2

This page claims:

we have to return to the basic questions behind Lacan's statements on the arrival of the letter at its destination and the necessity to eat one's Dasein

How can we "eat" a dasein, what does that mean?

virmaior
  • 24,518
  • 3
  • 48
  • 105
  • Although I'm not really well-enough informed to answer, perhaps eating something's "Dasein" (in more generality than your own self) is a bit like eating it mindfully - you are aware that you're eating and absorbing something particular and in its own right, rather than your entire conceptual sense of the thing you're doing being tasting a chocolate biscuit (say). Then Lacan draws this consumption parallel with the process of psychoanalysis and one's "coming to terms" with their substantial selves as more than just considering or reviewing their self-concept? – Paul Ross Apr 21 '15 at 14:34
  • The 'arrival of the letter': isn't this a reference to Poes story of the purloined letter - but what's it doing there? – Mozibur Ullah Apr 21 '15 at 14:45
  • 1
    @MoziburUllah The link is about a seminar by Lacan about Poe. I think the basic idea has to do with the 'numbing sense of the Real', where stripped of imagination and symbols, what is generally left is dread, emptiness or alienation (very essentially 'Poe' things) most of the time. We need to do something with that underlying feeling on a moment-to-moment basis, and what we do is 'eat' it. –  Apr 21 '15 at 20:06
  • @jobermark: This isn't relevant here - but one can imagine the contrary; where the Real is deleted; and one is left only with the Symbolic and Imaginary order; which is probably dreadful in a different sense. – Mozibur Ullah Apr 21 '15 at 21:08
  • @MoziburUllah Isn't that every idealists dream? To go visit the Platonic realm untouched by participation in the Real? If you believe the theories behind group psychoanalysis, then you can actually run this experiment, the consultant can thwart attempts to share imagination and symbols, and you can see the group fall into a sort of funk. The 'numbing' is not a theory of Lacan's, it is an experience from his own practice, which seems strange, and needs an explanation. –  Apr 21 '15 at 21:13
  • Possibly; but that wasn't the sense I was thinking of; one might think of Poes poem - the Raven in this light; ravens in reality aren't omens of anything - they are just a bird which happens to be Black; but if the real element of it as a bird is removed one left with what? It's symbolic sense which was before covered comes to life; but I may be turning Lacan upside down here. – Mozibur Ullah Apr 21 '15 at 21:29
  • Ok, I see my mistake; I wasn't thinking of a *shared* symbolic order; which of course it must be. – Mozibur Ullah Apr 21 '15 at 21:32
  • I take it that in this experiment the consultant allows speech - so long as it's not symbolic in any manner ie 'this cup' is allowed but not 'this silly cup'? – Mozibur Ullah Apr 21 '15 at 21:37
  • I suppose it can be viewed as a kind of isolation. – Mozibur Ullah Apr 21 '15 at 21:39
  • The consultant can't actually forbid anything, just show them for what they psychoanalytically represent. When the group escapes into fantasy, he interprets the fantasy. When they get mired in or fascinated by words or images, he points out how this serves to distance them from reality. The net effect is to make them aware of their manipulations. The theory is that the manipulations cannot play the intended role if the target is made conscious. Usually, one only does this to bad shared material, but it is possible to thwart everything that is not totally mundane. –  Apr 21 '15 at 23:03

0 Answers0