Hi Jacob
So we have these popular ideas, and studies have shown that a
more or less "vulgar Freudianism" is a default of modern common sense
regarding human motives. Then as you documented, it turns out that the
disciplinary term is substantially different. This happens in all
fields (the notion of "force" in physics, for example).
Your inference about how to proceed is correct. What I like about heuretics in general, and theory in particular, is that you can't wing it and expect to accomplish anything, or, winging it produces embarrassment eventually, usually sooner rather than later. Rather, you have to suspend common sense, and follow the instructions of the theory (however wacky or counter-intuitive). You start in the right direction, noting that while the Unconscious may be structured "like" a language, it does not include many of the features of formal grammar that literacy developed into the rules of logic, not to mention the practices of inference (abduction, deduction, induction). Rather, as we know from Part One, the Unconscious thinks via conduction (as I put it), or by dream work. Everything Lacan says about "primary process" is this alternative inference system. The instruction is: use primary process operations in your experiment.
No comments:
Post a Comment