Logic of Phantasy 23

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉岡

Lacan Seminar 14:

The Logic of Fantasy 7
幻见的逻辑
Seminar 7: Wednesday, January 11, 1967

I left you, if you remember, on the operation defined by me as alienation, in the form of a forced choice

in which it is imaged by being brought to bear on an alternative that results in an essential lack. At least,

I announced to you that I would take up this form again, in connection with the alternative with which I

translate the Cartesian cogito and which is the following: "either I am not thinking or I am not" (ou je ne

pense pas ou je ne suis pas).

假如你们记得，我以强制的选择，将你们留在我下定义为「疏离」的运作。跟这个选择息息相关的，是一个

代替的选择，造成一个基本的欠缺。至少，我跟你们宣布，我将再一次探讨这个选择的形式，跟相关的代

替的选择。我使用它来翻译笛卡尔的「我思故我在」，如下：「要就是我没有正在思想，要就是我並不存在」。

This transformation, a logician formed in symbolic logic will recognise. Will recognise as representing

the formula brought to light in the register of this symbolic logic, for the first time by de Morgan, in the

middle of the last century, in as much as what it stated - which represented a veritable discovery, which

had never been brought to light in this form up to then - was first of all expressed as follows: that in the

propositional relation which consists in the union of two propositions, (which is expressed, on the upper

right of these white sheets on which I wrote in black so that, the union of A and of B would be more

visible), if you deny it as a union, if you say that it is not true, for example, that A and B are tenable at

the same time: this is equivalent to union ... Union means something different to intersection.

Intersection is (if you represent, if you image the field of what is produced in each one of these

propositions by a circle covering an area) intersection is this (1). Union is that (2).

这种转移，一位用符号逻辑形成的逻辑专家将会认可。他将会让可为它，代表这个符号逻辑所啟发的这个

公式，首先是摩根先生提出，在上个世纪的中业。它的陈述代表一种可验证的发现，以前从来没有人以这

种方式啟发。它首先被表达如下：在组成两个命题的连接的命题关系，（这个关系被表达，在这些白色纸

1
张的右上方，我用黑色笔书写，这样A跟B的连接，才会更加明显。）假如你否认这个关系作为一个连接，

假如你说，这个关系並不真实，例如，A跟B同时都可以成立，这相当等於就是连接了。连接的意思是指不

同的某件东西的交会。交会是（假如你代表，假如你用一个圆圈涵盖一个领域，这两个命题的每一个，各

自产生的领域）交会是这个图 （一），连接是这个图（二）。

(2) As you see it is not addition, because there can be a part that is common to each of the two fields.

Well then, de Morgan's statement is expressed as follows: that in the set formed by these two fields,

here covered by the two propositions in question, the negation of intersection - namely, what is involved

in the fact that A and B are together - is represented by the union of the negation of A (let us write here

A: its negation is this part of B) and the negation of B (namely, of this part of A). You see that something

remains in the middle which is excepted, and which is the complement of the union of these two

negations and corresponds properly speaking to what is denied, namely, to the field of intersection of A

and B.

（第二）你们看出，交会不是加法，因为这两个领域的每一个，只有一部分相同。摩根先生的陈述被表达

如下：在这两个领域组成的集合里，有两个受到置疑的命题被涵盖，一个是交会的否定，换句话说，A跟

B在一起所牵涉的内涵，使用A的否定的连接来代表，（让我们在这里书写成A：它的否定是B的这个部

分），加上 B的否定（换句话说，属於A的这个部分）。你看出，有某件东西始终保留在中间，作为除外，

这是这两个否定的连接，恰当地说，对应於所被否认的部分，换句话说，对应於A跟B的交会的领域。

This simple formula was found to take on such importance in the development of symbolic logic, that it

is

considered as fundamental in it in terms of what is called the duality principle which in its most general

form is expressed thus. Namely, that, if we raise things not to this attempt of the literalising of their

handling of propositional logic, but if we raise it to the plane of what comes at the foundation of the

formulation of mathematical development, namely, set theory, set theory introduces in a masked form

something which is precisely what allows there to be made of it the foundation of the development of

mathematical thinking.

这个简单的公式，在逻辑符号的发展上，被发现具有重大意义。它被认为是一个基本的公式，在所谓「双重

原理」的术语里，非常普遍地被表达。换句话说，假如我们运用的企图，不是要将命题逻辑的处理实质化，

而是要将它运用到作为数学发展的说明的基础，换句话说，集合理论以一种伪装的方式，介绍某件确实可

以用来说明数学思想的发展的东西。

The fact is that in a masked fashion, one could say, what I have taught you to distinguish from the

subject of the statement as being the stating subject, finds itself - in the primary statements, in the

definition of the set as such - the stating subject finds itself in a way frozen in it, it does not even escape,

it remains implicated in it - in so far, of course, as set theory is what allows there to be unfolded the

2
presentation, the secure consistency of the development of mathematical thinking. Quite different, of

course, is the progress of invention, the proper progress of mathematical reasoning, which is not that of

tautology, whatever may be said, which has its own fecundity, which is extracted from the purely (3)

deductive plane and through this source which is essential to it, joins what is called reasoning by

recurrence or again, to use Poincare's term "complete induction".

这个事实是，以一个伪装的方式，我们能够说，我曾经教导你们将「陈述的主体」，跟作为生命的实存的

「被陈述的主体」，区别出来。问题是，我的教导在原初的陈述时，发现它自己，使用集合的定义来说，陈

述的主体发现它自己某个程度被冻僵在里面，甚至无法逃避，因为它始终被牵连在里面。当然，就集合理

论而言，它容许这样的呈现被展开，因为数学思想的发展，有稳定的一贯性。当然，截然不同的是发明的

历程，数学推理的适当历程。这不是同义反复，无论如何，它有它自己的繁殖力，纯粹从推论的层面就可

抽取出来，然后透过它基本重点的这个来源，连接上所谓的「重现或再现的推论」，使用坡凯尔的术语「完

整的推论」。

This, in order to be highlighted, requires a recourse to temporality, to the progress of reasoning in so far

as it is punctuated by this something which is properly what is constitutive of reasoning by recurrence, is

carried out as based on a process that is indefinitely repeatable.

为了被强调，这个需要诉诸於「时间性」，诉诸於推论的进展，因为强调它的东西，恰当地说，就是根据反

复重现的推理的内涵。它被运作的基础，就是无穷尽的重复的过程。

But at the level of set theory, we have only to seek an apparatus which allows us to symbolise what is

assured in mathematical development and for this, what in the act of stating is isolated as the subject,

the stating subject in so far as it is different from the point in the statement where we can recognise it.

This is what, in the notion of set - and very precisely in so far as it is grounded on the possibility of the

empty set as such - this is where there is assured in a veiled way the existence of the stating subject.

但是在集合理论的层次，我们所必需做的，就是寻找一个仪器，可以让我们象征数学发展所确定的东西。

为了达成这个，在陈述的过程，被孤立出来充当主体，这个陈述的主体，不同於陈述中我们能够辨认它的

这个点。在集合的这个观念里，这是陈述的主体的存在，用遮盖的方式，可以确认的领域。準确来说，它的

基础是空洞的集合的可能性。

At the level of set theory, de Morgan's transformation is expressed as follows. That in every formula in

which we have a set, (some set or other), the empty set, the sign of union and the sign of intersection,

by exchanging them two by two, namely, in substituting for the set the empty set, for the empty set a set,

for union intersection, for intersection union, we preserve the truth value which was established in the

first formula.

3
在集合理论的层次，摩根先生的转移被表达如下：在我们某一种或其它的集合的每一个公式里，这个空洞

的集合，这个连接的符号及交会的符号，以二乘二的方式交换它们，换句话说，用空洞的集合，代替这个

集合，用某一个集合，代替这个空洞的集合，用交会代替连接，用连接代替交会。这样，我们保持在第一

个公式所建立的真理的价值。

This is, fundamentally, what is meant by the fact that we substitute for the I think, therefore I am, this

something which requires that we should look more closely at it in its handling, but which, quite brutally,

quite massively, quite blindly, I would say, can first of all be articulated as something in which the or of

union is to be looked at more closely and which unites an I am not thinking with an I am not.

基本上，它的用意就是，我们用某件东西代替「我思故我在」。这件东西要求我们更加仔细地看待它的处理

过程，但是这个东西被表达的方式，是相当残暴，相当大规模，相当盲目，我必须这样说。在这个东西里，

连接的这个「要不然就是」，我们应该更仔细地审查，因为它连接「我没有正在思想」，跟「我没有存在」。

Moreover, these two nots (ne pas) are not of course, starting from the moment at which there is

introduced this dimension of the empty set, in so far as they support this something defined by stating

(to which no doubt it may be nothing corresponds, but which is established as such). This empty set qua

representing the stating subject forces us to take up, in a value which is to be examined, the function of

negation.

而且，这两个「没有」並不是那麽天经地义，从它开始的时刻。在开始的时刻，所被介绍的是空洞集合的这

个向度，因为它们支持由陈述所定义的这个东西（无可置疑地，可能没有东西跟它对应，但是它仍然被建

立）。这个空洞的集合，作为代表陈述的主体，强迫我们不得不接纳否定的功用，在我们应该审查的人生

有何价值意义上。

Let us take it up: I do not desire. It is clear that this I do not desire, just by itself is designed to make us

ask what the negation is brought to bear on. If it is a transitive I (4) do not desire, it implies the

undesirable (undesirable because of me: there is some particular thing that I do not desire). But, in fact,

the negation could mean that it is not I (moi) who desires, implying that I take no responsibility for

desiring, which may also indeed be what carries me while at the same time not being me. But again it

remains that this negation may mean that it is not true, that I desire, that desire, whether it is from me or

from not-me has nothing to do with the question.

让我们从事一下：「我並没有渴望」。显而易见的，这个「我没有渴望」，它本身被设计要使我们询问，跟否

定息息相关的问题是什麽。假如「我没有渴望」，有一个及物动词，它会涵盖着这个不被渴望的东西（它不

被渴望，因为我的关系：有某件我並没有渴望的特别的东西）。但是事实上，这个否定可能意谓着，渴望

者是「非我」，那涵盖着，我没有挡负起渴望的责任。我一方面表达我的陈述，同时又不是「真我」在表达。再

一次，依旧存在的问题是，否定可能意谓着，我渴望的这句陈述，或渴望这一件事，「並不是真实」，无论

4
表达的人是从「我」，或从「非我」，都跟这个问题无关。

雄伯译

springherohsiung@gmail.com