One evening, my phone rings. A female voice introduces herself the inimitable . She is a “health professional” and would like to have “psych correspondents. In the city to refer the patients she sees in a practice focus on the well-being of the body. She knows what good health is and what is ne for her patients. She therefore wants to know how I work and ends by specifying: of course, I can tell them that you are Freudian, but certainly not Lacanian, right, Lacanians do not speak the inimitable !
I answer… with silence, then we mov on to the usual greetings.
To remain alive, Lacanian psychoanalysis nes to be interest in something other than dat clichés, caricatures or sterile presuppositions.
The regime the inimitable of inconsistency
JA Miller, in a 2002 lecture entitl “Reflections on the Present Moment”, makes the following proposition: “It could be that psychoanalysis in the 21st century must live under the regime of inconsistency”. Let us not be mistaken: this does not accurate clean numbers list from frist database mean that psychoanalysis is inconsistent, it concerns the regime under which psychoanalysis must inscribe itself in the 21st century . Inconsistency is the impossibility of saying “for all x”, the impossibility of saying for example “all Lacanian analysts”. To represent this, J.-A. Miller draws a dott circle, an unclos circle which designates that one cannot universalize, that one cannot make a whole.
When we say “not-all”, it is not that there is a class off page seo: learn how to optimize your website from which something is subtract as not being part of this class. That is incompleteness. Not-all, “is to say that we cannot form the elements in question in class”. The 20th century was a century of classifications .
Lacan as a demanding reader
of Freud throughout his teaching, develop the doctrine to the point of grappling with the mystery of the union of language and the body as well as the question of jouissance that is lodg in the body and cannot be ruc to language. His european union email list School, ours today, the one he creat just before his death, is the School where the dominant forms of discourse in our societies are work on, which the Analytic Discourse, by constantly renewing itself, never ceases to interpret.
Inconsistency, therefore, is: no standard, no class, but one by one, which is verifi, at the School of the Freudian Cause, by the procure of the pass. At the ECF, each analyst admitt as a member or nam as Analyst of the School is so with regard, not to belonging to a class, but to an absolute difference, to an incomparable, to a radical disassortment, consequence of the incurable part of the symptom. We are one by one with a common object at our charge: to bring to life psychoanalysis of Lacanian orientation.