Zizek-Tarrying with the Negative.doc

8/13/2019 Zizek-Tarrying with the Negative.doc

1/212

TARRYING with the NEGATIVEKant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology

Slavoj iek

Duke University Press Durham 1993

-iii-

Fourth printing, 199 ! 1993 Duke University Press "ll rights reserve# Printe# in the Unite#States o$ "meri%a on a%i#-$ree paper &' (ypeset in Dante )y *eystone (ypesetting, +n%i)rary o$ .ongress .ataloging-in-Pu)li%ation Data appear on the last printe# page o$ this

)ook

-iv-

Lacking strength, Beauty hates the Understanding for asking of her what it cannot do. But thelife of Spirit is not the life that shrinks from death and keeps itself untouched by devastation,but rather the life that endures it and maintains itself in it. It wins its truth only when, in utterdismemberment, it finds itself. This tarrying with the negative is the magical power thatconverts it into being-- . !. ". #egel, /$reface% toPhenomenology o$ Spirit

-v-


2/212


3/212

Introdution

(he most su)lime image that emerge# in the politi%al upheavals o$ the last years-- an# theterm /su)lime/ is to )e %on%eive# here in the stri%test *antian sense-- Cas un#ou)te#ly theuniue pi%ture $rom the time o$ the violent overthroC o$ &eau'sescuin omaniaE the re)elsCaving the national $lag Cith the re# star, the .ommunist sym)ol, %ut out, so that instea# o$the sym)ol stan#ing $or the organiing prin%iple o$ the national li$e, there Cas nothing )ut ahole in its %enter +t is #i$$i%ult to imagine a more salient in#e5 o$ the/open/ %hara%ter o$ ahistori%al situation/in its )e%oming,/ as *ierkegaar# Coul# have put it, o$ that interme#iate

phase Chen the $ormer ;aster-Signi$ier, although it has alrea#y lost the hegemoni%al poCer,has not yet )een repla%e# )y the neC one (he su)lime enthusiasm this pi%ture )ears Citnessto is in no Cay a$$e%te# )y the $a%t that Ce noC knoC hoC the events Cere a%tually

manipulate# ultimately it ha# to #o Cith a %oup o$ Se%uritate, the .ommunist se%ret poli%e,against itsel$, against its oCn signi$ier' that is, the ol# apparatus survive# )y %asting o$$ itssym)oli% %lothing2E $or us as Cell as $or most o$ the parti%ipants themselves, all this )e%amevisi)le in retrospe%t, an# Chat really matters is that the masses Cho poure# into the streets o$Gu%harest/e5perien%e#/ the situation as/open,/ that they parti%ipate# in the uniueinterme#iate state o$ passage $rom one #is%ourse so%ial link2 to another, Chen, $or a )rie$,

passing moment, the hole in the )ig 8ther, the sym)oli% or#er, )e%ame visi)le (heenthusiasm Chi%h %arrie# them Cas literally the enthusiasm over this hole, not yethegemonie# )y any positive i#eologi%al proje%t' all i#eologi%al appropria-

-1-

tions $rom the nationalisti% to the li)eral-#emo%rati%2 entere# the stage a$terCar#s an#en#eavore# to/ki#nap/ the pro%ess Chi%h originally Cas not their oCn "t this point, perhaps,the enthusiasm o$ the masses an# the attitu#e o$ a %riti%al intelle%tual overlap $or a )rie$moment "n# the #uty o$ the %riti%al intelle%tual-- i$, in to#ay


4/212

uote# )y Fre#ri% HamesonE/?ot +taly itsel$ is given here, )ut the proo$ that it e5ists/ 3?othing is more antiphilosophi%al than the Cell-knoCn ane%#ote a)out Diogenes the %yni%Cho, Chen %on$ronte# Cith the :leati% proo$s o$ the none5isten%e an# inherent impossi)ilityo$ movement, ansCere# )y simply stan#ing up an# taking a Calk "s 0egel points out, thestan#ar# version o$ this ane%#ote passes over in silen%e its #enouementE Diogenes soun#ly

thrashe# his pupil Cho applau#e# the ;aster


5/212

opposes is this very philosophy ua antiphilosophyE Chat i$ a%an


6/212

ART I C"GIT" The Void Called &u/0et

-B-

! I or He or It 1the Thing2 3hih Thin4sThe Noir &u/0et555

8ne Cay to take note o$ the histori%al gap separating the 19As $rom the 197As is to %omparethe %lassi%film noirto the neC Cave o$ noirin the eighties hat + have in min# here are not

primarily #ire%t or in#ire%t remakes the tCo*+


7/212

is himsel$ a repli%ant (he out%ome o$ the uest is there$ore in )oth %ases the ra#i%alun#ermining o$ sel$-i#entity mastermin#e# )y a mysterious, all-poCer$ul agen%y, in the $irst%ase the Devil himsel$ /ouis .ipher/2, in the se%on# %ase the (yrell %orporation, Chi%hsu%%ee#e# in $a)ri%ating repli%ants unaCare o$ their repli%ant status, ie, repli%antsmisper%eiving themselves as humans4 (he Corl# #epi%te# in )oth $ilms is the Corl# in Chi%h

the %orporate .apital su%%ee#e# in penetrating an# #ominating the very $antasykernel o$ our)eingE none o$ our $eatures is really /ours/' even our memories an# $antasies are arti$i%iallyplante# +t is as i$ Fre#ri% Hameson


8/212

re%ent issue o$ TimemagaineE /Stories are pre%ious, in#ispensa)le :veryone must have hishistory, her narrative =ou #o not knoC Cho you are until you possess the imaginative versiono$ yoursel$ =ou almost #o not e5ist Cithout it/ .lassi%al noirsremain Cithin these %on$inesEthey a)oun# Cith %ases o$ amnesia in Chi%h the hero #oes not knoC Cho he is or Chat he #i##uring his )la%kout =et amnesia is here a

-11-

#e$i%ien%y measure# )y the stan#ar# o$ integration into the $iel# o$ intersu)je%tivity, o$sym)oli% %ommunityE a su%%ess$ul re%olle%tion means that, )y Cay o$ organiing his li$e-e5perien%e into a %onsistent narrative, the hero e5or%ies the #ark #emons o$ the past Gut inthe universe o$Blade 0unnerorngel #eart, re%olle%tion #esignates something in%ompara)lymore ra#i%alE the total loss o$ the hero


9/212

%orrelative to the Chole o$ reality, ie, as the point e5ternal to reality, e5empte# $rom it,Chi%h #elineates reality


10/212

am ina%%essi)le to mysel$ ua noumenal (hing Chi%h thinks (he (hing is originally lost an#the $antasyo)je%t a2 $ills out its voi# in this pre%ise *antian sense a%an remarks that ais/the stu$$ o$ the +/2 B (he a%t o$ /+ think/ is trans-phenomenal, it is not an o)je%t o$ innere5perien%e or intuition' yet $or all that, it is not a nournenal (hing, )ut rather the voi# o$ itsla%kE it is not su$$i%ient to say a)out the + o$ pure apper%eption that /o$ it, apart $rom them Othe

thoughts Chi%h are its pre#i%ates, Ce %annot have any %on%ept Chatsoever/ .P, " 36>28ne has to a## that this lack of intuited content is constitutive of the I- the inaccessibility tothe I of its own %kernel of being% makes it an I (his is Chat *ant is not uite %lear a)out,Chi%h is Chy he again an# again yiel#s to the temptation o$ %on%eiving o$ the relationship

)etCeen the + o$ pure apper%eption an# the + o$ sel$-e5perien%e as the relationship )etCeen a(hing-initsel$ an# an e5periential phenomenon 9

hen, %onseuently, *ant remarks that, /in the syntheti% original unity o$ apper%eption, + am%ons%ious o$ mysel$, not as + appear to mysel$, nor as + am in mysel$, )ut only that + am/ .P, G17B 2, the $irst thing one has to noti%e here is the $un#amental para#o5 o$ this$ormulationE + en%ounter being#evoi# o$ all #eterminations-o$-thought at the very moment

Chen, )y Cay o$ the utmost a)stra%tion, + %on$ine mysel$ to the empty $orm

-16-

o$ thoughtChi%h a%%ompanies every representation o$ mine (hus, the empty $orm o$ thought%oin%i#es Cith )eing, Chi%h la%ks any $ormal #etermination-o$-thought 0ere, hoCever,Chere *ant seems at his %losest to Des%artes, the #istan%e that separates them is in$initeE in*ant, this %oin%i#en%e o$ thought an# )eing in the a%t o$ sel$-%ons%iousness in no Cay impliesa%%ess to mysel$ ua thinking su)stan%eE /(hrough this + or he or it the thing2 Chi%h thinks,nothing $urther is represente# than a trans%en#ental su)je%t o$ the thoughts Q M +t is knoCnonly through the thoughts Chi%h are its pre#i%ates, an# o$ it, apart $rom them, Ce %annot haveany %on%ept Chatsoever/ .P, " 36>2 +n shortE Ce %an provi#e no possi)le ansCer to theuestion /0oC is the (hing Chi%h thinks stru%ture#K/ (he para#o5 o$ sel$-%ons%iousness isthat it is possible only against the background of its own impossibilityE + am %ons%ious o$mysel$ only inso$ar as + am out o$ rea%h to mysel$ ua the real kernel o$ my )eing /+ or he orit the thing2 Chi%h thinks/2 + %annot a%uire %ons%iousness o$ mysel$ in my %apa%ity o$ the/(hing Chi%h thinks/ 1A +nBlade 0unner, De%kar#, a$ter learning that a%hael is a repli%antCho mis2per%eives hersel$ as human, asks in astonishmentE /0oC %an it not knoC Chat it isK/e %an see, noC, hoC, more than tCo hun#re# years ago, *ant


11/212

i#enti$i%ation, the phenomenal + the empiri%al su)je%t2 has to )e %on%eive# o$ simultaneouslyas something Chi%h in the guise o$ an o)je%t o$ e5perien%e2

-17-

appears tothe noumenal su)je%t an# as the appearan%e ofthe nournenal su)je%t (hat is to say,everything that appears as part o$ the %onstitute# reality appears to the trans%en#ental su)je%tChi%h is here %on%eive# as i#enti%al Cith the noumenal su)je%t2' on the other han#, theempiri%al su)je%t is, as is the %ase Cith every intuite# reality, a phenomenal appearan%e o$some noumenal entity, in this %ase, o$ the noumenal su)je%t (his #ou)ling, hoCever, is anonsensi%al, sel$-%an%eling short-%ir%uitE i$ the noumenal su)je%t appears to itself, the #istan%ethat separates appearan%e $rom noumena $alls aCay (he agen%y Chi%h per%eives somethingas an appearan%e %annot itsel$ )e an appearan%e +n su%h a %ase, Ce $in# ourselves in thenonsensi%al vi%ious %ir%le #es%ri)e# )y "lphonse "llais, Chere tCo appearan%es mutuallyre%ognie themselves as appearan%es aoul an# ;arguerite make an appointment at amaske# )all' in a se%ret %orner, they )oth take o$$ their masks an# utter a %ry o$ surprise--

aoul, sin%e his partner is not ;arguerite, an# ;arguerite, sin%e her partner is not aoul2(hus, the only Cay out o$ this impasse is to #istinguish )etCeen the + o$ pure apper%eptionan# the (hing-Chi%h-thinksE Chat + e5perien%e, Chat is given to me phenomenally in myintuition, the %ontent o$ my person the o)je%t o$ empiri%al psy%hology2, is, o$ %ourse, as Cithevery phenomenon, the appearing o$ a (hing in this %ase o$ the (hing-Chi%h-thinks2, but thisThing cannot be the I of pure apperception, the transcendental sub(ect to whom the %Thingwhich thinks% appears as the empirical I

ith this %ru%ial point in min#, Ce %an give a pre%ise a%%ount o$ the #i$$eren%e )etCeen theina%%essi)ility o$ the noumenal Sel$ an# o$ any o)je%t o$ per%eption hen *ant says that thetrans%en#ental su)je%t /is knoCn only through the thoughts Chi%h are its pre#i%ates, an# o$ it,apart $rom them, Ce %annot have any %on%ept Chatsoever/ .P, " 36>2, #oes not the samealso hol# true $or the ta)le in $ront o$ me, $or e5ampleK (he ta)le is also knoCn only throughthe thoughts Chi%h are its pre#i%ates, an# o$ it, apart $rom them, Ce %annot have any %on%eptChatsoever 0oCever, #ue to the a)ove-#es%ri)e# sel$-re$erential #ou)ling o$ the appearing inthe %ase o$ the +, %I think% must also remain empty on the phenomenal level (he +


12/212

possess an intuition o$ mysel$ ua /(hing Chi%h thinks,/ ie, i$ + Cere to have an a%%ess to mynoumenal Sel$,I would thereby lose the very feature which makes me an I of pureapperception' + Coul# %ease to )e the spontaneous trans%en#ental agent that %onstitutesreality13

(he same para#o5 repeats itsel$ apropos o$ the trans%en#ental o)je%t ua %orrelate to the + o$pure apper%eption (hat is to say, hoC #oes *ant arrive at the notion o$ trans%en#ental o)je%tKhy %an


13/212

the + o$ pure apper%eptionE its representation is empty sin%e, Cere it to )e givenphenomenally, it Coul# also )e given noumenally2 1B

-ro6 Kant to Hegel

(his am)iguity o$ *ant


14/212

the in#e5 o$ a #e$i%ien%y on the si#e o$ intuition-- ie, o$ the $a%t that our representations are$orever )ran#e# )y our $initu#e, that the Corl# o$ intuite# o)je%ts is never given in itstotality-- it shi$ts into the in#e5 o$ the #e$i%ien%y o$ the very discursive form +n this pre%isesense 0egel


15/212

)eyon# the limit For that reason, Ce must )e very attentive i$ Ce are not to miss Chat 0egelhas in min# Chen he insists that the ")solute has to )e %on%eive# also as su)je%t, not only assu)stan%eE the stan#ar# notion o$ the gra#ual )e%oming-su)je%t o$ the su)stan%e o$ the/a%tive/ su)je%t leaving its /imprint/ on the su)stan%e, mol#ing it, me#iating it, e5pressing init his su)je%tive %ontent2 is here #ou)ly mislea#ing First, Ce must )ear in min# that Cith

0egel this su)je%tiviation o$ the o)je%t never /turns out/E there is alCays a remain#er o$ thesu)stan%e Chi%h elu#es the grasp o$ /su)je%tive me#iation/' an# $ar $rom )eing a simpleimpe#iment preventing the su)je%t


16/212

%ommon Ioo# em)o#ie# in the State2 GetCeen these tCo e5tremes a pro%ess o$e5%hangeRme#iation takes pla%eE the /no)le %ons%iousness/ alienates its pure For-itsel$ itssilent honora)le serving o$ the State2 in language ua me#ium o$ the universality o$ thought$lattery to the ;onar%h, the hea#

-44-

o$ the State2' in e5%hange $or this alienation, su)stan%e itsel$ a%%omplishes a $irst step toCar#its /su)je%tiviation,/ ie, it %hanges $rom the unattaina)le State, a)stra%tly oppose# to us,into Cealth ua su)stantial %ontent Chi%h alrea#y is at our #isposal money Ce get $or$lattering the ;onar%h2 8n the other han#, Su)stan%e itsel$ the State2 is not onlysu)or#inate# to the su)je%tivity o$ sel$-%ons%iousness via its trans$ormation into CealthE ine5%hange $or this su)or#ination, it a%uires itsel$ the $orm o$ su)je%tivity-the impersonal Stateis repla%e# )y the a)solute ;onar%hy' it )e%omes i#enti$ie# Cith the person o$ the ;onar%h%L29tat, c2est moi.%2 (hroughout the entire #iale%ti% o$Bildung, the appearan%e o$ aneuivalent e5%hange )etCeen su)je%t sel$-%ons%iousness2 an# su)stan%e is thus maintaine#E

in e5%hange $or his in%reasing alienation, $or sa%ri$i%ing a $urther su)stantial part o$ himsel$,the su)je%t re%eives honor, Cealth, the language o$ Spirit an# insight, the heaven o$ Faith, theUtility o$ the :nlightenment 0oCever, Chen Ce rea%h the apogee o$ this #iale%ti%, /a)solute$ree#om,/ the e5%hange )etCeen the parti%ular an# the universal ill, the su)je%t /getsnothing in e5%hange $or everything/ 0e /passes into an empty nothing/' his alienation

)e%omes an a)stra%t negation Chi%h o$$ers no positive, #eterminate %ontent in e5%hange (hehistori%al epo%h Chi%h stan#s $or this moment o$ /a)solute $ree#om/ is, o$ %ourse, theHa%o)ini%al eign o$ (error, in Chi%h, $or no apparent reason, + %oul# )e pro%laime# traitoran# have my hea# %ut o$$ at any momentE the %hapter on Spirit en%ompasses the entirespiritual #evelopment o$ :urope $rom the me#ieval $eu#al state to the Fren%h evolution2=et it is pre%isely this $alling apart o$ the appearan%e o$ a symmetri%al, )alan%e# e5%hangethat makes possi)le the spe%ulative-#iale%ti%al reversalE sel$-%ons%iousness has only to

)e%ome aCare o$ hoC this ?othingness Chi%h appears to a parti%ular ill as an a)stra%t,oppose#, e5ternal threat %oin%i#es Cith its oCn $or%e o$ negativity' it has to internalie this$or%e o$ negativity an# re%ognie in it its oCn essen%e, the very kernel o$ its oCn )eing/Su)je%t/ emerges at this very point o$ utterly meaningless voi#an%e )rought a)out )y anegativity Chi%h e5plo#es the $rame o$ )alan%e# e5%hange (hat is to say, Chat is /su)je%t/ i$not the in$inite poCer o$ a)solute negativityRme#iationE in %ontrast to a mere )iologi%al li$e,sel$-%ons%iousness %ontains in itsel$ its oCn negation, it maintains itsel$ )y Cay o$ negativesel$-relating (his Cay, Ce pass $rom a)solute $ree#om o$ the revolutionary citoyen2 into /theSpirit %ertain o$ itsel$/ epitomie# )y the *antian moral su)je%tE the e5ternal negativity o$ the

revolutionary (error is internalie# into the poCer o$

-43-

moral aC, into the pure *noCle#ge an# ill ua Universality, Chi%h is not somethinge5ternally oppose# to the su)je%t )ut something Chi%h %onstitutes the very a5is o$ his sel$-%ertainty' /Free ill/ is a ill that a%ts in a%%or#an%e Cith the universal moral aC, not ina%%or#an%e Cith parti%ular /pathologi%al/2 motivations Chi%h enslave it to the Corl# o$o)je%ts 0ere is the passage $rom$henomenologyChi%h re%apitulates this movementE

+n the Corl# o$ %ulture Bildung2 itsel$, it Osel$-%ons%iousness #oes not get as $ar as to )ehol#

its negation or alienation in this $orm o$ pure a)stra%tion' on the %ontrary, its negation is $ille#Cith a %ontent, either honour or Cealth, Chi%h it gains in pla%e o$ the sel$ that it has alienate#


17/212

$rom itsel$' or the language o$ Spirit an# insight Chi%h the #isrupte# %ons%iousness a%uires'or it is the heaven o$ $aith, or the Utility o$ the :nlightenment "ll these #eterminations havevanishe# in the loss su$$ere# )y the sel$ in a)solute $ree#om' its negation is the #eath that isCithout meaning, the sheer terror o$ the negative that %ontains nothing positive, nothing that$ills it Cith a %ontent "t the same time, hoCever, this negation in its real e5isten%e is not

something alien' it is neither the universal ina%%essi)le necessityin Chi%h the ethi%al Corl#perishes, nor the parti%ular a%%i#ent o$ private possession, nor the Chim o$ the oCner onChi%h the #isrupte# %ons%iousness sees itsel$ #epen#ent' on the %ontrary, it is the universalwillChi%h in this its ultimate a)stra%tion has nothing positive an# there$ore %an give nothingin return $or the sa%ri$i%e Gut $or that very reason it is imme#iately one Cith sel$-%ons%iousness, or it is the pure positive, )e%ause it is the pure negative' an# the meaningless#eath, the un$ille# negativity o$ the sel$, %hanges roun# in its inner ?otion into a)solute

positivity 43

(he logi% o$ this internaliation o$ negativity usually un#ergoes tCo types o$ %riti%ism (hestan#ar# ;ar5ist approa%h %ites it as the supreme proo$ o$ 0egel


18/212

e%onomy/ %an legitimately )e attri)ute# is ;ar5 himsel$ hat + have in min# here, o$ %ourse,is the uniue moment Chen ;ar5 is at his most 0egelianE his $ormulation o$ the proletarian as/su)stan%eless su)je%tivity/ in the $amous manus%ript$ragment on /Pre%apitalist epo%hs/ $romrundrisse 47 "$ter #eploying his gran#iose %on%eption o$ the proletariat as the apogee o$ thehistori%al pro%ess o$ /alienation,/ o$ the gra#ual #isengaging o$ the la)or $or%e $rom the

#omination o$ the /organi%,/ su)stantial %on#itions o$ the pro%ess o$ pro#u%tion the #ou)le$ree#om o$ the proletarianE he stan#s $or the a)stra%t su)je%tivity $ree# $rom all su)stantial-organi% ties, yet at the same

-47-

time he is #ispossesse# an# thus o)lige# to sell on the market his oCn la)or $or%e in or#er tosurvive2, ;ar5 %on%eives o$ the proletarian revolution as a /materialist/ version o$ the0egelian re%on%iliation o$ su)je%t an# su)stan%eE it reesta)lishes the unity o$ the su)je%tla)or $or%e2 Cith the o)je%tive %on#itions o$ the pro%ess o$ pro#u%tion, yet not un#er thehegemony o$ these o)je%tive %on#itions Chere in#ivi#uals $igure as mere su)or#inate#

moments o$ their so%ial totality2, )ut Cith %olle%tive su)je%tivity as the me#iating $or%e o$ thisunity +n so%ialism, the %olle%tive su)je%t is )oun# to ren#er transparent an# %ontrol the

pro%ess o$ pro#u%tion an# so%ial repro#u%tion in its entirety

From this ;ar5ian perspe%tive, o$ %ourse, the 0egelian /re%on%iliation/ emerges as a mere/re%on%iliation in the me#ium o$ thought/ that leaves so%ial reality un#istur)e# Perhaps,hoCever, a$ter more than a %entury o$ polemi%s on the ;ar5ist /materialist reversal o$ 0egel,/the time has %ome to raise the inverse possi)ility o$ a 0egelian %ritiue o$ ;ar5 Does not0egel ena)le us to #is%ern, in the very $oun#ation o$ the ;ar5ian notion o$ the proletarianrevolution, a kin# o$ perspe%tive-illusion Chi%h hinges pre%isely on the /%lose# e%onomy/ o$the #iale%ti%al reversalK +t Cas possi)le $or ;ar5 to imagine /#is-alienation/ as the reversal )ymeans o$ Chi%h the su)je%t reappropriates the entire su)stantial %ontent 0oCever, su%h areversal is pre%isely Chat 0egel pre%lu#esE in 0egel


19/212

-- (he uali$i%ation o$ .apital as the alienate# Su)stan%e o$ the histori%al pro%ess Chi%hreigns over the atomie# su)je%ts see the $amous $ormulae $rom rundrisseon the proletariatua /su)stan%eless su)je%tivity/ Chi%h posits .apital as its oCn non)eing2' Cithin this

perspe%tive, evolution ne%essarily appears as an a%t )y means o$ Chi%h the histori%al Su)je%tappropriates to himsel$ his alienate# su)stantial %ontent, ie, re%ognies in it his oCn pro#u%t

(his moti$ a%hieve# its ultimate e5pression in Ieorg uk%s

-- (he opposite uali$i%ation o$ .apital as Su)stan%e Chi%h is alrea#y in itsel$ Su)je%t, ie,Chi%h is not anymore an empty-a)stra%t universality )ut an universality repro#u%ing itsel$through the %ir%ular pro%ess o$ its sel$me#iation an# sel$-positing see the #e$inition o$ .apitalas /money Chi%h )egets more money/E ;oney-.ommo#ity-;oney2-- in short, .apital is;oney-Chi%h-)e%ame-Su)je%t (his theme o$ /0egel


20/212

money an# the Corn %urren%y Cas knoCn as agio 8n the )asis o$ this #i$$eren%e )etCeen/goo#/ an# /)a#/ money, a neC $orm o$ money emerge# in mer%antile states, a so-%alle#/)ank-money/E it represente# money e5a%tly a%%or#ing to the stan#ar# o$ mint, ie, moneyinso$ar as it has not yet )een #evalue# )y use' hoCever, $or this very reason, it Cas notem)o#ie# )ut e5iste# only as an imaginary point o$ re$eren%e ;ore pre%isely, it e5iste# as a

%onvention )etCeen a )ank an# an in#ivi#ualE as a paper )y means o$ Chi%h a )ank promise#to pay a parti%ular mer%hant a %ertain amount upon his presenting this paper (his Cay, themer%hant Cas guarantee# that the money he gave to the )ank Coul# keep its /real/ value

(here are tCo %ru%ial points to )e note# here (he $irst is that, )y Cay o$ this operation,/money entere# into a relation Cith itsel$ an# )e%ame a %ommo#ity/E 3A the #upli%ation into/goo#,/ )ut only imaginary, money an# /)a#,/ empiri%ally e5isting gol# money, su)je%te# toCear an# tear, ma#e it possi)le to measure the /pri%e o$ money itsel$/ +t Cas possi)le to saythat this gol# %oin that + hol# in my han#, #ue to its Cear an# tear, is Corth only so mu%h, onlya per%entage o$ /goo#/ money, o$ its oCn /true/ value (he se%on# point is that this imaginarymoney Cas /#ei%ti%ally roote# in the signature o$ a parti%ular name# payee/E 31 the paper

issue# )y the )ank Cas a monetary promise ma#e )y it to a name#, in#ivi#ual mer%hant +nor#er to arrive at paper money as Ce knoC it to#ay, this

-4-

#ei%ti% promise Cith %on%rete #ates an# names has to )e #epersonalie# into a promise ma#eto the anonymous /)earer/ to pay the gol#-euivalent o$ the sum Critten on paper money--thus, the an%horing, the link to a %on%rete in#ivi#ual Cas %ut loose "n# the su)je%t Cho %ameto re%ognie itsel$ as this anonymous /)earer/ is the very su)je%t o$ sel$-%ons%iousness-ChyKhat is at stake here is not simply that this /)earer/ #esignates a neutral universal $un%tionChi%h %an )e $ille# in )y any in#ivi#ual' i$ Ce are to attain sel$-%ons%iousness, the emptyuniversality o$ the /)earer/ has to assume a%tual e5isten%e, it has to )e posite# as su%h, ie,the sub(ect has to relate to itself, to conceive of itself, as :to; an empty %bearer,% and to

perceive his empirical features which constitute the positive content of his particular%person% as a contingent variable (his shi$t is again the very shi$t $rom S to L, $rom the$ullness o$ the /pathologi%al/ su)je%t to cogitoua empty sel$-relating Chi%h e5perien%es itsoCn positive, empiri%al %ontent as something /posite#,/ ie, %ontingent an# ultimatelyin#i$$erent34

-ro6 &u/0et to &u/stane555and (a4

(he gap that separates ;ar5 $rom 0egel, ie, the %ru%ial #imension o$ Chat 0egel %alls/su)je%t/ as oppose# to empiri%al in#ivi#uals2, )e%omes visi)le the moment one traverses the

path /$rom su)stan%e to su)je%t/ in the opposite #ire%tion hat Ce have in min# here is thereproa%h usually a##resse# to 0egel )y his nominalist a#versaries, $rom Feuer)a%h an# young;ar5 onCar#s, Chose )asi% premise is that /a%tually e5isting in#ivi#uals/ realie their

potentials in the so%ial netCork o$ their mutual relationships /the essen%e o$ man is thetotality o$ his so%ial relationships,/ as ;ar5 put it2 "%%or#ing to this reproa%h, 0egel


21/212

o$ this /unmasking o$ the i#ealist mysti$i%ation/ is provi#e# )y the %ritiue o$ religious%ons%iousness ela)orate# )y Feuer)a%h an# young ;ar5, Chi%h %on%eives o$ Io# as thealienate#, inverte#, /su)stantialie#/ e5pression o$ the )asi% stru%ture o$ so%ial relations

)etCeen a%tual an#

-49-

a%tive in#ivi#uals "%%or#ing to this %ritiue, the $irst step o$ the religious mysti$i%ation is to/groun#/ the in#ivi#ual


22/212

/%ommuni%ate/ Cith them is the hope that + Cill re%eive $rom them the truth a)out mysel$,a)out my oCn #esire "n# the same goes $or the no less Corn-out pro)lem o$ /%ommuni%ation

)etCeen #i$$erent %ultures/ (he %ommon groun# that alloCs %ultures to talk to ea%h other, toe5%hange messages, is not some presuppose# share# set o$ universal values, et%, )ut rather itsopposite, some share# deadlock' %ultures /%ommuni%ate/ inso$ar as they %an re%ognie in

ea%h other a #i$$erent ansCer to the same $un#amental /antagonism,/ #ea#lo%k, point o$$ailure 37

hat is there$ore %ru%ial $or 0egel


23/212

a)an#one# (he +#ea pays the penalty o$ #eterminate e5isten%e an# %orrupti)ility, not $romitsel$, )ut $rom the passions o$ in#ivi#uals 3B

(his uotation $rom 0egel


24/212

/notion o$ la)or/2 is #ire%t an# unam)iguousE Ce attain the universality o$ (hought ua $ormo$ a%tuality )y Cay o$ the typi%ally 0egelian reversal o$ e5ternal $inality into sel$-$inality, ie,o$ e5ternal $orm into a)solute $orm (hrough his e$$ort to mol#, to $orm, e5ternal o)je%ts sothat they $it the en# o$ satis$ying the ;aster


25/212


26/212

the eal, )ut pre%isely )e%ause it invokes the impression o$ some su)stantial eal )ehin# it' it#e%eives )y posing as a sha#oC o$

-3>-

the un#erlying eal66 "n# the same goes $or *antE Chat *ant $ails to noti%e is that das *ingis a mirage invoke# )y the trans%en#ental o)je%tLimitation precedes transcendenceE all that/a%tually e5ists/ is the $iel# o$ phenomena an# its limitation, Chereas das *ingis nothing )uta phantasm Chi%h, su)seuently, $ills out the voi# o$ the trans%en#ental o)je%t

a%an


27/212

/nothing,/ the voi#, )eyon# the limit "n#-- as #emonstrate# )y a%an in his Seminar on the:thi% o$ Psy%hoanalysis-- this *antian notion o$ the Su)lime is Cholly %ompati)le Cith theFreu#ian notion o$ su)limationE in the Freu#ian theory, the /su)lime/ #esignates an empiri%alo)je%t that o%%upies, $ills in, the voi#, the empty pla%e, o$ the /primor#ially represse#/ (hing,

)e%oming /elevate# to the #ignity o$ the (hing/ +n this pre%ise sense, the su)lime o)je%t is

simultaneously the sur$a%e Scheinor /grima%e,/ a pure sem)lan%e #evoi# o$ any su)stantialsupport, andsomething /more real than reality itsel$/E in its very %apa%ity o$ a puresem)lan%e, it /gives )o#y/ to a )oun#ary Chi%h $i5es the limits o$ Chat Ce e5perien%e as2reality, ie, it hol#s the pla%e o$, stan#s in $or, Chat has to )e e5%lu#e#, $ore%lose#, i$ /reality/is to retain its %onsisten%y 6>

"s regar#s 0egel


28/212

/imme#iate/ synthesis an# proposes to over%ome *ant


29/212

-6A-

)etCeen human an# an#roi# ;an is a repli%ant Cho #oes not knoC it' yet i$ this Cere all, the$ilm Coul# involve a simplisti% re#u%tionist notion that our sel$-e5perien%e ua $ree /human/agents is an illusion $oun#e# upon our ignoran%e o$ the %ausal ne5us Chi%h regulates our

lives For that reason, Ce shoul# supplement the $ormer statementE it is only Chen, at the levelo$ the enun%iate# %ontent, + assume my repli%ant-status, that, at the level o$ enun%iation, +

)e%ome a truly human su)je%t /+ am a repli%ant/ is the statement o$ the su)je%t in its purest--the same as in "lthusser


30/212

there$ore amount to $illing out the voi# Chi%h %onstitutes me ua L, su)je%t o$ sel$-%ons%iousness, ie, to i#enti$ying-re%ogniing mysel$ as /he or it, the (hing Chi%h thinks/ +na%anian terms, /total re%all/ Coul# amount to the /knoCle#ge in the eal/ 77

epli%ants knoC their li$e span is limite# to $our years (his %ertainty saps the openness o$

their /)eing-toCar#s-#eath/' it )ears Citness to their arrival at the impossi)le point o$knoCing hoC they are stru%ture# ua /thing-ma%hine Chi%h thinks/ For that reason,repli%ants are ultimately the impossi)le $antasy-$ormation o$ us human mortalsE the $antasy o$a )eing %ons%ious o$ itsel$ ua (hing, o$ a )eing Chi%h #oes not have to pay $or a%%ess to sel$-%ons%iousness Cith L, Cith the loss o$ its su)stantial support " %ra%k in this $antasy there$oreena)les us to )roa%h the uestion o$ /arti$i%ial intelligen%e/E #o %omputers thinkK

hat is %ru%ial to the #e)ates on arti$i%ial intelligen%e is that an inversion has taken pla%e,Chi%h is the $ate o$ every su%%ess$ul metaphorE one $irst tries to simulate human thought Ciththe %omputer, )ringing the mo#el as %lose as possi)le to the human /original,/ until at a%ertain point matters reverse an# the uestion emergesE what if this %model% is already a

model of the %original% itself, Chat i$ human intelligen%e itsel$ operates like a %omputer, is/programme#,/ et%K (herein %onsists also the intriguing impli%ation o$ the %omputer-generate# /virtual reality/E Chat i$ our /true/ reality itsel$ has to )e virtualie#, %on%eive# asan arti$a%tK2 (he %omputer raises in pure

-64-

$orm the uestion o$ sem)lan%e, o$ a #is%ourse Chi%h Coul# not )e that o$ a sem)lan%eE it is%lear that the %omputer in some sense only /simulates/ thought' yet how does the total

simulation of thought differ from %real% thought)?o Con#er, then, that the spe%ter o$/arti$i%ial intelligen%e/ appears as an entity Chi%h is simultaneouslyprohibitedan#%onsi#ere# impossibleE Ce assert that it is not possi)le $or a ma%hine to think at the same time,Ce try to prohi)it resear%h in these #ire%tions, on the groun#s that it is #angerous, ethi%ally#u)ious, et%

Do then /%omputers think/ or notK (he ansCer hinges pre%isely on this logi% o$ the reverse#metaphor Chere, instea# o$ %on%eiving o$ the %omputer as the mo#el $or the human )rain, Ce%on%eive o$ the )rain itsel$ as a /%omputer ma#e o$ $lesh an# )loo#,/ Chere, instea# o$#e$ining the ro)ot as the arti$i%ial man, Ce #e$ine man himsel$ as a /natural ro)ot,/ et% (hisreversal %oul# )e $urther e5empli$ie# )y resorting to the #omain o$ se5uality e usually%onsi#er mastur)ation as an /imaginary se5ual a%t,/ ie, an a%t Chere the )o#ily %onta%t Cith

a partner is only imagine#' is it not possi)le to reverse the terms an# to %on%eive the /proper/se5ual a%t, the a%t Cith an /a%tual/ partner, as a kin# o$ /mastur)ation Cith a real instea# o$only imagine#2 partner/K (he Chole point o$ a%an


31/212

appears as a mere metaphori%al simulation, a pale imitation, o$ the true reality %omputer as ametaphor o$ the true )rains, et%2 )e%omes the original para#igm imitate# )y )loo#-an#-$leshreality )rains $olloC in an alCays imper$e%t Cay the $un%tioning o$ the %omputer, et%2 hatCe e5perien%e as /reality/ is %onstitute# )y su%h a reversalE as a%an puts it, /reality/ isalCays $rame# )y a $antasy, ie, $or something real to )e e5perien%e# as part o$ /reality,/ it

must $it the preor#aine# %oor#inates o$ our $antasy-spa%e a se5ual a%t must $it the %oor#i-

-63-

nates o$ our imagine# $antasy-s%ripts, a )rain must $it the $un%tioning o$ a %omputer, et%2(his Cay, Ce %an propose a se%on# #e$inition o$ the ealE a surplus, a har# kernel, Chi%hresists any pro%ess o$ mo#eling, simulation, or metaphori%iation

et us re%all hoC, apropos o$lien3, some revieCers uote# a series o$ $eatures the a%tiontakes pla%e in a %lose# male %ommunity Chere even ipley has to shave her hea# in or#er to

)e%ome part o$ it' humans are utterly #e$enseless against the threat o$ the /alien,/ et%2 as an

argument $or %on%eiving the /alien/ as a metaphor o$ "+DS hat one has to a##, $rom thea%anian perspe%tive, is that all the talk a)out /alien,/ the monster, as a metaphor o$ "+DS$alls short o$ the %ru%ial $a%t that "+DS itsel$ oCes its tremen#ous impa%t not to its raC realityo$ an illness, to its imme#iate physi%al impa%t, hoCever horri$ying it may )e, )ut to thee5traor#inary li)i#inal energy investe# in it "+DS is per%eive# as irresisti)le, it strikessu##enly, as i$ $rom noChere, it seems to $un%tion per$e%tly as Io#


32/212

9 Cogito and the &e.ual $iffereneThe Kantian Cra4 in the 'ni7ersal

+t may seem para#o5i%al to evoke a /%ra%k in the universal/ apropos o$ *antE Cas *ant noto)sesse# )y the Universal, Cas not his $un#amental aim to esta)lish the universal $orm%onstitutive2 o$ knoCle#ge, #oes his ethi%s not propose the universal $orm o$ the rule Chi%hregulates our a%tivity as the sole %riterion o$ morality, et%K =et as soon as the (hing-in-itsel$is posite# as unattaina)le, every universal is potentially suspended :very universal implies a

point o$ e5%eption at Chi%h its vali#ity, its hol#, is %an%ele#' or, to put it in the language o$%ontemporary physi%s, it implies a point o$ singularity (his /singularity/ is ultimately the

1antian sub(ect himself, namely the empty su)je%t o$ the trans%en#ental apper%eption 8n

a%%ount o$ this singularity, ea%h o$ *ant


33/212

the Su)lime is the site o$ the ins%ription o$ pure su)je%tivity Chose a)yss )oth Geauty an#(eleology en#eavor to %on%eal )y Cay o$ the appearan%e o$ 0armony

0oC then, on a %loser look, is the Su)lime relate# to the tCo sets o$ Geauty an# (eleologyChose interse%tion it isK "s to the relationship )etCeen the Geauti$ul an# the Su)lime, *ant,

as is Cell knoCn, %on%eives o$ )eauty as the sym)ol o$ the Ioo#' at the same time, he pointsout that Chat is truly su)lime is not the o)je%t Chi%h arouses the $eeling o$ su)limity )ut themoral aC in us, our suprasensi)le nature "re then )eauty an# su)limity simply to )e%on%eive# as tCo #i$$erent sym)ols o$ the Ioo#K 8r is it not, on the %ontrary, that this #uality

points toCar# a %ertain %hasm Chi%h must pertain to the moral aC itsel$K a%an #raCs a lineo$ #emar%ation )etCeen the tCo $a%ets o$ laCE on the one han#, laC ua sym)oli% :go+#eal--ie, laC in its pa%i$ying $un%tion, laC ua guarantee o$ the so%ial pa%t, ua the interme#iating(hir# Chi%h #issolves the impasse o$ imagi-

-6>-

nary aggressivity' on the other han#, laC in its superego #imension-- ie, laC ua /irrational/pressure, the $or%e o$ %ulpa)ilitiation totally in%ommensura)le Cith our a%tual responsi)ility,the agen%y in Chose eyes Ce are a priori guilty an# Chi%h gives )o#y to the impossi)leimperative o$ enjoyment +t is this #istin%tion )etCeen :go-+#eal an# superego Chi%h ena)lesus to spe%i$y hoC Geauty an# Su)limity are #i$$erently relate# to the #omain o$ ethi%s Geautyis the sym)ol o$ the Ioo#, ie, o$ the moral aC as the pa%i$ying agen%y Chi%h reins in ouregotism an# ren#ers possi)le harmonious so%ial %oe5isten%e +n %ontrast, the #ynami%alsu)lime-- vol%ani% eruptions, stormy seas, mountain pre%ipi%es, et%-- )y its very $ailure tosym)olie to represent sym)oli%ally2 the suprasensi)le moral aC evokes its superego#imension (he logi% at Cork in the e5perien%e o$ the #ynami%al su)lime is there$oreE true, +may )e a tiny parti%le o$ #ust throCn aroun# )y Cin# an# sea, poCerless in $a%e o$ the raging$or%es o$ nature,yet all this fury of nature pales in comparison with the absolute pressuree8erted on me by the superego, which humiliates me and compels me to act against my

fundamental interests


34/212

-6B-

perhaps ena)les us to #ete%t the roots o$ the pu)li% $as%ination Cith $igures like 0anni)ale%ter, the %anni)al serial killer $rom (homas 0arris


35/212

/enjoyment o$ nature/ an# the superego is the key to Hohn For# The #urricane 193B2, thestory o$ a san#)ar, on%e an islan# para#ise run )y the Fren%h governor De aage aymon#;assey26 Cho #enies mer%y to (erangi, an a)origine %on#emne# $or hitting )a%k at aFren%hman hen (erangi es%apes $rom the prison to rejoin his Ci$e, De aage pursues himmer%ilessly until a hurri%ane #estroys everything De aage, o$ %ourse, is an irrational laC-

an#-or#er e5tremist, in$este# Cith myopi% arrogan%e-- in short, a superego $igure i$ there everCas one From this perspe%tive, the $un%tion o$ the hurri%ane shoul# )e to tea%h De aage thatthere are things more important than the penal %o#eE Chen De aage is %on$ronte# )y theruination %ause# )y the hurri%ane, he hum)ly grants (erangi his $ree#om =et the para#o5 isthat the hurri%ane #estroys the native #Cellings an# their islan# para#ise, Chile De aage isspare#' so the hurri%ane must rather )e %on%eive# as a mani$estation o$*e Laage


36/212

)y Cay o$ the %ontrast, o$ the ri#i%ulous, e5treme #is%or#, )etCeen 0im an# the loCest $ormo$ human e5isten%e' the point is rather that this e5treme #is%or#, this a)solute gap, is the#ivine poCer o$ /a)solute negativity/ Goth HeCish an#

-7A-

.hristian religions insist on the a)solute #is%or# )etCeen Io# Spirit2 an# the #omain o$sensi)le2 representations' their #i$$eren%e is o$ a purely $ormal natureE in HeCish religion Io##Cells in a Geyon# unattaina)le through representations, separate# $rom us )y anun)ri#gea)le gap, Chereas the .hristian Io# is this gap itself +t is this shi$t that %auses the%hange in the logi% o$ the Su)lime, $rom the prohi)ition o$ representation to the a%%eptan%e o$the most null representation7

(his /.hristian Su)lime/ involves a spe%i$i% mo#e o$ the #iale%ti%al movement Chi%h might)e %alle# the /#oCnCar#-synthesis/E the %on%lu#ing moment is here not a triumphant/synthesis,/ )ut the loCest point at Chi%h the very %ommon groun# o$ position an# negation is

Corn aCay hat Ce get stu%k Cith is a remain#er Chi%h $alls out $rom the sym)oli% or#erEthe or#er o$ universal sym)oli% me#iation as it Cere %ollapses into an inert le$t-over "part$rom the .hristian Su)lime, the $urther e5amples o$ it are the tria# o$ positive-negative-in$inite ju#gment, the #iale%ti% o$ phrenology /Spirit is a )one/2, an#, o$ %ourse, the tria# o$aC Chi%h %on%lu#es the %hapter on eason an# sets the passage into Spirit, into 0istory, in0egel$henomenology of SpiritE reason as laCgiver' reason as testing laCs' the a%%eptan%e o$laC $or the simple $a%t that it is laC eason $irst #ire%tlypositslaCs ua universal ethi%al

pre%epts /:veryone ought to speak the truth,/ et%2' on%e it gains an insight into the%ontingent %ontent an# the possi)le %on$li%tual nature o$ these laCs #i$$erent ethi%al normsmay impose on us mutually e5%lusive $orms o$ )ehavior2, it assumes a kin# o$ reflective#istan%e an# limits itsel$ to their testing, to assessing hoC they $it $ormal stan#ar#s o$universality an# %onsisten%y' $inally, eason )e%omes aCare o$ the empty, purely $ormal%hara%ter o$ this pro%e#ure, o$ its in%apa%ity to pro%ure a%tual spiritual su)stan%e $ille# outCith %on%rete, positive %ontent eason is thus %ompelle# to re%on%ile itsel$ to the $a%t that it%an neither posit nor re$le%t upon laCs Cithout presupposing our inveterate#ness in some%on%rete, determinateethi%al su)stan%e, in a laC Chi%h is in $or%e simply because it is law,ie, )e%ause it is a%%epte# as a %onstitutive part o$ our %ommunity (he logi% o$ these three stages $olloCs the tria# o$ positing, e5ternal an##eterminate re$le%tion, an#, Chat may surprise some)o#y not verse# in 0egel, the thir#,

%on%lu#ing moment that %onsists o$ an imme#iate a%%eptan%e o$ the given ethi%al su)stan%e'one Coul#

-71-

rather e5pe%t it to %onstitute the /loCest/ moment, the imme#iate starting point $rom Chi%hCe then /progress/ )y Cay o$ re$le%tive me#iation (he tria# o$ aC in its entirety thuse5empli$ies the )reak#oCn o$ re$le%tionE it en#s Cith the re$le%ting su)je%t gettinga%%ustome# to the ethi%al su)stan%e ua universal, presuppose# me#ium Chi%h me#iates hisvery attempts at re$le%tive me#iation (his resigne# a%%eptan%e o$ the imme#iate %hara%ter o$the very totality-o$-me#iation is Chat 0egel has in min# Cith /#eterminate re$le%tion/E

re$le%tive totality is /hel# together/ )y a %ontingent, nonre$le%te# remain#er Chi%h is /simplythere/ B
http://www.questia.com/5785759http://www.questia.com/5785759http://www.questia.com/5785759http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785759http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760


37/212

"s to its $ormal stru%ture, this e$$e%t o$ the .hristian Su)lime hinges on a %ertain temporalinversionE a material Chi%h, presente# in /normal/ linear su%%ession, in no Cay a$$e%ts oursensitivity to the Su)lime nonetheless a%uires the aura o$ the /Su)lime/ the moment itun#ergoes a purely temporal manipulation "n e5emplary %ase is Paul ?eCman melo#ramaThe 9ffect of amma7rays on 3an7in7the73oon 3arigolds, the story o$ ;athil#a, a girl in her

early teens Cho lives in a poor $amily Cith her ol#er sister, the vi%tim o$ epilepti% atta%ks )ymeans o$ Chi%h she a%ts out her $rustrations, an# her mother, a resigne#, %yni%al e%%entri%Cho /hates the Corl#/' she es%apes #omesti% misery )y investing her energy in )iologi%ale5periments Cith see#s e5pose# to ra#ioa%tive rays ;athil#a presents the results o$ here5periments at a s%hool %ompetition an#, une5pe%te#ly, Cins Upon returning home, she $in#sher pet ra))it, given to her )y the )iology tea%her, #ea# on her )e#E her mother has kille# it inrevenge $or the #aughter


38/212

The 8-or6ulae of &e.uation8

(he pro)lem Cith this a%%ount, hoCever, is that it privileges one mo#e o$ the Su)lime the/#ynami%al/ superego-Su)lime mani$este# in raging nature, in the #isplay o$ intense,%on%entrate# For%e Chi%h threatens to overChelm us2 to the #etriment o$ its se%on# mo#e, the/mathemati%al/ Su)lime the #iiness that seies us Chen Ce are %on$ronte# Cith an in$initeseries Chose totality lies )eyon# our grasp2 (his split o$ the Su)lime itsel$, o$ the interse%tiono$ Geauty an# (eleology, into /mathemati%al/ an# /#ynami%al/ Su)lime, is $ar $romnegligi)le sin%e it #ire%tly %on%erns se5ual #i$$eren%e (he /o$$i%ial/ theory o$ the Su)limesustaine# not

-73-

only )y *ant )ut alrea#y )y Gurke, his $orerunner an# sour%e, links the oppositionmas%uline R $eminine to the opposition Su)lime R Geauti$ul' in %ontrast, our aim is to

#emonstrate that,prior to the opposition Sublime > Beautiful, se8ual difference is inscribed inthe inherent split of the Sublime into mathematical and dynamical

"s is Cell knoCn, the %on%eptual matri5 that un#erlies the opposition o$ the tCo mo#es o$ theSu)lime is set up alrea#y in the &riti6ue of $ure 0eason, in the guise o$ the #i$$eren%e

)etCeen the tCo types o$ antinomies o$ pure reason &$0, G 676-2 hen, in its use o$trans%en#ental %ategories, eason goes )eyon# the $iel# o$ possi)le e5perien%e )y Cay o$applying the %ategories to entities Chi%h %annot ever )e%ome o)je%ts o$ possi)le e5perien%ethe universe as a hole, Io#, soul2, it gets entangle# in antinomies, ie, it ne%essarily arrivesat tCo %ontra#i%tory %on%lusionsE the universe is $inite an# in$inite' Io# e5ists an# #oes note5ist *ant arranges these antinomies into tCo groupsE mathemati%al antinomies arise Chen

%ategories are applie# to the universe as a hole the totality o$ phenomena Chi%h is nevergiven to our $inite intuition2, Chereas #ynami%al antinomies emerge Chen Ce apply%ategories to o)je%ts Chi%h #o not )elong to the phenomenal or#er at all Io#, soul2 hat iso$ %ru%ial importan%e here is the #i$$erent logi% o$ the tCo types o$ antinomies (his#i$$eren%e %on%erns $irst o$ all the mo#ality o$ the link )etCeen the elements o$ the seriesChose synthesis )rings a)out the antinomyE in the %ase o$ mathemati%al antinomies, Ce are#ealing Cith a multitu#e das 3annigfaltige2 a%%essi)le to sensi)le intuition, ie, Cith asimple coe8istenceo$ the elements given in the intuition Chat is at stake here is their#ivisi)ility an# their in$initu#e2' in the %ase o$ #ynami%al antinomies, Ce are #ealing Cithintelle%t, a syntheti% poCer Chi%h rea%hes )eyon# a mere sensi)le intuition, that is to say, Ciththe ne%essary logi%al interconnection /erknuepfung2 o$ the elements notions o$ %ause an#

e$$e%t2

(his #i$$eren%e o$ the tCo types o$ antinomies %an )e $urther spe%i$ie# Cith re$eren%e to theopposition homogeneity R heterogeneityE in the mathemati%al antinomy, all elements )elong tothe same spatiotemporal series' in the #ynami%al antinomy, on the %ontrary, Ce progress $rome$$e%t to %ause or groun# Chi%h in prin%iple, at least2 %an )elong to a #i$$erent nonsensi)le,intelligi)le2 ontologi%al or#er (he $a%t that a %ause may also2 not )e a %ause Cithin theseries alloCs $or the possi)ility that )oth poles o$ the antinomy are trueE %on%eive#

phenomenally, the event M-- say, my giving a han# to a #roCning person-- is #etermine# )ythe universal

-76-
http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760http://www.questia.com/5785760


39/212

%ausal ne5us as a material event, it is su)mitte# to physi%al %ausality2' %on%eive#noumenally, this same event is )rought a)out )y a heterogeneous, intelligi)le %ause as anethi%al a%t, it #epen#s on the $ree Cill o$ the autonomous su)je%t2 "nother aspe%t o$ the sameopposition is that mathemati%al antinomies %on%ern the real e8istenceo$ their o)je%t theuniverse as a hole2, ie, they e5ten# the s%ope o$ reality )eyon# the limits o$ possi)le

e5perien%e, Chereas #ynami%al antinomies %on%ern an o)je%t Chi%h #oes not )elong to/reality/ %on%eive# o$ as the $iel# o$ possi)le e5perien%e Io#, the soul $urnishe# Cith $reeCill2

(his #i$$eren%e in the stru%ture o$ mathemati%al an# #ynami%al antinomies hinges on the#ou)le negation Chi%h #e$ines the status o$ phenomenaE noumenon is a non-phenomenon, alimitation o$ phenomena, an#, $urthermore, the $iel# o$ phenomena itsel$ is never %omplete orChole ;athemati%al antinomies are antinomies o$ the /non-all/ o$ the phenomenal $iel#E theyresult $rom the para#o5 that, although there is no o)je%t given to us in intuition Chi%h #oesnot )elong to the phenomenal $iel#, this $iel# is never /all,/ never %omplete Dynami%alantinomies, on the %ontrary, are antinomies o$ universalityE logi%al %onne%tion o$ the

phenomena in the universal %ausal ne5us ne%essarily involves an e5%eption, the noumenal a%to$ $ree#om Chi%h /sti%ks out,/ suspen#ing the %ausal ne5us an# starting a neC %ausal series/spontaneously,/ out o$ itsel$ (he status o$ the #ispute# o)je%t there$ore #i$$ers ra#i%allyE the/universe as a hole/ is the totality of phenomena, Chereas /Io#/ or /soul/ are noumenalentities beyond phenomena .onseuently, the solution o$ the antinomies is also #i$$erent inea%h o$ the tCo %ases +n the $irst %ase, )oth the thesis an# the antithesis are $alse, sin%e thevery o)je%t to Chi%h the thesis attri)utes $initu#e an# the antithesis in$initu#e #oes not e5istthe universe as the hole o$ phenomenal reality is a sel$-%ontra#i%tory entityE it speaks o$/reality,/ ie, it uses trans%en#ental %ategories %onstitutive $or the $iel# o$ possi)le e5perien%e,yet simultaneously it rea%hes )eyon# possi)le e5perien%e, sin%e the universe in its entirety %annever )e the o)je%t o$ our $inite e5perien%e2 +n the se%on# %ase, Chere the #ispute# o)je%tsoul, Io#2 is not %on%eive# as an o)je%t o$ possi)le e5perien%e, ie, as a part o$ reality, it is

possi)le $or )oth the thesis an# the antithesis to )e true (his #uality o$ mathemati%al an##ynami%al repro#u%es the #uality o$ o)je%t an# su)je%t, o$ theoreti%al an# pra%ti%al reasonEtheoreti%al reason aims at completingthe %ausal %hain, ie, at ren#ering the entire %ausalne5us Chi%h le# to the event to )e e5plaine# the regulative +#eal o$ pure reason2, Chereas

pra%ti%al reason aims at

-77-

suspen#ing the %ausal ne5us )y Cay o$ a $ree a%t Chi%h )egins /out o$ itsel$ an# there$ore

%annot )e e5plaine# )y the pre%e#ing %ausal %hain

hat has all this to #o Cith se5ual #i$$eren%eK9 a%an en#eavore# to $ormalie se5ual#i$$eren%e ua #is%ursive $a%t )y means o$ his /$ormulae o$ se5uation,/ in Chi%h on the/mas%uline/ si#e the universal $un%tion 5F5E all 5 are su)mitte# to the $un%tion F2 impliesthe e5isten%e o$ an e5%eption :5notF5E there is at least one 5 Chi%h is e5empte# $rom the$un%tion F2, Chereas on the $eminine si#e a parti%ular negation not5F5E not-all 5 aresu)mitte# to the $un%tion F2 implies that there is no e5%eption not:5notF5E there is no 5Chi%h %oul# )e e5empte# $rom the $un%tion F2E
http://www.questia.com/5785761http://www.questia.com/5785761http://www.questia.com/5785761http://www.questia.com/ib184821p0056.fpxhttp://www.questia.com/5785761


40/212

hat Ce have to )e attentive to apropos o$ these $ormulae o$ se5uation is that they arestru%ture# like antinomies in the *antian sense, not like %ontrary polesE the relationship o$%ontrariety is e5%lu#e# here +n the %ase o$ the /mas%uline/ antinomy, $or e5ample, the%ontrary to /all 5 are su)mitte# to the $un%tion F/ is not /there is at least one 5 Chi%h ise5empte# $rom the $un%tion F,/ )ut /no 5 is su)mitte# to the $un%tion F/2 .ommon sense

Coul# there$ore suggest that the $ormulae are, i$ linke# in tCo #iagonal pairs, euivalentE isnot /all 5 are su)mitte# to the $un%tion F/ stri%tly euivalent to /there is no 5 Chi%h %oul# )ee5empte# $rom the $un%tion F/K "n#, on the other han#, is not /not-all 5 are su)mitte# to the$un%tion F/ stri%tly euivalent to /there is at least2 one 5 Chi%h is e5empte# $rom the $un%tionF/K 1A a%an


41/212

%on#emne# to hysteri%al splitting, to Cearing masks, to not Canting Chat she preten#s toCant 0oC are Ce to %on%eive o$ this $eminine resistan%e to sym)oli% i#enti$i%ationK eCoul# %ommit a $atal mistake i$ Ce Cere to rea# su%h resistan%e as the e$$e%t o$ a pree5istent$eminine su)stan%e opposing sym)oliation, as i$ Coman is split )etCeen her true ?ature an#the impose# sym)oli% mask " %ursory glan%e at a%an


42/212

universal %hara%ter, )ut )e%ause it is not /a)stra%t/ enough +n res cogitans, the nonsu)stantialvoi# o$ /+ think/ is alrea#y o)$us%ate#, surreptitiously trans$orme# into a /thinkingsu)stan%e/-- an#, to put it su%%in%tly, se5ual #i$$eren%e is euivalent to the #i$$eren%e )etCeenthe .artesian res cogitansan# the *antian pure $orm o$ /+ think/

+n the span o$ three years, a%an ela)orate# tCo oppose# rea#ings o$ the cogito +n )oth %ases,he )roke up the unity o$ cogito ergo sum? cogitois %on%eive# o$ as the result o$ the $or%e#%hoi%e )etCeen thought an# )eing, ie, /+ am not Chere + think/ 0oCever, in the Seminar onthe $our $un#amental %on%epts 19>6->72, the %hoi%e is that o$ thought' the a%%ess to thought /+ think/2 is pai# $or )y the loss o$ )eing 1> hereas in the unpu)lishe# Seminar on the logi%o$ $antasy 19>>->B2, the %hoi%e is that o$ )eing' the a%%ess to )eing /+ am/2 is pai# $or )ythe relegation o$ thought to the Un%ons%ious /+ am not Chere + think/ %an thus )e rea# in tCoCaysE either as the *antian /+ think/ ua pure $orm o$ apper%eption $oun#e# on theina%%essi)ility o$ the +


43/212

ethi%s o$ #esire an# an ethi%s o$ #rive $urther #etermines a%anA-

For that reason, Ce shoul# avoi# the trap o$ interpreting the se%on# version o$ the cogito%hoi%e as a%an


44/212

gets the $antasy-)eing, the )eing o$ a /person,/ the )eing in /reality/ Chose $rame isstru%ture# )y $antasy

-- (he /$eminine/ cogito%hooses thought, the pure /+ think,/ yet Chat it

->1-

gets is thought )ere$t o$ any $urther pre#i%ates, thought Chi%h %oin%i#es Cith pure )eing, or,more pre%isely, the hyper)oli% point Chi%h is neither thought nor )eing hen, %onseuently,in his Seminar9ncore, a%an speaks o$(ouissance feminine, o$ Coman enjoying it CithoutknoCing it, this in no Cay entails her a%%ess to some ine$$a)le $ullness o$ )eingE as hee5pli%itly points out,(ouissance feminineis none5istent

(he pu)li%ity poster $orlien3on the le$t si#e the hea# o$ the :(-monster, the slimy metalskull, $i5ing its gae on Sigourney eaver' on the right the terri$ie# $a%e o$ Sigourneyeaver Cith her eyes loCere#, #iverting her gae $rom the monster, yet her Chole attention

$i5e# on it2 %oul# )e title# /#eath an# the mai#en/E here Ce en%ounter cogitoat its purestChen Chat Cill )e%ome2 the su)je%t %onstitutes itsel$ )y reje%ting the slimy su)stan%e o$

(ouissance43 +t is there$ore not su$$i%ient to say that +t the alien (hing2 is a /proje%tion o$ ouroCn represse#/E the + itsel$ %onstitutes itsel$ )y Cay o$ reje%tion o$ the (hing, )y Cay o$assuming a #istan%e toCar# the su)stan%e o$ enjoyment +n this pun%tuality o$ pure horror shethinks' she is re#u%e# to pure thoughtE the moment Ce a)stain $rom the %on$rontation Cith the/alien, / the moment Ce re%oil $rom this stain o$ horror an# retreat to the haven o$ our/)eing,/ at some #e%entere# pla%e /it/ )egins to think (his, then, is a%an


45/212

)rother is #ea#, having #roCne# long ago the hero Cas not there to save him2, the ol# goo#-hearte# pharma%ist is rotting in jail the hero Cas not there to Carn him o$ ina#vertently

putting in poison Chen mi5ing a me#i%ine2, his Ci$e is a #espairing ol# mai#, an#, a)ove all,his $ather


46/212

giganti% eye, ie, inso$ar as he o%%upies this spa%e outsi#e reality seen )y the eye hat is%ru%ial, hoCever, is that Des%artes, in his opti%al Critings, outline# the same $antasyE that o$ aman interposing )etCeen himsel$ an# reality a #ea# animal


47/212

the pla%e Chere her un%ons%ious thought #Cells, an# Chat she is una)le to #o is to re%ogniehersel$ in it, to say /+ am there,/ Chere this thought is arti%ulate# +nstea#, the stain has toremain a )lot Chi%h means nothing to her, i$ she is to retain the %onsisten%y o$ her sel$-i#entity 8r, as a%an Coul# put it, there is no + Cithout the stainE /+ am/ only inso$ar as + amnot Chere + think, that is to say, only inso$ar as the pi%ture + am looking at %ontains a stain

Chi%h %on#enses the #e%entere# thought-- only inso$ar as this stain remains a stain, ie,inso$ar as + #o not re%ognie mysel$ in it, inso$ar as + am not there, in it For this reason,a%an returns again an# again to the notion o$ anamorphosisE + per%eive /normal/ reality onlyinso$ar as the point at Chi%h the /it thinks/ remains a $ormless stain 4>

(he theoreti%al temptation to avoi# here, o$ %ourse, is that o$ i#enti$ying this stain too hastilyCith ob(et petitaE a is not the stain itsel$ )ut rather the gae in the pre%ise sense o$ the point o$vieC $rom Chi%h the stain %an )e per%eive# in its /true meaning,/ the point $rom Chi%h,instea# o$ the anamorphi% #istortion, it Coul# )e possi)le to #is%ern the true %ontours o$ Chatthe su)je%t per%eives as a $ormless stain For that reason, the analyst o%%upies the pla%e o$ob(et aE he is suppose# to knoC-- to knoC ChatK (he true meaning o$ the stain, pre%isely

.onseuently, a%an is uite justi$ie# in %laiming that in paranoia ob(et a/)e%omes visi)le/Ein the person o$ the perse%utor, the o)je%t ua gae assumes the palpa)le, empiri%al e5isten%eo$ an agen%y Chi%h /sees into me,/ is a)le to rea# my thoughts

+n this sense, ob(et petita stan#s $or the point o$ sel$-%ons%iousnessE i$ + Cere a)le to o%%upythis point, it Coul# )e possi)le $or me to a)olish the stain, to say that /+ am Chere + think/ +tis here that the su)versive potential o$ the a%anian %ritiue o$ sel$-%ons%iousness ua sel$-transparen%y )e%omes visi)leEself7consciousness as such is literally decentered-the slip-- thestain-- )ears Citness to the e5-sisten%e o$ a %ertain #e%entere#, e5ternal pla%e Chere + doarrive at sel$-%ons%iousness Freu#>-

%ons%iousness is an e5ternal o)je%t out o$ my rea%h4B

;ore pre%isely, sel$%ons%iousness isthe o)je%t ua ob(et petita, ua the gae a)le to per%eive the true meaning o$ the stain Chi%hgives )o#y to the un)eara)le truth a)out mysel$ 4

e %an noC see Chy sel$-%ons%iousness is the very opposite o$ sel$transparen%yE + am aCareo$ mysel$ only inso$ar as outsi#e o$ me a pla%e e5ists Chere the truth a)out me is arti%ulate#hat is not possi)le is $or these tCo pla%es mine an# the stain


48/212

+n or#er to e5empli$y this #istin%tion, let us re%all the tCo versions o$ &ape "ear, H ee(hompson original $rom the early si5ties an# ;artin S%or%ese


49/212

imme#iately, inherently )elongs to a %ommunity, )ut intersu)je%tivity an# )elonging to a2%ommunity are to )e stri%tly oppose#, ie, intersub(ectivity senso strictu becomes possible,thinkable, only with 1ant, with the notion of sub(ect 6ua @, the empty form of apperceptionwhich needs S as correlative to its nonbeing +n other Cor#s, intersu)je%tivitystricto sensuinvolves the su)je%t-

not the intersu)je%tivity proper )ut a %ommunity o$ in#ivi#uals Cho share a %ommonuniversal-su)stantial groun# an# parti%ipate in it +t is only Cith *ant, Cith his notion o$ thesu)je%t as L, as the empty $orm o$ sel$apper%eption, as an entity Chi%h %onstitutively /#oesnot knoC Chat it is,/ that the 8ther Su)je%t is nee#e# in or#er $or me to #e$ine my oCni#entityE Chat the 8ther thinks + am is ins%ri)e# into the very heart o$ my oCn most intimatesel$-i#entity (he am)iguity that sti%ks to the a%anian notion o$ the )ig 8ther-- another

su)je%t in its impenetra)le opa%ity, yet at the same time the very sym)oli% stru%ture, theneutral $iel# in Chi%h + en%ounter other su)je%ts-- is there$ore $ar $rom )eing the result o$ asimple %on$usionE it gives e5pression to a #eep stru%tural ne%essity Pre%isely inso$ar as + amL, + %annot %on%eive o$ mysel$ as parti%ipating at some %ommon su)stan%e, ie, thissu)stan%e ne%essarily opposes itsel$ to me in the guise o$ the 8ther Su)je%t

8I $ou/t, Therefore I A68

a%an


50/212

)e%omes trans$i5e# upon the Chite glass o$ milk %ontaining the ansCer to the #ou)ts an#suspi%ions that are tormenting her, yet she is totally immo)ilie#, una)le to a%t-- ChyKGe%ause )y $in#ing an ansCer to her suspi%ions she Coul# there)y lose her status as a su)je%t49 +t is this inherent #iale%ti%al inversion that %hara%teries the su)je%t o$ #ou)t an# suspi%ionE/o$$i%ially,/ he strives #esperately $or %ertainty, $or an unam)iguous ansCer that Coul#

provi#e the reme#y against the Corm o$ #ou)t that is %onsuming him' a%tually, the true%atastrophe he is trying to eva#e at any pri%e is this very solution, the emergen%e o$ a $inal,unam)iguous ansCer, Chi%h is Chy he en#lessly sti%ks to his un%ertain, in#eterminate,os%illating status (here is a kin# o$ re$le%tive reversal at Cork hereE the su)je%t persists in hisin#e%ision an# puts o$$ the %hoi%e not )e%ause he is a$rai# that, )y %hoosing one pole o$ thealternative, he Coul# lose the other pole that, in the %ase o$ ina, )y opting $or inno%en%e,she Coul# have to a%%ept the $a%t that her hus)an# is a mere small-time %rook, #evoi# o$ anyinner strength, even in the #ire%tion o$ :vil2 hat he truly $ears to lose is #ou)t as su%h, theun%ertainty, the open state Chere everything is still possi)le, Chere none o$ the options are

pre%lu#e# +t is $or that reason that a%an %on$ers on the status o$ ob(ectE $ar $rom #esignatingthe very #imension o$ su)je%tivity /su)je%ts a%t, o)je%ts are a%te# upon/2, the a%t %uts short

the in#etermina%y Chi%h provi#es the #istan%e that separates the su)je%t $rom the Corl# o$o)je%ts

(hese %onsi#erations ena)le us to approa%h $rom a neC perspe%tive the moti$ o$ /1ant avecSade/ (o#ay, it is a %ommonpla%e to uali$y *ant as a %ompulsive neuroti%E the un%ertainstatus o$ the su)je%t is ins%ri)e# into the very heart o$ the *antian ethi%s, ie, the *antiansu)je%t is )y #e$inition never /at the height o$ his task/' he is $orever torture# )y the

possi)ility that his ethi%al a%t, although in accordance with#uty, Cas not a%%omplishe#forthe sakeo$ #uty itsel$, )ut Cas motivate# )y some hi##en /pathologi%al/ %onsi#erations that,

)y a%%omplishing my #uty, + Cill arouse respe%t an# veneration in others, $or e5ample2 hatremains hi##en to *ant, Chat he ren#ers invisi)le )y Cay o$ his logi% o$ the 8ught Sollen2,ie, o$ the in$inite, asymptoti% pro%ess o$ realiing the moral +#eal, is that it is this very

-BA-

stain o$ un%ertainty Chi%h sustains the #imension o$ ethi%al universalityE the *antian su)je%t#esperately %lings to his #ou)t, to his un%ertainty, in or#er to retain his ethi%al status hat Cehave in min# here is not the %ommonpla%e a%%or#ing to Chi%h, on%e the +#eal is realie#, allli$e-tension is lost an# there is nothing )ut lethargi% )ore#om in store $or us Something $armore pre%ise is at stakeE once the %pathological% stain is missing, the universal collapses intothe particular (his, pre%isely, is Chat o%%urs in Sa#eian perversion, Chi%h, $or that very

reason, reverses the *antian %ompulsive un%ertainty into a)solute %ertaintyE a pervert knoCsper$e%tly Chat he is #oing, Chat the 8ther Cants $rom him, sin%e he %on%eives o$ himsel$ asan instrument-o)je%t o$ the 8ther


51/212

only $or the 8ther2/ (his un%ertainty definesthe su)je%tE the su)je%t /is/ only as a /%ra%k inthe su)stan%e,/ only inso$ar as his status in the 8ther os%illates "n# the position o$ themaso%hist pervert is ultimately an attempt to elu#e this un%ertainty, Chi%h is Chy it involvesthe loss o$ the status o$ the su)je%t, ie, a ra#i%al sel$-o)je%tiviationE the pervert knows whathe is for the +ther, sin%e he posits himsel$ as the o)je%t-instrument o$ the 8ther


52/212

8ther


53/212

For that reason, the su)je%t


54/212

+t is easy to re%ognie hoC a spe%i$i% mo#e o$ su)je%tivity %orrespon#s to ea%h o$ the threemoments o$ the logi%al timeE the /instant o$ gae/ implies the impersonal /one/ /one sees/2,the neutral su)je%t o$ logi%al reasoning Cithout any intersu)je%tive #iale%ti%' the /time $orun#erstan#ing/ alrea#y involves intersu)je%tivity, ie, in or#er $or me to arrive at the%on%lusion that my hat is Chite, + have to /transpose/ mysel$ into the other


55/212

-B>-

sym)oli% i#enti$i%ation is alCays a /$light $orCar#/ $rom the o)je%t that + am Gy Cay o$saying /=ou are my Ci$e,/ $or e5ample, + elu#e an# o)literate my ra#i%al un%ertainty as toChat you are in the very kernel o$ our )eing, ua (hing 39 (his is Chat is missing $rom

"lthusser


56/212

are also others Cho )elieve in 5 (he i#eologi%al .ause isstricto sensuan e$$e%t o$ the )elie$poure# into it $rom the si#e o$ its su)je%ts 64

(his para#o5 o$ the /pre%ipitate#/ i#enti$i%ation Cith the unknoCn is Chat a%an has in min#Chen he #etermines the phalli% paternal2 signi$ier as the signi$ier o$ the la%k o$ the signi$ier

+$ this re$le%tive reversal o$ the la%k o$ the signi$ier into the signi$ier o$ the la%k seems%ontrive#, su$$i%e it to re%all the story o$ ;al%olm M, the legen#ary "$ri%an-"meri%an lea#er0ere are some e5%erpts $rom aew Aork Timesarti%le apropos o$ Spike ee $ilm ;al%olmM-- an# theew Aork Times$or sure %annot )e a%%use# o$ a a%anian )iasE

M stan#s $or the unknoCn (he unknoCn language, religion, an%estors an# %ultures o$ the"$ri%an "meri%an M is a repla%ement $or the last name given to the slaves )y the slavemaster /M/ %an #enote e5perimentation, #anger, poison, o)s%enity an# the #rug e%stasy +tis also the signature o$ a person Cho %annot Crite his or her name (he irony is that;al%olm M, like many o$ the ?ation o$ +slam an# other )la%ks in the >o


57/212

the %apitalist $inan%ial system is most instru%tive "s Ce knoC $rom *eynes onCar#s, the%apitalist e%onomy is /virtual/ in a very pre%ise senseE *eynes


58/212

ART IIERG" The $ialetial Nonsequitur

-1-

= "n Radial E7il and Related +atters

Kant with (entha6

(o#ay, Chen *ant


59/212

"n# *ant


60/212

/puri$i%ation/ that 0ume realie# in the #omain o$ theoreti%al reason (hat is to say, Chat%onstitutes the $un#amental proposition o$ Gentham


61/212

o)vious that /%ontra%t/ an# /gol#en mountain/ are not entities o$ the same or#er "lthoughthe $irst entity is $i%titious Chat /really e5ists/ are only a%ts pres%ri)e# or %omprise# )y this$i%tion2, there is nothing imaginary a)out it' it is not an imaginary representation /$a)ri%ate#/

)y my min#, an#, $urthermore, it serves, in its very %apa%ity o$ a $i%tion, as a tool $or )ringinga)out a series o$ /real/ e$$e%ts /%ontra%t/ o)liges me to a%%omplish real a%ts %omprise# )y the

$i%titious term /o)ligation,/ or another kin# o$ real e$$e%ts %omprise# )y the $i%titious term/#amages/ )e$all me2 /Iol#en mountain,/ hoCever, is $ar %loser to sensi)le reality' there isno #i$$i%ulty in #isplaying its genesis it unites tCo real representations, the representation o$a mountain an# the representation o$ gol#2, an# yet it is in a sense /less real/ than /%ontra%t,/sin%e it %learly #es%ri)es something Chi%h #oes not e5ist, ie, something Chi%h is the pro#u%to$ our imagination +n or#er not to mi5 up these tCo kin#s o$ entities, Gentham intro#u%e# the#i$$eren%e )etCeen $i%titious entities %ontra%t, #uty, legal person2 an# imaginary nonentitiesuni%orn, gol#en mountain2 (his Cay, he

producedavantlalettretheLacaniandistinctionbetweentheSymbolicandtheImaginaryE $i%titiousentities make up the realm o$ the Sym)oli%, Chereas /uni%orns,/ et% are imaginary$a)ri%ations> "lthough Gentham %lung to his program o$ re#u%ing $i%tions to their real

ingre#ients, he ha# to %on%e#e that in the %ase o$ $i%tions stri%to sensu, ie, $i%tions asoppose# to imaginary nonentities, this re#u%tion %oul# not )e %arrie# out' Ce must pro%ee##i$$erently an# re$ormulate, in the $orm o$ a #es%ription o$ real a%ts, the Chole situation#esignate# )y the Cor# /%ontra%t,/ $or e5ample

(hese an# other similar impasses le# Gentham to %on%lu#e that $i%tions are inherent tolanguage /#is%ourse/2 as su%h +t is not possi)le to speak Cithout making use o$ $i%titiousentitiesE /(o language, then-- to language alone-- it is, that $i%titious entities oCe theire5isten%e-- their impossi)le, yet in#ispensa)le, e5isten%e/ B hat Gentham has in min# hereare not only legal-normative notions su%h as /%ontra%t,/ )ut $irst o$ all the innate propensity o$language to su)stantiate something Chi%h, as to its original

-B-

an# real status, is a mere property o$ a thing or a pro%ess Chi%h involves itE /Cater is $loCing/)e%omes /the $loC o$ Cater/ although /$loC/ possesses no su)stantial reality2' /this ta)le isheavy/ )e%omes /the ta)le


62/212

Gentham an# *antE it is possi)le to tell reality $rom $i%tions in Gentham, the names o$ realentities $rom the names o$ $i%tions' in *ant, the legitimate use o$ trans%en#ental %ategories inthe %onstitution o$ reality $rom their illegitimate use Chi%h )rings a)out /trans%en#entalillusion/2' hoCever, as soon as Ce renoun%e $i%tion an# illusion, Ce lose reality itsel$,themomentwesubtractfictionsfromreality, realityitselflosesitsdiscursive7logicalconsistency

*ant


63/212

-9-

sure,/ o$ avoi#ing )oth naive realism Chi%h a%%epts noumenal reality o$ the phenomena, an#/ghost-seeing,/ Chi%h posits imme#iate %onta%t Cith suprasensi)le spirits (he pro)lem is thatour most %ommon e5perien%e o$ reality reuires $or its %onsisten%y a minimal share o$

regulative +#eas, o$ prin%iples Chi%h rea%h )eyon# possi)le e5perien%e +n other Cor#s, thereal %hoi%e is not the %hoi%e )etCeen naive realism an# #elirious ghost-seeing, sin%e, at a%ertain point, theyarebothonthesamesideE or, as a%an Coul# put it, there is no reality Cithoutits $antasmati% support +n his +pus $osthumum, *ant uite e5pli%itly argues that +#easpre%isely in the sense o$ /#elirious %reations,/ remain#ers o$ hallu%inatory $ormations2%ompose the $antasmati% $rame o$ our a%%ess to realityE

+#eas are prime images intuitions2 %reate# )y reason Chi%h, as purely su)je%tive things o$thought, pre%e#e our knoCle#ge o$ things an# the elements o$ the latterE they are the

prototypes a%%or#ing to Chi%h Spinoa thought that all things must )e seen in Io# +#eas,sel$%reate# a priorithings o$ thought entia rationis2in%lu#e prin%iples o$ the systemati%

unity o$ the thought o$ o)je%ts e see all o)je%ts a%%or#ing to Spinoa2 in Io#E Ce %an justas Cell say that, as regar#s their reality, they must )e en%ountere# in the Corl# 13

(he last senten%e is %ru%ial hereE the /sel$-%reate#/ $antasmati% $rame o$ the +#eas is theultimate guarantee o$ the very reality o$ o)je%ts (his Cay, the am)iguous status o$ +#eas atthe same time noumenal (hings an# su)je%tive regulative prin%iples2 appears in a neC lightEthe point is not to #ismiss this am)iguity as *ant


64/212

poCer that pertains to Chat 0egel %alle# /erstandthe analyti%al morti$i%ation-#ismem)eringo$ Chat organi%ally )elongs together2 17 0oCever, Cith regar# to this Coun# o$ language, oneshoul# )e %are$ul not to miss its %ru%ial #imension (hat is to say, in his interpretation o$ the$amous Freu#ian e5ample o$ the %hil#

0oC, then, pre%isely, are Ce to %omprehen# the thesis that logosis a)le to re%over its oCn%onstitutive #e)t, or, even more pointe#ly, that it is onlyspee%h itsel$, the very tool o$#isintegration, that %an heal the Coun# it makes in the real-- /only the spear that smote you R%an heal your Coun#/ as agner puts it in$arsifal2K +t Coul# )e easy, here, to %ite

e5emplary ansCers a# in$initum, sin%e this logi% %an )e sai# to %ontain the uintessen%e o$post-*antian thoughtE $rom ;ar5, Chere %apitalism itsel$ )rings a)out the $or%e that Cill )uryit namely, the proletariat Cho Cill heal its Coun# )y Cay o$ esta)lishing a %lassless so%iety2'to Freu#, Chere trans$eren%e, the main hin#ran%e to the su%%ess$ul remem)ran%e o$ thetraumati% past, )e%omes the lever o$ the psy%hoanalyti% %ure


65/212

%onsists in the $a%t that the sym)oli% #e)t is %onstitutive an# as su%h unre#eema)leE theemergen%e o$ the sym)oli% or#er opens up a )Jan%e Chi%h %an never )e Cholly $ille# up )ysense' $or that reason, sense is never /all/' it is alCays trun%ate#, marke# )y a stain o$ non-sense

=et %ontrary to the %ommon opinion, a%an #oes not $olloC this path' the most appropriateCay to tra%k #oCn his orientation is to re%all one o$

-94-

the %ommonpla%es o$ anti)ureau%rati% populismE )ig-government )ureau%rats arti$i%ially%reate pro)lems in or#er to o$$er themselves as saviors (he Cay out o$ the #ea#lo%k isthere$ore to as%ertain hoC Chat appears as a solution is a%tually part o$ the pro)lem Fore5ample, Cithin the neoli)eral anti-Cel$are-state vision, the state )ureau%ra%y Chi%h %laims to/solve/ the pro)lems o$ unemployment, so%ial se%urity, %rime, et%, a%tually %auses these

pro)lems, #ue to its ta5-an#-spen# attitu#e Chi%h #istur)s the /normal/ $un%tioning o$ the

market me%hanism (he only true solution is there$oreE leave us alone Cith your /solutions/an# the pro)lem itsel$ Cill #isappear@ "lthough there is a kin# o$ elementary #iale%ti%s atCork here the solution retroa%tively %reates the pro)lem it en#eavors to resolvehoC not tore%ognie in it the o)sessive attitu#e o$ provi#ing neC an# neCer solutionsinordertokeeptheproblemalive)2, Chat a%an as Cell as 0egel2 has in min# is rather the e5a%toppositeE Chat, to an a)stra%t approa%h, appears as a /pro)lem/ is a%tually a ne%essary%onstituent o$ the very /unpro)lemati%,/ /normal/ state o$ things Ce are striving $or ?o/unpro)lemati%,/ inno%ent state o$ things e5ists prior to /pro)lems/' the moment Ce get ri# o$the /pro)lem,/ Ce lose pre%isely Chat Ce Cante# to save, Chat Ce $elt Cas threatene# )y the/pro)lem/ et us return to neoli)eralismE Chat it ten#s to overlook is the #egree to Chi%h, into#ay


66/212

empty' nonauthenti% prattle in Chi%h the speaker


67/212

(he very $a%t that + $eel morally responsi)le $or my evil )ears Citness to hoC, in a timelesstrans%en#ental a%t, + must have %hosen $reely my eternal %hara%ter )y giving pre$eren%e to:vil over Ioo# (his is hoC *ant %on%eives o$ /ra#i%al :vil/E as an a priori, not just anempiri%al-%ontingent propensity o$ human nature toCar# :vil 0oCever, )y reje%ting thehypothesis o$ /#ia)oli%al :vil,/ *ant retreats $rom the ultimate para#o5 o$ ra#i%al :vil, $rom

the un%anny #omain o$ those a%ts Chi%h, although /evil/ as to their %ontent, thoroughly $ul$illthe $ormal %riteria o$ an ethi%al a%t Su%h a%ts are not motivate# )y any pathologi%al%onsi#erations, ie, their sole motivating groun# is :vil as a prin%iple, Chi%h is Chy they %aninvolve the ra#i%al a)rogation o$ one


68/212


69/212

statusofthesub(ectassuchisevil, ie, inso$ar as Ce are /human,/ in a sense Ce always7alreadyhavechosen9vil Far more than #ire%t re$eren%es to 0egel, the 0egelian stan%e o$ theearly a%an is %on$irme# )y the rhetori%al $igures Chi%h give )o#y to this logi% o$ the/negation o$ negation/ a%an


70/212

(he $irst, the mil#est, $orm o$ :vil e5presses itsel$ through an appeal to the /Ceakness o$ thehuman nature/E + knoC Chat my #uty is, + $ully a%knoCle#ge it, )ut + %annot gather enoughstrength to $olloC its %all an# not to su%%um) to /pathologi%al/ temptations (he $alsity o$ this

position, o$ %ourse, resi#es in the un#erlying gesture o$ sel$-o)je%tiviationE the $ee)leness o$my %hara%ter is not part o$ my given nature' + have no right to assume the position, o$

metalanguage, o$ an o)je%tive o)server o$ mysel$, in or#er to as%ertain Chat my naturealloCs ;y /natural #ispositions/ #eter-

-99-

mine my )ehavior only inso$ar as + ua $ree, autonomous )eing a%knoCle#ge them, so + am$ully responsi)le $or them +t is this responsi)ility that the $irst $orm o$ :vil eva#es

(he se%on# $orm, in%ompara)ly more #angerous, inverts the $irst oneE in the $irst $orm o$ :vil,the su)je%t, Chile retaining the a#euate notion o$ Chat his #uty is, pro$esses his ina)ility toa%t a%%or#ingly' here, the su)je%t %laims to a%t $or the sake o$ #uty, to )e motivate# solely )y

ethi%al %on%erns, Chereas he is truly le# )y pathologi%al motivations "n e5emplary %ase is asevere tea%her Cho )elieves that he torments the %hil#ren on )ehal$ o$ their oCn moralup)ringing, Chereas he is a%tually satis$ying his sa#isti% impulses (he sel$-#e%eption is here#eeper than in the $irst %ase, sin%e the su)je%t misper%eives the very %ontours o$ #uty

(he thir# $orm, the Corst, is $or the su)je%t to totally lose the inner sense, the innerrelationship toCar# #uty ua spe%i$i% moral agen%y, an# to per%eive morality as a simplee5ternal set o$ rules, o$ o)sta%les that so%iety puts up in or#er to restrain the pursuit o$egotisti%al /pathologi%al/ interests (his Cay, the very notions o$ /right/ an# /Crong/ losetheir meaningE i$ the su)je%t #oes $olloC moral rules, it is simply in or#er to avoi# pain$ul%onseuen%es, )ut i$ he %an /)en# the laC/ Cithout getting %aught, all the )etter $or him (hestan#ar# e5%use o$ the su)je%t Cith this attitu#e, Chen he is reproa%he# $or #oing something%ruel or immoral, is /+ #i#n


71/212

$oun#ations $or them in his moral philosophy it Cas 0egel Cho $irst #ete%te# this terroristpotential o$ *antian ethi%s2 *ant ha# there$ore goo# reasons $or e5%lu#ing /#ia)oli%al :vil/ECithin the parameters o$ his philosophy, it is in#istinguisha)le $rom the Ioo#@ 3A

So, to resume our argumentE i$ moral struggle is %on%eive# as the %on$li%t o$ tCo opposing

positive $or%es striving $or mutual annihilation, it )e%omes unthinka)le that one o$ the $or%es--:vil-- not only opposes the other, en#eavoring to annihilate it, )ut alsounderminesitfromwithin, bywayofassumingtheveryformofitsopposite henever *antapproa%hes this possi)ility apropos o$ /#ia)oli%al :vil/ in pra%ti%al philosophy' apropos o$the trial against the monar%h in the #o%trine o$ laC2, he ui%kly #ismisses it as unthinka)le, asan o)je%t o$ ultimate a)horren%e +t is only Cith 0egel


72/212

irrelevant an# )oring ar%hite%tural #etails, the more Ce, the rea#ers, are tormente#, gree#y tolearn Chat goes on in the spa%e )ehin# the %lose# %urtains o$ the %oa%h (he pu)li% prose%utorCalke# into this trap in the trial against ;a#ame Govary Chen he uote# pre%isely this

passage as one instan%e o$ the o)s%ene %hara%ter o$ the )ookE it Cas easy $or Flau)ert


73/212

(his painting ren#ers the elementary matri5 o$ the ;agrittean para#o5es )y Cay o$ stagingthe /*antian/ split )etCeen sym)olie#, %ategorie#, trans%en#entally %onstitute#2 realityan# the voi# o$ the (hing-initsel$, o$ the eal, Chi%h gapes open in the mi#st o$ reality an#%on$ers upon

-1A3-

it a $antasmati% %hara%ter (he $irst variation that %an )e generate# $rom this matri5 is thepresen%e o$ some strange, in%onsistent element Chi%h is /e5traneous/ to the #epi%te# reality,ie, Chi%h, un%annily, has its pla%e in it, although it #oes not /$it/ in itE the giganti% ro%kChi%h $loats in the air %lose to a %lou# as its heavy %ounterpart, its #ou)le, inLa Bataille del2rgonne 19792' the unnaturally large )loom Chi%h $ills out the entire room in Tombeau deslutteurs 19>A2 (his strange element /out o$ joint/ is pre%isely the $antasy-o)je%t $illing outthe )la%kness o$ the real that Ce per%eive# in the %ra%k o$ the hal$-open Cin#oC inLa lunetted2approche (he e$$e%t o$ un%anniness is even stronger Chen the /same/ o)je%t is re#ou)le#,as inLes deu8 myst5res, a later variation $rom 19>>2 on the $amous &eci n2est pas une pipeE

the pipe an# the ins%ription un#erneath it /&eci n2est pas une pipe/ are )oth #epi%te# as#raCings on a )la%k)oar#' yet on the le$t o$ the )la%k)oar#, the apparition o$ anothergiganti%an# massive pipe $loats $reely in a nonspe%i$ie# spa%e (he title o$ this painting %oul# alsohave )een /" pipe is a pipe,/ $or Chat is it i$ not a per$e%t illustration o$ the 0egelian thesison tautology as the ultimate %ontra#i%tionE the %oin%i#en%e )etCeen the pipe lo%ate# in a%learly #e$ine# sym)oli% reality, an# its phantomati%, un%anny #ou)le, strangely a$loat near)y(he ins%ription un#er the pipe on the )la%k)oar# )ears Citness to the split )etCeen the tCo

pipesE the pipe Chi%h $orms part o$ reality an# the pipe as real, ie, as a $antasy-apparition, are#istinguishe# )y the intervention o$ the sym)oli% or#erE it is the emergen%e o$ the sym)oli%or#er Chi%h splits reality into itsel$ an# the enigmati% surplus o$ the real, ea%h one/#erealiing/ its %ounterpart

(he a%anian point to )e ma#e here, o$ %ourse, is that su%h a split %an o%%ur only in ane%onomy o$ #esireE it #esignates the gap )etCeen the ina%%essi)le o)je%t-%ause o$ #esire, the/metonymy o$ nothingness/-- the pipe $loating $reely in the air-- an# the /empiri%al/ pipeChi%h, although Ce %an smoke it, is never /that/ (he ;ar5 Grothers version o$ this paintingCoul# )e something like /(his looks like a pipe an# Corks like a pipe, )ut this shoul# not#e%eive you-- this isa pipe@/2 3> (he massive presen%e o$ the $ree-$loating pipe, o$ %ourse,turns the #epi%te# pipe into a /mere painting,/ yet, simultaneously, the $ree-$loating pipe isoppose# to the /#omesti%ate#/ sym)oli% reality o$ the pipe on the )la%k)oar# an# as su%ha%uires a phantomlike, /surreal/ presen%e-- like the emergen%e o$ the /real/ aura in 8tto

Preminger


74/212

ringing Chi%h goes on even a$ter the re%eiver is pi%ke# up %omes out o$ the nonspe%i$ie# voi#o$ the eal3B

Gut this splitting )etCeen sym)olie# reality an# the surplus o$ the eal ren#ers only the mostelementary matri5 o$ the Cay the Sym)oli% an# the eal are intertCine#' a $urther #iale%ti%al

/turn o$ the s%reC/ is intro#u%e# )y Chat Freu# %alle# /orstellungs70epraesentan4, thesym)oli% representative o$ an originally missing, e5%lu#e# /primor#ially represse#/2representation 3 (his para#o5 o$ the /orstellungs70epraesentan4is per$e%tly stage# )y;agritte


75/212

)ehin# her, the re$le%tion o$ e%ter


76/212

-1AB-

here is a para#o5i%al kin# o$ %ommuni%ationE not a /#ire%t/ %ommuni%ation o$ the su)je%tCith his $elloC %reature in front ofhim, )ut a %ommuni%ation Cith the e5%res%en%e behindhim, me#iate# )y a thir# gae, as i$ the %ounter-$iel# Cere to )e mirrore# )a%k into the $iel#

itsel$ +t is this thir# gae Chi%h %on$ers upon the s%ene its hypnoti% #imensionE the su)je%t isenthralle# )y the gae Chi%h sees /Chat is in himsel$ more than himsel$/ "n# the analyti%alsituation itsel$-- the relationship )etCeen analyst an# analysan#-- #oes it not ultimately also#esignate a kin# o$ return to this preintersu)je%tive relationship o$ the su)je%t analysan#2 tohis sha#oCy other, to the e5ternalie# o)je%t in himsel$K +s not this the Chole point o$ thespatial #isposition o$ analysisE a$ter the so-%alle# preliminary intervieCs, the analysis proper

)egins Chen the analyst an# the analysan# no longer %on$ront ea%h other $a%e to $a%e, )ut theanalyst sits behindthe analysan#, Cho, stret%he# on the #ivan, stares into the voi# in $ront o$himK Does not this very #isposition lo%ate the analyst as the analysan#


77/212

-eal opposition is not to )e %on$use# Cith logical contradiction, Chose out%ome is a#i$$erent type o$ /ero,/ nihil negativumE it o%%urs Chen the very notion o$ the o)je%t un#er%onsi#eration %ontra#i%ts itsel$ an# there)y %an%els itsel$ hat *ant has in min# here arenotions like /suare %ir%le,/ /Coo#en iron,/ et% e %annot arrive at an intuition o$ su%ho)je%ts Ce %annot imagine Chat a /suare %ir%le/ looks like2, sin%e they are %ases o$ Chat

*ant re$ers to as UndingE a /non-thing,/ an empty ob(ect devoid of its notionan# as su%h, #ueto its sel$-%ontra#i%tory %hara%ter, logi%ally impossi)le

-(here is, hoCever, a thir# type o$ negation, irre#u%i)le to either real opposition or logi%al%ontra#i%tionE antinomy *ant praise# himsel$ $or )eing the $irst to arti%ulate its spe%i$i%%hara%ter (here are namely o)je%ts Chi%h, although not logi%ally sel$-%ontra#i%tory,nevertheless a priori %annot )e intuite#, ie, imagine# as o)je%ts o$ our e5perien%e, as parts o$Chat Ce e5perien%e as reality (hese o)je%ts are %learly not logi%ally impossi)le, yet $or allthat, Ce %annot %onsi#er them as /possi)le/ inso$ar as the #omain o$ Chat %ounts as /possi)le/is #elineate# )y the horion o$ our e5perien%e (hey are not empty o)je%ts #evoi# o$ theirnotions, )ut uite on the %ontrary empty notions devoid of their :intuited; ob(ects "s su%h,

they %annot )e su)sume# un#er the notion o$ Unding, sin%e it is easy to imagine them Cithoutany %ontra#i%tion (he pro)lem is pre%isely that Chile it is easy to imagine them, Ce %annever $ill out their notion Cith positive, intuite# %ontent For that reason, *ant )aptie# su%han o)je%t edankending, an o)je%t-o$-thought ens rationis2 :5emplary %ases involve notionsChi%h

-1A9-

a)oun# in tra#itional metaphysi%s an# Chi%h involve us in trans%en#ental antinomiesE theuniverse in its totality, the soul, Io# "ll these notions %an )e rationally imagine# or%onstru%te#, )ut Ce %an never e5perien%e them as part o$ reality in our spatio-temporalreality, Ce never a%tually stum)le upon /Io#/ or /soul/2 63

(his #i$$eren%e )etCeen %ontra#i%tion an# antinomy, ie, the spe%i$i% status o$ antinomy asirre#u%i)le to %ontra#i%tion, )rings into play the transcendental#imensionE the /ero/ o$%ontra#i%tion is logi%al the very notion o$ the o)je%t %an%els itsel$2, Chereas the /ero/ o$antinomy is trans%en#ental, that is to say, Ce have to $o%us here on the notion o$ an o)je%tChi%h remains $orever /empty/ sin%e it %an never )e%ome an o)je%t o$ our sensi)le intuition,o$ our possi)le e5perien%e "n#, a%%or#ing to *ant, the Cay to resolve the /s%an#al/ o$trans%en#ental antinomies is pre%isely to %on%eive o$ them as antinomies, not as%ontra#i%tions +n the %ase o$ logi%al %ontra#i%tion, one o$ its poles is ne%essarily trueE

yester#ay + #i# rea# 0egel


78/212

#e$ines our noumenal soul2 *ant


79/212

intuition,/ the su)je%t o$ the ju#gment remains the same the /o)je%t o$ an intuition/2' Chat%hanges is only the %hara%ter nonsensi)le instea# o$ sensi)le2 o$ this intuition, so that aminimal /%ommensura)ility/ )etCeen the su)je%t an# the pre#i%ate ie, in this %ase, )etCeenthe noumenon an# its phenomenal #eterminations2 is still maintaine#

" 0egelian %orollary to *ant is that limitation is to )e %on%eive# o$ as prior to Chat lies/)eyon#/ it, so that ultimately *ant

8/13/2019 Zizek-Tarryi

Documents

Zizek-Tarrying with the Negative.doc