The history of psychoanalysis is, of course, marked by blunders and fourvoiements.DE FEED WHAT AN ANTHOLOGY, IF AN ENCYCLOPEDIA SO NEGATIVE BOOK OF BLACK ... we know the brainwashing. The authors and critics do not always keep ... themselves from falling into the traps of Manichaeism. As it is true that there are two kinds of intellectuals: those who are forgiven all those who are not going there, OR SITER Lacan?
While every effort is made to transcend anti-Semitic delirium Celine is going after the dazzling success of Lacan. That required analysis of the phenomenon, two temptations can the contradictory touch, equally pernicious, and minimizing the exégarération, exaggeration is the case with this sad HAJBLUM undoubtedly minimization is on the lips of followers blind to which alone the fame account, while Richard continued to explain, do not remove anything go about your business.
PS: The malaise is deeper still have to assess the ideological compromises a Lacan or an artist whose work inspires phus high esteem. Because it is a troubling mystery.
Richard wrote: "Frans I agree with you to avoid excesses: in front of a work and practice that they are, we can calmly discuss and demonstrate critical thinking. No. It is neither to praise nor to condemn the excesses but to play the analytical tools that are ours, and when I said I was retiring, that dialogue with Jean Pierre Edberg, whose I do not see how he could continue, as it seemed that his lacanolatrie could not be reached, as Freud said, "a believer, we can not discuss." Curiously he has erased all traces of this dialogue, which I find both very strange and unfortunate, but the act confirms what I just said interposed by Freud: A discussion was deleted. But of course I am not withdrawing from any further opportunity for discussion: if ah, those that pose a touch on the ethics of the other, so it is clear that the ethics of each is always greater than that of neighboring . "
While every effort is made to transcend anti-Semitic delirium Celine is going after the dazzling success of Lacan. That required analysis of the phenomenon, two temptations can the contradictory touch, equally pernicious, and minimizing the exégarération, exaggeration is the case with this sad HAJBLUM undoubtedly minimization is on the lips of followers blind to which alone the fame account, while Richard continued to explain, do not remove anything go about your business.
PS: The malaise is deeper still have to assess the ideological compromises a Lacan or an artist whose work inspires phus high esteem. Because it is a troubling mystery.
Richard wrote: "Frans I agree with you to avoid excesses: in front of a work and practice that they are, we can calmly discuss and demonstrate critical thinking. No. It is neither to praise nor to condemn the excesses but to play the analytical tools that are ours, and when I said I was retiring, that dialogue with Jean Pierre Edberg, whose I do not see how he could continue, as it seemed that his lacanolatrie could not be reached, as Freud said, "a believer, we can not discuss." Curiously he has erased all traces of this dialogue, which I find both very strange and unfortunate, but the act confirms what I just said interposed by Freud: A discussion was deleted. But of course I am not withdrawing from any further opportunity for discussion: if ah, those that pose a touch on the ethics of the other, so it is clear that the ethics of each is always greater than that of neighboring . "
0 comments:
Post a Comment