{"id":12489,"date":"2014-03-19T12:37:37","date_gmt":"2014-03-19T17:37:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=12489"},"modified":"2014-03-19T14:29:04","modified_gmt":"2014-03-19T19:29:04","slug":"zupancic-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2014\/03\/19\/zupancic-1\/","title":{"rendered":"zupan\u010di\u010d 1"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>This is the real &#8216;miracle&#8217; involved in ethics. The crucial question of Kantian ethics is thus not &#8220;how can we eliminate all the pathological elements of will, so that only the pure form of duty remains?&#8221; but, rather, &#8220;how can the pure form of duty itself function as a pathological element, that is, as an element capable of assuming the role of the driving force or incentive of our actions?&#8221;. 15-16<\/p>\n<p>Pure form of duty as the sole motive for performing an act that is called ethical. Alenka wants to propose an ethics based solely on the <span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: red; font-size: 11pt;\">drive<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: blue; font-size: 11pt;\">surplus jouissance<\/span> equals the <span style=\"color: red; font-weight: bold;\">objet petit a<\/span><\/p>\n<p>What both Lacan and Kant are trying to get their heads arounds is articulating, conceptualizing a certain SURPLUS. 17<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #0000ff;\">Triebfeder<\/span> (drive or incentive) as one of the pivotal points of Kant&#8217;s practical philosophy. This <span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #0000ff;\">Triebfeder <\/span>is nothing but the object drive of the will. Now even if Kant makes a point of stressing that the <strong>ethical act is distinguished by its lack of any Triebfeder<\/strong>, he also introduces what he calls the <span style=\"font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; color: #0000ff;\">echte Triebfeder<\/span>, the &#8216;genuine drive&#8217; of pure practical reason.<\/p>\n<p>This genuine object-drive of the will is itself defined precisely in terms of <strong>pure form<\/strong> as an absence of any <span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #0000ff;\">Triebfeder<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>We can see here, as well, that the Lacanian notion of the <span style=\"color: red; font-weight: bold;\">objet petit a <\/span>is not far off: the <span style=\"color: red; font-weight: bold;\">objet petit a<\/span> designates nothing but the absence, the lack of the object, the void around which desire turns.<\/p>\n<p>After a need is satisfied, and <strong>the subject gets the demanded object, desire continues on its own<\/strong> ; it is not &#8216;extinguished&#8217; by the satisfaction of need. The moment the subject attains the object she demands, the <span style=\"color: red; font-weight: bold;\">objet petit a<\/span> appears, as a marker of that which <strong>the subject still &#8216;has not got&#8217;<\/strong>, or does not have \u2014 and this itself constitutes the <span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #0000ff; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic;\">&#8216;echte&#8217;<\/span> <strong>object of desire<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>Thus we can see that the object-drive involved in Kant&#8217;s conceptualization of ethics is not just like any other pathological motivation, but neither is it simply the absence of all motives or incentives.<\/p>\n<p>The point, rather, is that <strong>this very absence must at a certain point begin to function as an incentive. It must attain a certain &#8216;material weight&#8217; and &#8216;positivity&#8217;, otherwise it will never be capable of exerting any influence whatsoever on human conduct<\/strong>. 18<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This is the real &#8216;miracle&#8217; involved in ethics. The crucial question of Kantian ethics is thus not &#8220;how can we eliminate all the pathological elements of will, so that only the pure form of duty remains?&#8221; but, rather, &#8220;how can the pure form of duty itself function as a pathological element, that is, as an &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2014\/03\/19\/zupancic-1\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;zupan\u010di\u010d 1&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[79],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12489","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ethics_real"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12489","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12489"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12489\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12495,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12489\/revisions\/12495"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12489"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12489"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}