{"id":12505,"date":"2014-03-19T15:38:37","date_gmt":"2014-03-19T20:38:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=12505"},"modified":"2014-03-20T09:19:18","modified_gmt":"2014-03-20T14:19:18","slug":"zupancic-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2014\/03\/19\/zupancic-3\/","title":{"rendered":"zupan\u010di\u010d 3"},"content":{"rendered":"

However, if structuralism ultimately identifies the subject with structure (the Other), Lacan intervenes, at this point, in a very Kantian manner: he introduces the subject as a correlative to the lack in the Other<\/strong>; that is, as correlative to the point where structure fails fully to close in upon itself.<\/strong><\/p>\n

He does this in two different ways. The first consists in introducing a moment of irreducible jouissance <\/span>as the ‘proof of the subject’s existence’.<\/p>\n

The second – and this is what interests us here – consists in defining the subject via the shifter ‘I’ <\/strong>in relation to the ‘act of enunciation’<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Lacan ‘s claim that there is no Other of the Other<\/span> means that the Other and the statement have no guarantee of their existence besides the contingency of their enunciation.<\/p>\n

This dependence cannot in principle be eliminated from the function of the Other, and this is precisely what attests to its lack. The subject of enunciation<\/span> does not and cannot have a firm place in the structure of the Other; it finds its place only in the act of enunciation.<\/p>\n

This amounts to saying that the depsychologizing of the subject does not imply its reducibility to a (linguistic or other) structure. The Lacanian subject<\/span> is what remains after the operation of ‘de-psychologizing’ has been completed: it is the elusive, ‘palpitating’ point of enunciation<\/span>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

However, if structuralism ultimately identifies the subject with structure (the Other), Lacan intervenes, at this point, in a very Kantian manner: he introduces the subject as a correlative to the lack in the Other; that is, as correlative to the point where structure fails fully to close in upon itself. He does this in two … Continue reading “zupan\u010di\u010d 3”<\/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-12505","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ethics_real"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12505","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=12505"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12505\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12513,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12505\/revisions\/12513"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12505"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12505"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12505"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}