拉岡講座240

Aphanisis.
失蹤
The Piagetic error •
皮亞傑的錯誤
2
Everything emerges from the structure of the signifier. This structure is based on what I first called the
function of the cut and which is now articulated, in the development of my discourse, as the topological
function of the rim.

一切事情的出現，都來自意符的結構。這個結構的基礎，我起初稱之為切割的功用。隨著我課程
的發展，我現在名之為邊緣的地形功用。

The relation of the subject to the Other is entirely produced in a process of gap. Without this, anything
could be there. The relations between beings in the real, including all of you animated beings out there,
might be produced in terms of inversely reciprocal relations. This is what psychology, and a whole area
of sociology, is trying to do, and may succeed in doing as far as the mere animal kingdom is concerned,
for the capture of the imaginary is enough to motivate all sorts of behavior in the living being.

主體跟大它者的關係，完全是由分裂的過程所產生。若非如此，任何事情都可能在那裡。真實界
的主體，包括一切有情眾生，都可能以互惠互利的關係來生存。這是心理學，及所有社會學的領
域，正在從事的。就動物界的生物而言，它們會有所進展，因為非真實界的捕捉足以啟動生物的
各種行為。

Psycho-analysis reminds us that human psychology belongs to another dimension. To maintain this
dimension, philosophical analysis might have sufficed, but it has proved itself to be inadequate, for
lack of any adequate definition of the unconscious. Psycho-analysis, then, reminds us that the facts of
human psychology cannot be conceived in the absence of the function of the subject defined as
the effect of the signifier.

精神分析學提醒我們，人類的心理學屬於另外一個領域。為了維持這個領域，哲學的分析本來可
能也綽綽有餘，但事實證明，它還是力有不逮，因為它對於無意識的領域缺乏足夠的了解。因此
精神分析學提醒我們，主體的功用不僅僅是在意符的影響，而是在意符的欠缺。人類的心理學必
需從這個欠缺的領域著手，始有效用。

Here the processes are to be articulated, of course, as circular between the subject and the Other—from
the subject called to the Other, to the subject of that which he has himself seen appear in the field of the

1
Other, from the Other coming back. This process is circular, but, of its nature, without reciprocity.
Because it is circular, it is disymmetrical.

在此，過程當然應該被表達為主體與大它者之間的循環，從所謂的主體到大它者，到他已經看
見自己出現在大它者領域的主體，從大它者那裡再回轉過來。這個過程是循環，但是它的屬性，
卻是沒有互利互惠。因為它是循環狀態，它並不對稱。

You will realize that today I am taking you on to the terrain of a logic whose essential importance I
hope to stress. The whole ambiguity of the sign derives from the fact that it represents something for
someone. This someone may be many things, it may be the entire universe, in as much as we have
known for some time that information circulates in it, as a negative of entropy. Any node in which
signs are concentrated, in so far as they represent something, may be taken for a someone.

你們將體會到，今天我要引導你們到達一個邏輯的平台，我希望強調這個平台的基本的重要性。
符號之所以會模稜兩可，原因是它對於某個人，代表的常是有特殊的意義。所謂某個人，各人的
解讀各有不同。對於某個人，他可能是他自己的整個宇宙，有他自己一套的自我認知在運作，直
到生命的終止。就符號代表某件東西而言，某個人就是符號所匯聚的代表。

What must be stressed at the outset is that a signifier is that which represents a subject for another
signifier. The signifier, producing itself in the field of the Other, makes manifest the subject of its
signification. But it functions as a signifier only to reduce the subject in question to being no more
than a signifier, to the subject in the same movement in which it calls the subject to function, to speak,
as subject. There, strictly speaking, is the temporal pulsation in which is established that which is the
characteristic of the departure of the unconscious as such—the closing.

一開始我們必須強調的是，一個意符，是一個主體對於另外一個主體的代表。意符在大它者的領
域，產生自己的意符，然後使具有意義的主體顯現出來。但是主體若只充當意符的功用，結果會
使潛力無窮的主體，淪落為僅是一個意符，換言之，淪落為僅是接受意符的功用所播弄的主體。
嚴格來說，無意識本身具有開啟與封閉的特性，人作為主體，在其間，會形成一陣瞬間的悸動。

One analyst felt this at another level and tried to signify it in a term that was new, and which has never
been exploited since in the field of analysis—aphanisis, disappearance. Ernest Jones, who invented it,
mistook it for something rather absurd, the fear of seeing desire disappear. Now, aphanisis is to be
situated in a more radical way at the level at which the subject manifests himself in this movement of
disappearance that I have described as lethal. In a quite different way, I have called this movement the
fading of the subject.

有一位精神分析師從另外一個層次領會到這一點。他設法用一個新潁的術語表達。
「失蹤」這個術

2
語，是精神分析領域以前從未曾使用過的。恩尼士、江尼思鑄造這個術語，但是將它誤解為某件
相當荒謬的東西，當著是看到欲望失蹤的恐懼。現在，我們能夠以更激進的方式，找到「失蹤」的
位置，因為就在我曾描繪為危險萬分的失蹤的動作中，主體顯現了自己。換言之，我稱呼這個動
作，為主體的的隱退。

I wish to dwell on this for a moment in order to convey to you to what extent it is always possible to
find oneself again in concrete experience, and even in observation, on condition that this key is used to
lift the veil of blindness. I will show you this by means of an example.

我希望對於這一點詳述一下，為了讓你們明瞭，我們如何在實際的經驗中，甚至是觀察中，重
新找回自己。這個關鍵是要讓我們揭開使我們目盲的面紗。我用一個例子讓你們明白。

The Piagetic error—for those who might think that this is a neologism, I would stress that I am
referring to Monsieur Piaget—is an error that lies in the notion of what is called the egocentric
discourse of the child, defined as the stage at which he lacks what this Alpine psychology calls
reciprocity. Reciprocity is very far from the horizon of what we mean at that particular moment, and
the notion of egocentric discourse is a misunderstanding.

皮亞傑的錯誤，對於那些以為我在鑄造新術語的人，我要強調，我指的是教育哲學家皮亞傑。他
的錯誤在於所謂孩童的自我中心論述的觀念。他將這個孩童階段的這個觀念，定義為欠缺阿爾邦
學派的心理學所謂人際互惠。人際互惠根本不是我們在孩童那個特別時刻，所要討論的範圍。而
且，他的孩童自我中心論述的觀念也是一種誤導。

The child, in this discourse, which may be tape-recorded, does not speak for himself, as one says. No
doubt, he does not address the other, if one uses here the theoretical distinction derived from the
function of the l and the you. But there must be others there—it is while all these little fellows are
there, indulging all together, for example, in little games of operations, as they are provided with in
certain methods of so-called active education, it is there that they speak—they don't speak to a
particular person, they just speak, if you'll pardon the expression, a la cantonade.1

在這個論述中，孩童雖然可以被錄音下來，但是他並沒有替自己發言，如某孩童所說。無可置疑
的，他並沒有跟大它者對話。容我們理論上區別一下，這個「我」的大它者，跟這個「你」的大它者
的功用並不一樣。但是一定還有其它的人在那裡。那些小孩在那裡，聚集在那裡，例如正在玩某
種遊戲，如同在某些所謂的主動的教育方法創導的，就在那裡的時刻，孩童發言，但是他們不
是針對某個特別的人發言。他們只是發言，可不是針對拉岡，容我往我自己臉上貼金。

This egocentric discourse is a case of hail to the good listener! What we find once again here is the
constitution of the subject in the field of the Other, as I have designated it for you in this little arrow on

3
the blackboard. If he is apprehended at his birth in the field of the Other, the characteristic of the
subject of the unconscious is that of being, beneath the signifier that develops its networks, its chains
and its history, at an indeterminate place.

自我中心的論述，聽起來令聽眾悅耳。我們在此再一次發現的是，主體在大它者領域的形成，如
同我在黑板上這個小箭頭所指明的。假如主體一出生，就在大它者的領域被理解，那麼無意識的
主體的特色，就是存在的主體的特色，架構在意符之下，發展自己的網絡、自己的鎖鏈、及自己
的歷史，在一個不明確的地方。

More than one dream element, indeed almost all, may be the point at which we will variously situate
him in interpretation. If one thinks that one may make him say whatever one wishes, one has
understood nothing—but one must admit that psycho-analysts do not explain themselves very well.
Interpretation cannot be bent to any meaning. It designates only a single series of signifiers. But the
subject may in effect occupy various places, depending on whether one places him under one or
other of these signifiers.

不僅僅是一次的夢境，甚至幾乎所有的夢境，都可以讓我們用各種各樣的方式，解釋主體所在
的位置。即使我們認為，我們可以讓主體說出他願望中的話，我們也無法了解那是什麼意思。但
是我們必須承認，精神分析師解釋自己，也不見得多高明。解釋無法產生任何意義。它只是指明
一系列的意符運作。但是主體實際上佔據各種各樣的位置，端賴我們是否將他擺置在一個或多個
意符的運作之中。

I now come to the two operations that I intend to articulate today in the relation between the subject
and the Other.

我現在講完我今天打算要表達的兩個命題，處理主體跟大它者的關係。那就是失蹤與皮亞傑的錯
誤。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw