Logic of Phantasy 14

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉岡

Lacan Seminar 14:

The Logic of Fantasy 5
Seminar 5: Wednesday, December 14, 1966

While I am waiting for this piece of chalk that I may need and that I hope is going to come before long,

let us talk about ... the news. It is a curious thing that is not foreign to what unites us here, to speak

about the way in which this book has been received in a certain zone, precisely the one that you

represent, all of you, such as you are, who are here. I mean that it is curious, for example, that in far-

away universities where I had no reason up to now to think that what I limited myself to saying in the

seminars had such an echo, well I do not know why, this book is sought after. So then, since I am

alluding to Belgium, I point out that this evening as ten o'clock, the third programme of Radio-Bruxelles,

but on FM, (the only people who will be able to benefit from it then are those who live near Lille, but I

know that I also have listeners from Lille) well then, at ten o'clock there will be transmitted a little

response that I gave to someone who is one of the most agreeable of those who came to interview me.

On this point there are others, of course, other countries that are still more distant, in which it is not sure

that it is always so successful.

在我等待我需要的这支粉笔的这段时间，我希望它不久就会送来，我们先谈一些新闻。我们大家聚会在这，

也习以为常，行之有年了，但是谈论到这本书在某个地区被出版的方式，确实是你们代表的这一本，你们

所有的人，代表你们的特质，你们的本质。我的意思是，这是耐人寻味的，例如，在远方的大学，直到目

前，我没有理由认为，我在这些讲座所说的内容，会有如此大的迴响。我不知道为什麽，这本书有人对它

好奇。因此，当我提到比利时，我指的是说，今天晚上十点，布鲁塞尔电台的第三个节目，但是在长波调

频（那个时刻能够接收的人，只有住在里拉附近的人。但是我知道，我在里拉那里也有听众。）在那里的十

点钟，将会转播一个我发表的简短的回答，对於一位善意的记者的前来採访。当然，也还有其它人，其他

更加遥远的国家，我不确定，我能那麽声名远播。

But in any case I am going to start - because we have to make a transition - I am going to start from an

idiotic question which was put to me. What I am calling an idiotic question is not what one might think, I

1
mean, something which in no way displeases me - I love idiotic questions - I also love idiots (idiotes). I

also love idiots (idiots), it is not - privilege of the sex. In a word what I call idiotic, is something that, in

this case, is quite simply natural and proper. An idiotism is something that is confused too quickly with

singularity, it is something natural, simple, and in a word, very often linked to the situation. The person in

question, for example, had not opened my book. She posed me the following question: "What is the link

between your Ecrits"?

无论如何，我将要开始（因为我们必须先做个开场白），我要开始，从一个我被问到的白痴般的问题开始。

我所以称之为白痴般的问题，不是如一般人所认为，我的意思是，我丝毫並不因为这件事情而感到不愉快。

我喜欢白痴般的问题，我也喜欢白痴。我也喜欢白痴、那不是哪一种性别的特权。简单来说，在这种情况下，

我所说的白痴般的问题，仅仅是顺其自然。一个白痴般的问题，就是对於某个特点鑽牛角尖。这是顺理成章

的事情，总而言之，它跟这个情况有关联。例如，提出问题的人並没有看过我的书。她对我提出以下的问题：

「你的精神分析论文集的关联是什麽？」

I must (2) say that it is a question that would never have struck me of my own accord. Of course! I must

also say that it is a question that it would never have struck me would have struck anyone else. But it is

a very interesting question, in truth, to which I made every effort to reply.

我必须说，我自己从来没有想过这个问题。当然，我也必须说，我自己从来没有想过的问题，别的人居然

会想到。但事实上，这个问题很耐人寻味，我费了一番力气回答。

And to respond to, well, my God, as it was put to me, namely, that since it was put to me for the first

time, it was for me a veritable source of questions and, to go quickly, I replied to it in the following terms.

That what seemed to me to form the link - I am thinking here not so much of my teaching but by Ecrits

as they may present themselves to someone who, precisely, is going to open them - well then, it is what

- in the order of what is called "identity" - everyone has the right to refer to, in order to apply it to himself.

我的天，要回答我被问的问题，换句话说，我第一次被问到的问题，那对於我，像是问题汩汩而来。为了

敏捷反应，我用以下的术语回答。对我来说，那似乎就形成一个连接。我在此想到的，並不是我的教学，而

是我的精神分析论文集，因为它像是毛遂自荐，有某个人想要去阅读它。这像是所谓的「心电感应的认同」，

人人都有权利去提到它，都想要以它当自身的验证。

I mean that from the Mirror stage up to the last notations that I was able to write under the rubric of the

Subversion of the subject, when all is said and done, this would be the link.

我的意思是，从「镜子影像」，一直到最后的章节，我都能够书写在「主体的颠覆」的这个架构下。当我们一

切都说过及做过，这个连接就是主体的颠覆。

And as you know, this year (I am only recalling it for those who come here for the first time), I thought I

2
ought – in speaking (I am saying it also for them) about the logic of the phantasy - to start from this

remark which, for those who are familiar with them has nothing new about it, but is essential, that the

signifier cannot signify itself. It is not quite the same thing for the subject as this question bearing on the

sort of identity that might be applicable to himself. But anyway, to say things in a way that makes them

resonate, the start - and what remains a link up to the end of this collection - is indeed this something

thoroughly discussed, this is the least that can be said, throughout these Ecrits and which is expressed

in this formula - which comes to everyone and which is maintained, I must say, with regrettable certainty

- which is expressed as follows: "Me, I am me" (moi, je suis moi).

你们知道，今年（我提到它，是因为有人第一次来这里），当我们谈到幻见的逻辑，我认为我应该从这段

谈话开始，因为对於那些耳熟能详的人，这不算是什麽新鲜东西。但是，意符无法使自身被意符化，这一

点还是很重要。对於人作为一个生命的主体而言，这件事情，跟可以应证到自身的这种自我认同有关的问

题，並不完全相同。但是无论如何，说出引起迴响的问题，作为一个开端，这始终是一个连接，一直到这

本「论文集」的结尾。这是某件被徹底讨论的事情，至少我们可以这样说，「论文集」的通篇都是，我们可以

用这个公式表达：我必须遗憾地说，斩丁截铁地，每个人都会面临这个问题，与之缠鬥不休。这个问题，

我表达如下：「我，我就是我！」

I think there are few of you who do not have to struggle in order to shake off this conviction and, after all,

moreover, even if it were struck from their documents, large or small, it nevertheless remains that it is

always extremely dangerous. In effect what is immediately engaged on, the path onto which people slip

is the following, which I signalled at the beginning of this year - you see that see that the question is

posed immediately and in the most natural fashion. The very people among whom there is so strongly

established this certainty, do not hesitate to settle just as frivolously what is not part of them. "It is not

me". "I did not behave in that way".

我认为，你们没有几个人能够免於这种博鬥，为了摆脱这个信念。畢竟，即使这个信念从他们的文件里受

到攻击，无论是大文件，或是小文件，这个信念的动摇，始终是极端危险的。事实上，马上会牵扯到的事

情，人们会陷入的途径如下，这是我今年的开始所指出的，你们看得出来，顺理成章的，立刻会形成这个

问题。那些自我信念牢固不移的人，会毫不犹豫地解决，好似轻鬆的像是摆脱一件身外之物。
「那不是我！」

「我的行为才不会是那样！」

It is not the privilege of babies to say "It is not me". A whole theory of the psychological genesis of the

world for each person, will even start quite plainly from this: that the first steps in experience, for the one

who is living it, the being who is "infans", and subsequently infantile, will be for him to make the

distinction (says the professor of psychology) between the (3) "ego" and the non-ego. Once engaged

along this path, it is quite clear that the question cannot be taken further. Because to engage oneself in

this opposition between the ego and the non-ego, as if it were considered as something which could be

decided with the simple limit of a negation (including, in addition, the excluded third, I suppose),

3
completely rules out, makes it completely out of the question, that there should be attacked, what is

nevertheless the only important question, namely, whether "me, I am me".

说「这不是我」，並非仅是婴孩的特权。对於每个人，心理的創世纪世界的整个历史，显而易见的，就是从

这里开始。根据经验的最初几步，对於生活其中的人，「婴孩」的生命实存，跟随后成为小孩，他必须做「自

我」与「非自我」的这个区别（心理学教授如此说）。一但他步上这条途径，显而易见地，这个问题就不再被

提起。因为从事自我与非自我之间的这种对立，好像它被认为是某件能够用一个简单的否定限制，就能决

定的事情（除外，我认为还要包括这个被排除的第三者。）。由於否定等於是完全被排除，这使它成为为一

件完全不可能的事情。可是，我们应该处理的唯一重要的问题，换句话说，是否「我，我是我自己！」

It is certain that in opening my book, every reader will be caught very quickly in this link. But this is not,

for all that, a reason for him to remain in it. Because what is bound together by this link, also gives him

enough opportunities, a sufficiently enormous number of opportunities, to occupy himself with other

things, things which, precisely, are illuminated by being caught in this link and, therefore, slip out of its

field again. Which is conceivable because of the fact that it is obviously not on the terrain of

identification itself that the question can really be resolved.

千真万确，阅读我的书时，每一位读者很快会被这种连接所吸引。儘管如此，这並不是吸引他继续看下去

的理由。因为这个连接所聚集的东西，也给他足够的机会，数目众多的机会，让他去从事其它事情，因为

他被这个连接吸引，而受到啟发，因此也不知不觉地越出领域之外。这是可想而知的事情，因为显而易见

地，这个问题真正能够被解决的领域，並不是在自我认同的这个平台。

It is precisely by referring, not simply this question, but everything that it involves- in particular the

question of the unconscious, which presents, it has to be said, difficulties which leap much more

immediately to the eye as regards what it should be identified to -it is, with regard to this question of

identification, but not simply limited to what in the subject is believed to be grasped under the

identification me (moi), that we employ the reference to structure. We have to start from something

external to what is given immediately, intuitively, in this field of identification, namely, for example, the

remark that I re-evoked earlier, that no signifier is able to signify itself.

确实是当我们提到，不仅是这个问题，而且是它相关的一切，特别是无意识的问题。我们必须说，它呈现

的一些困难，立刻会扑上我们的面前，关於它应该被认同是什麽，关於自我认同的问题，但是又不仅是限

制於我相信是以「自我认同」的名义，所理解的生命主体，我们必须提到结构的问题。我们必须开始的某件

东西，它外在於当下而直觉的自我认同的领域，换句话说，例如，我早先一再召唤的这句话：没有一个意

符有能力使自己被意符化。

So then, to start today from why I asked for chalk, since it is a matter of structure, what. One of the

sources of my embarrassment here, sometimes, is that it is necessary for me to make rather long

4
detours to explain certain elements to you. It is certainly not my fault if they are not within your reach,

namely, commonly enough in circulation, for, as one might say, these first truths to be considered as

understood when I speak to you about them. I am going to make for you here the schema of what is

called a group. I alluded on several occasions to what a group signifies starting, for example, from set

theory. I am not going to begin again today, especially given the path that we have to travel. What is

involved is the Klein group, in as much as it is a group defined by a certain number of operations. There

are no more than three of them. What results from them is defined by a very simple series of equalities,

between two of them, and a result that can be obtained otherwise, namely, by one of the others, for

example, one by the other of the two, for example.

因此，今天从为什麽我要求新的粉笔开始，因为那是一个结构的问题。有时候，我的尴尬的来源之一是，

我必须要做相当长的迂迴，来对你们解释某些的因素。假如你们因此而无法理解，那确实不是我的过失，

换句话说，我们可以这样说，当我提到这些前面的几个真理论述时，我认为你们都已经了解，因为你们应

该已经耳熟能详。在此，我将跟你们提到一个所谓的「群体」的这个基模。我在好几个场合引述到，例如，从

集合理论开始，一个群体意指着什麽。今天，我就不从这里开始，特别是考虑到，我们必须要旅行的这条

途径。这个途径会牵涉到客体关系的「克莱因群体」，因为这个群体有他们某些远作的特色。这些运作的特色

仅仅有三个。从这三个特色所形成的结果，我们可以用一系列的数学平等式来界定，在其中两个特色之间。

其它方面所能得到的结果，换句话说，是由其它两个特色之一来界定。例如，其中一个，乘上两个之中的

另外一个。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com