in no way can what I am stating about the structure be

situated with respect to Sartre, since this fundamental point, around which turns the privilege that he

tries to maintain of the subject, is properly this sort of substitute which can in no way interest me except

in the register of its interpretation.

（三）这就是为什麽为我们能够说，我对於无意识的结构的陈述，无法被定位为跟薩特有关，因为他设法

要维持他的主体，是以理性为特权，基本的要点，适当地说，就是这种专断的自我意识的「代替」。我对於

这种代替，丝毫不感興趣，处了借用它来作为解释。

Logic, then, of the phantasy ... It is almost necessary to recall - but we can only do it very rapidly in the

3
way that, touching a bell with the tip of the finger, one makes it vibrate for an instant - to remind you on

this point of the unextinguished vacillation of what is attached to the tradition, that the term "university"

will pinpoint here (if we give to this sense not at all anything whatsoever which designates or shames a

geographical point, but this sense of Universitas litterarum or a cursus classici, let us say), it is not

useless in passing to indicate that – whatever may be the other much more historical sense that one

can give to this term of "university" - there is here some allusion to what I called the Universe of

discourse. At least it is not vain to bring the two terms together.

幻见的逻辑因此是、、、我们有需要回顾一下，即使是简单地回顾。当我们用手指尖碰触一下钟铃，我们会使

它共鸣一阵子。我了提醒你们跟传统息息有关的那种细微的震荡，「大学」这个术语在这里所界定的这个点

（假如我们对於大学的感觉，指的根本不是替地理位置蒙羞的那个点，而是环宇通识或博大精深的经典）。

容我们偶尔指明一下，不无帮助：「大学」这个术语，我们给予的历史的意涵之外的另一面，这里会提到我

所谓的「真理论述的宇宙」。至少，我们将两个术语相提並论，不会徒劳无功。

Now, it is clear that in this hesitation (remember the waltz) that the professor of philosophy - in the year I

think you all went through, more or less as many of you as are here - performed around logic, (namely:

what is involved in it, the laws of thinking or its norms, the way it functions and that we are going to

extract scientifically, will we say, or the way it ought to be conducted?) - you must admit that in so far as

this debate has not yet been settled, perhaps a suspicion may arise for us that the function of the

University in the sense that I articulated it earlier, is perhaps precisely to put off the decision about it.

all that I can say is that this decision, perhaps, is more involved - I am speaking about logic - in what is

happening in Vietnam, for example, than what is involved in thinking, if in fact it still remains suspended

in this way, in this dilemma between its laws ... which in that case leaves us asking ourselves whether it

is applied to the "world" as they say, let us say rather: to the real, in other words: whether it is not

dreaming? (I am not losing my psychoanalytic bearings. I am speaking about things that interest us, us

analysts, because for us analysts, to know whether the man who is thinking is dreaming is a question

that has the most concrete sense. To whet your appetite, to keep you in suspense, you should know that

I have indeed the intention of posing the question, this year, of what is involved in the waking state ...)

Norms of thinking, opposed to the other, here indeed is something that also interests us, and in the

dimension that is not reduced by this little sand papering by which generally, the professor, when he is

dealing with logic in the philosophy class, will end up by ensuring that these laws and these (4) norms

end up by being presented with the same "smoothness", which allows one to pass one's finger from one

to the other, in other words to handle all of that blindly.

现在，显而易见的，在这个犹豫（不要忘了，跳华尔兹舞，跳一步，要犹豫两步），我想你们今年你都读

过哲学，哲学教授演示逻辑（换句话说，逻辑所牵涉到的思想或其思维的法则，它所运作的方式，我们将

会用科学的方式抽离出来，或是它应该被运作的方式）。你们将会承认，这场辩论尚未终了，可能我们都

会产生一个怀疑，大学的功能，就我早先所表达的意义来说，确实是要拖延这个决定。我所能说的是，这

4
个决定所牵涉到的，纯就逻辑来说，跟美国在越南战争所发生的事情有关。例如，思想所牵涉到的，即使

事实上，它被悬置在它的法则之间的困境。在那种情境，它使我们不禁要问自己，它是否被运用到这个「世

界」，也就是说，被运用到「真实界」，换句话说，是否它是一场梦境？（我並没有失去我的精神分析师的

教养。我现在谈论到我们感到興趣的事情，我们精神分析学，因为对於我们精神分析师而言，了解正在思

想的这个人，是否正在做梦，是一个很有具体意义的问题。为了激发你们的興趣，为了让你们保持在悬疑

当中，你应该知道，我今年确实有意要提出这个问题，关於在清醒时刻所牵涉到问题、、、）思想的模式，

相对於另外一个模式，是某件我们也感到興趣的事情。一般说来，当一位大学教授在哲学课处理逻辑的问

题时，他像是用一张沙纸在使表面变得光滑，结果要能保证，这析法则呈现出来是，要能具有同样的「光

滑」。这样，我们才能够用我们的手指在上面触摸，换句话说，闭着眼睛，也能触摸出来。

For us, the relief has not been lost (I am saying, us analysts) of this dimension which is entitled: that of

the true. In so far as, after all, it does not require, does not imply in itself the support of thinking, and that

if in questioning what it is - the true that is at stake - in connection with which there is stirred up the

phantasy of a norm, undoubtedly, it clearly appears - from the origin - that this is not immanent to

thinking. If I allowed myself, to touch the ears that it was necessary to make vibrate, to write one day,

erecting a figure which it was not moreover very difficult to bring to life - that of the truth, emerging from

the well, as it has always been depicted - in order to make it say: "Me, the truth, I speak", it is indeed in

effect to highlight this relief in which it is a matter for us of maintaining that to which, properly speaking,

our experience is attached and which is absolutely impossible to exclude from the articulation of Freud:

for Freud is here put, immediately, up against it - and there is no need to intervene for that: he put

himself there himself.

对於我们，（我是说，对於我们精神分析师而言。）救济的几会尚未失去，救济这个真实界的向度，也就

是我们题目的这个向度。畢竟，它並没有要求，它本身並没有暗示具有思想的支持。当我们在置疑它是什麽，

这个岌岌可危的真实界是什麽，会有一种模式的幻见会被激发起来。无可置疑的，从起源的地方，清楚地

出现这个幻见：这个並不属於思想的内在性。为了引起听众所需要的共鸣，容许有一天我能够写作，竖立

一个人物，设法要让它复活起来，也就是真理这个人物，从这个井中出现，如童话中所描述的人物，为了

让它说出：「我，是真理，我在说话！」。实际上，我是要强调我们一直设法要维持的这个救济，适当地说，

我们精神分析师的经验跟这个救济息息相关，要将这个救济，从佛洛伊德的学说里排除掉，是绝对不可能

的。我们在此将佛洛伊德抬举出来，跟真理等量齐观。这其实也不需要我们妄加干预，佛洛伊德本人就将自

己定位在那里。

雄伯译

springherohsiung@gmail.com