Tell me if I've got this down. I haven't read Lacan, but from arguments on 4chan and readings of several of Zizek's books, I've gotten this out of him.
1. Psychoanalysis
Lacan refers to his theories as being psychoanalytical, and he ran a psychoanalytic practice. He saw his work as a rejection of Freud that was meant to patch up the holes in Freud's theories. Whether or not he succeeded, and whether or not the method he used was valid, is debatable, but beside the point of this post--when Lacanians refer to "psychoanalysis," they mean either the entire history of the discourse stretching back to Freud, or the specifically Lacanian way of performing this practice. The nature of the referent depends on the context.
2. Fantasy
Our fantasies are constituent to our perception of the world. Lacanian psychoanalysis encourages us to embrace our fantasies, to the extent that this can help us attain the jouissance necessary for human flourishing or, at the very least, psychological health. (Again, whether or not this works is beside the point, I'm just trying to understand Lacan's claims.) The Fantastic plays a significant role in the process whereby man is subjugated by power, interpolated into an ideology or religion, and relates to his fellow humans and himself psychologically. The human need to embrace the Fantastic is a key part of Lacanian psychoanalysis, which we might call post-rational for its rejection of Freud's antipathy toward religion and the primitive. The Fantastic lies beyond the order of symbolism; compare it to the superego, in terms of the way it works as a conditioner of the ego.
(contd)
3. The Real
The Real is the sum of the basic, visceral sensations that give rise to the sense of self, the things that cannot be symbolized or properly integrated into the Fantastic order, which exists in part to cope with what goes on on the level of the Real.
4. The Symbolic
All of this is mediated by the symbolic order, which is in fact, as language conceived in a very broad sense, the essence of consciousness. Essentially, we can get lost in the symbolic and lose touch with the relationship between the Real and the Fantastic. The point of Lacanian psychoanalysis, like Platonic contemplation, Christian prayer, Zen meditation or the Confucian rectification of names, is to bring ourselves, as agents operating primarily on the level of the symbolic within the confines of the social and physical structures that give rise to the Fantastic and the Real, in touch with these visceral kernels of Being which defy symbolization and which therefore defy us, as symbolic and symbolizing, signified and symbolizing beings.
So is this Lacan? Or is this just some post-Hegelian bullshit that I just concocted? Also I'm American and don't read French, just FYI.
>>1166795
Why do you have to try to define psychoanalysis? When Lacanians refer to "psychoanalysis," they refer to psychoanalysis, kind of like how dermatologists refer to dermatology when they say dermatology.
Your understanding of Lacan is pretty awful and clearly and severely constrained by your not having read Freud, Lacan, or any psychoanalysis. It sounds like you are literally trying to reconstruct what Lacan might read written based on the 4 words you are trying to explicate. I guess that pretty much describes Zizek's "scholarship."
>>1166820
I literally say that that's what I'm trying to do. Could you maybe correct me, instead of just being confrontational? I'm trying to be corrected.
>>1166794
Lacan, Zizek, Derrida, Foucault, Sartre... all a bunch of charlatans.
Into the trash it goes.
>>1166842
>educated by 4chan.
cringeworthy.
>>1166890
I said "corrected," not "educated." Why are you posting in this thread if you understand Lacan and have no interest in discussing him? Are you only here to call me an idiot for not having read him? You aren't proving that people who have read Lacan aren't idiots by doing so.
>>1166890
>>1166901
Oh, and here's the sticky, in case you forgot why this board exists:
This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc. Please use /lit/ for discussions of literature. Threads should be about specific topics, and the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.
For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere. General discussions about international culture should go on /int/.
/his/ is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected. History can be examined from many different conflicting viewpoints; please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character.
When discussing history, please reference credible source material, and provide as much supporting information as possible in your posts.
>>1166901
>You aren't proving that people who have read Lacan aren't idiots by doing so.
why would I want to do that?.
Anyway I'm another anon. And your are wrong from point 1 , first try to understand what is psychoanalysis, start with basic concepts such as pshyche and unconscious mind.
>>1166937
>why would I want to do that?.
Why are you posting on a history board?
>And your are wrong from point 1 , first try to understand what is psychoanalysis, start with basic concepts such as pshyche and unconscious mind.
How about you explain those things to me? Or give me a reading list or something? Or do you just want me to contemplate those ideas?
>>1166950
>Why are you posting on a history board?
To discuss. not to teach, Im not a teacher.
>Or give me a reading list or something?
start with:
The Psychopathology of Everyday Life.
I like it because it gives you a nice perspective of psychoanalisis's view of the unconscious and how it affects our life.
>>1166984
>To discuss. not to teach, Im not a teacher.
I'm only asking for discussion; correction is part of discussion.
Thanks for the book rec, maybe you could give some examples about how the subconscious affects everyday life?
>>1166990
>maybe you could give some examples about how the subconscious affects everyday life?
phobias.
to forget names, words that you use every day.
when you rembember that you left the keys inside, just in the moment you close the doors.
hysteric syntomps, such as losing sensitiveness in parts of the body, or sexual missfunctions.
That dream that comes back every day.
that annoying jingle playing in your mind all day long.
and so forth.
