How To Solve Level 80 On Collapse

:: "I" exists outside of time?

English translation: Luisa M. Matallana

Author: Agnès SOFIYANA, Luisa Margarita Laverde Matallana, professeur de mathématiques
didacticienne
Author: Agnès SOFIYANA, Luisa Margarita Laverde Matallana, psychanalystes (Bogota, Colombia)

Web Sites: Associations Abréactions Psychanalyse-Paris.com - 11 rue Fénelon - 75010 Paris / Tel: 01 45 08 41 10 Psychoanalysis - Mathematics - Translation

Online Publication Date: Tuesday December 16, 2008

"" I "1 exists outside of time?

"Compared to these considerations about time," Could this be the time to ask in which one (s) time (s) applies the Cartesian cogito? "I think, therefore I am 'does that mean' I think 'and' I am 'exist in the same" now "? "Or," I think "and" I Am "come in two" nows "different from each other? Or even 'I think' and 'I am' exist in two different reference? In the latter case, we would then be impossible to obtain any knowledge about their simultaneity "



been last seen, how the ghost could be regarded as axiomatic, patterns of truth in the universe of discourse, as a word that would give itself a promise.

'axioms, as the foundation of the writing rules of the universe of discourse, then, are the promises to himself, as types of ghosts founders or instranscriptibles unmentionable in the current word. "I had said. Do

promises? According to our friend Robert4, it can be a commitment, an obligation to do or say, a hope, a word, as they say. What happen if, after this word, it will evaporate over time, leaving an indelible trace in the order of that motivates us? What would, then, if the whole edifice of our person had a foundation forgotten and lost? Forgotten, indeed, by the effect of repression, but not irretrievably lost! This is what my personal reading of Lacan in LdF5 has led me to tell you the last time. The axiom is not totally lost, as it is, the way the ghost, built by feedback, from the dynamics of the significant and logical rules governing the speech, not constrain those who ignore that mathematical logic has been the beginning a tool for linguistic and semantic then become an instrument purely mathematical structure.

Lacan tells us the lesson of December 7, 1966 (LDF), "the foundation of logic is not to take it elsewhere in the articulation of language in the signifying chain. "

recall the origins of logic: logos, is to begin in ancient Greece, the word. For the Presocratics, logos is the Word revealed to man, and the sophists, the logos is the instrument of the speaker, more próximp the rhetorical reasoning, where Zeno of Elea (490-430 BC) was inspired to found the dialectic ( understood techne 6, art of debate.)

The logos then has an origin linked to the discourse. It is with Socrates and PLATON logos that will become the road to reality intelligible and rational World of Ideas, where abstract mathematical thinking will be the pattern, and opposed to the sensible reality. "For Plato, every mathematical question has an answer, possibly unknown, affirmative or negative. It is thought that the origin of bivalent logic and the principle of excluded middle. [1]

Therefore, the thought and the speech he argues are at the origin of logic. Sure, the story does not stop there, since Aristotle, tutor of Alexander the Great, write the Organon (instrument), all works logic in which Aristotle opens the use of symbols, becoming thereby the founder, early, formal logic. He also defined the axiom, the principle of non-contradiction, the universal and existential sentences, affirmative and negative propositions, the rules of denial, the syllogism, the absurd reasoning, reasoning by induction. In short, almost everything that will be picked up and symbolically formalized by logicians of the late 19.

With the Stoics, the logic becomes a precision instrument in the trials, the dialectic, reasoning, definitions, concepts, notions, the logotropos, etc ... You can

then finding simply logic, be it mathematics, Aristotelian or Stoic, is an instrument that is in the articulation of signifiers in the universe of discourse, both in the literary discourses - Our favorite lawyer can testify.

Articulation of significant involvement ...

entoces Lacan agrees to follow an introduction to mathematical logic, where he is going to show that it is appropriate to reveal certain processes misleading. Lacan

first considers the relationship of involvement. It has been hinted last time with the classic symbolism and the famous example of William of OCCAM [2], leading to more structural relationship of inclusion. It is also what is called the Stoics, the "modus ponens" generic name hipotéticocategóricos syllogism: "If A then B, or A, then B". It Chrysippus (c. 281-208 BC) who first called this syllogism involvement. Lacan takes

then, the lesson of December 7, 1966, the example of time between the protasis understood (first time) and apodosis (second half) of the Stoic implication, in which he analyzes the value of truth. He says: "To return that first step concerning the involvement, it is necessary to see emerge that joint between the truth and the letter, namely that which can be written and why it can not be. [...] The only limit placed on the functioning of modern logic an alphabet in a certain system, the only limit being that of the word, and initial axiomatic. "

retrieved from the beginning: the implication is scored" P implies Q "where P and Q are two propositions either. The truth value of this involvement depends on the truth values \u200b\u200bassigned to propositions P and Q (initial axiomatic value): If P and Q are true, then "P implies Q 'is true, ie "True implies True 'is invalid. If P is false and Q is true, then P implies Q is true, ie "False implies True 'is invalid. If P and Q are false, then "P implies Q 'is true, ie" false implies false "is valid. If P is vedadera and Q is false, then "P implies Q 'is false, ie" True False means "is not valid.

There are then certain implications that can be written and others not. Lacan asks, "what do you mean 'can not'? There is a sense of the word given the initial injunction. But what is it that can be written? The problem of denial is presumed level of writing as a logical operation rule. "Attention, denial is not a contradiction! The unconscious knows no contradiction, but it integrates nicely into denial, which is next to the ban, you can understand "international jurisdiction" between what people say. What is that that is said between what people say? What is that which is spoken in the utterance, the statement does not say? DENIAL.

Denying the involvement is well represented, as if it is hidden: "P implies Q" is equivalent to "not Q implies not P", that is - called the counterparty.

the end of the Lesson 7 December 1966, finally introduces Lacan the Cartesian cogito, while involvement, "I think, therefore I am ', ie' I think means I am." Why, if we consider the logical counterpart, equals: "I do not think, therefore I do not think." Lacan

then asks: "Can we get used to the idea that when we speak of non-being, this is the thing that would be the outline of the bubble be? Does the non-being, is all the space on the outside? Is it possible to suggest that is what we mean, this non-being that I would rather headline: "The place where I am '?

Indeed, denial regarded as complementary, part of the principle of the excluded: either I am, is I'm not. Undecidability No, no third possibility. As in the times of Heraclitus or Parmenides, Lacan asks the question about the relationship between being and nonbeing. It is considered that Heraclitus 'being and non-being "is, and that for Parmenides' being and non-being" is not. But Heraclitus and Parmenides, based on the principle of excluded middle: there is no third case to consider outside of being and nonbeing. Lacan

then the fundamental question, certainly one that leads to the analysands to lie on the couch of a psychoanalyst: "Once listed in this direction is very clear that the question does not take a step, since enlisting in the opposition as if it were considered cuttable between the self (moi) and the non-self (non-moi) with the only limit to a denial also containing the third excluded, he is always out of bounds, that it is the only important issue, namely if I (je) me (moi). "Doubt Freudian

is then a consequence of the Cartesian cogito: 'I think therefore I am" and "I'm not then I do not think", but what if the word is axiomatic and initial is' I do not think "or" I'm not? "

The problems introduced by Lacan can be returned to enigma of knowledge on the other. In other words, if I do not think, how I can I know whether I am or if I'm not? But I think, is true then I am? Could it be that I think and I'm not at the same time? YES Lacan. Besides, if I am, I can also conclude that I think?

So what happens on the couch? I speak and as speaker, I think I think. And as I think, then, according to the cogito, I am. Thus speaking, I can believe that I am. But is this a certainty or belief? In other words: I'm not thinking that way I am? And if so, am I really? Do think that the fact that I am simply to certify that I am? Maybe I'm not really here that I think ...

But suddenly, I callus. The silence that is imposed on me by a resistance or repression "stops my thinking? Listening to my analyst tells me "think aloud", I continue to think, however, quietly or out loud (?). Two cases are then: I do not think or I do not hear my thoughts, and yet I am ... that's where I do not think. Impossible then any thought to form a verbalize. I thought nothing of wrapping the completeness of my being. I am, but I do not think.

Or actually I think quietly or without voice, but if I must verbalize this thought impossible. So am I really in the process of thinking? And in this suspension of the word, could say that I am not? If my mind can not be deployed more in words, can be because I do not follow (seguir7) plus my thoughts? So where am I, if I am not there where I think?

could reproof that this is not logic but rhetoric. However, Paul 9 I had highlighted a certain afternoon, I do not know what I said, not knowing this, I told him though. So is there some ternary display: I am, I think, I say. Three dimensions links the word and to which she gives a semblance of consistency.

Is there time?

Finally, what Lacan questions here, with this outline of the analysis of the Cartesian cogito, resembles the enigma of knowledge and being, that is, philosophically, the two main philosophical ontology and epistemology. But the fundamental issue is brewing in the Cartesian cogito and what Lacan tries to show, it seems to be the question of the existence of time.

sure, Heidegger, Kant, Husserl, Bergson and many other philosophers placed a stone on the building to [give] an answer to the riddle of time. But what will keep my attention here is how relativistic physics and mathematics ancestral addressed this issue, particularly as Kurt Gödel, logical genius, developed a mathematical theory of time, compatible with relativity, which strangely seems to coincide with what Lacan teaches us about the cogito Cartesian.

Indeed, Gödel was a serious fan of the theory of relativity of Einstein. Both were professors at Princeton University between 1942 and 1955, Einstein's disappearance. During those thirteen years, they made the journeys back and forth between home of the father of relativity and the Princeton campus. What

they said during those long marches? We do not ever know. All I can surmise is that they talked about their jobs, their ideas on cosmogenesis, on ontology and epistemology ... meteorology, women and politics also without doubt.

What remains of these exchanges? Not much, if not an article in a magazine in the special issue was devoted to Einstein and Gödel, entitled "A remark about the Relationship Between relativity theory and idealistic philosophy" (PA Schilpp, 1949). Gödel's ambition in this article was' re-examine the great philosophical quest the reality of time in the light of this that the theory of relativity teaches us on this issue "[3].

is said, the theory of relativity of Einstein, 1905, that spacetime is a four-dimensional mathematical space, which is curved and matter in motion that determines the shape of space-time. It also says that there is nothing that can be called "present state of the universe": "relativity of simultaneity implies that what is" now 10 "relatively to an inertial reference differs from that which is" now "in another reference inertial motion relative to the first "[4]. But then Which is where this theory, the intuitive concept of time? Gödel is interested in building an "experience of thinking that distinguishes the two notions mathematically [5].

In his paper, Gödel constructs, from the equations of general relativity, a model of the universe where the geometry of space-time can not reasonably interpret the temporal component of space-time as an intuitive representation of time. He shows mathematically that, in their model universe possible consistent with the theory of general relativity, you can construct the continuous world lines and closed timelike linking any two events, so that it is possible for him in this universe, time travel - as well as traveling along a continuous line and closed space genre.

This demonstration was a resounding effect among fans of science fiction and other supporters of Jules Verne, but also the fact that Gödel had built a world in which travel is possible in time, simultaneously had shown no Intuitive time!

In other words, "since this is no more real than the past and I lie (lay) on the beach last summer, why identify only the "I" which now trembles in the cold? Am I just in the process of making a mistake? Or are both "self" as moments in time? And if so, do all these "I" are all I (moi), or only parts of me (moi)? [6]

Another way to explain, mathematically, the difference between the existence of both "now" is as reference and time, is to consider that "time of relativity has a" geometry "different from that of spatial dimensions, rather than [time] is a qualitatively different, ie something that "disappears" [7].

Compared to these considerations of time, can this be the time to ask in which one (s) time (s) applies the Cartesian cogito? "I think, therefore I am 'does that mean' I think 'and' I am 'different from each other? Or even "I think" and "I Am" are two references - tions different? In the latter case, we would then be impossible to obtain any knowledge about their simultaneity.

Unless you 'I think' and 'I am' not of the same nature? Given a gender duty to each of these two propositions, would you say 'I am' is a genre space, that 'I am' exists in a while intuitive, fading, and will not tolerate a return trip to the past and that which is finite, and that 'I think' is a timelike, that "I think "There is a time that is but a" now "continuously curved, depending on the particular distribution of matter and its motion, and whereby a time travel possible?

Gödel goes further. "For the Gödel universe is in fact the real universe, but only one possible universe. Can you really deduct the non-existence of time in our universe of their absence in a just world possible? The answer is yes, at least according to Godel. And this is the last step, the subtlest and most elusive, their reasoning, one that leads as possible to the real. [8]

borrowed Plato, that God will stop playing dice, then used by St. Anselm, Descartes and Leibniz, the reasoning is radical, "if a mathematical object is at least possible at all, it is then necessary and real. This is because what necessarily exists can not exist unless it exists in all possible worlds. [9]

Thus, the test is done: time does not exist in the real world or should I say, in reality. "Each observer has its own set of "Now," and each of its various systems of layers can not claim to represent the passage of time target. Relativity is not exist in the same "now"? "Or," I think "and" I Am "come in two" nows "then simply" incomplete "in relation to time intuitive, it is incompatible with the reality of time intuitive. "

Now, an observation: it appears that Einstein and Gödel were interested in identifying while physical time (the" t "that contain the equations) and time philosophy as being the same time intuitive. But is this really well? Time studied and argued by Einstein and Gödel is not the time or the quantum scale astronomical scale? Certainly. But, as Godel has shown us, which is necessary in a world exists in all possible worlds.

Finally, if the 'I am' is mired in an intuitive time, heard, and if the 'I think' is mired in a "now" that exists at every moment, we might suggest that the unconscious has a quantum dimension , in which the laws governing the world of being no longer in progress, and that he should us to observe, to remember that distinguishes quantum physics Newtonian physics, namely the questioning of the fundamental axioms that underlie our apprehension of reality. In other words, since he is subjected to the "now" and at the same time intuitive, since it is dynamic, structured and indeterminate, the unconscious has certain qualities found in the quantum world. He walks in some way, a probabilistic mechanism.



Notes [1] Lanc ELOT Pecquet, informatique cours de logique, 2003

[2] Major Premise: All men are mortal / Minor Premise: Socrates is a man / Conclusion: Socrates is mortal

[3] Palle Yourgrau, Einstein / Gödel, Éditions Dunod, 2005, p, 142

[4] ibid. p.159

See online: Psychoanalysis - Mathematics - Translation

P.-S.
1 Hereafter, "je" translates as "I" and "moi" like me (moi) in order to make the distinction clearer. (N. of T.)

4 Our friend Robert, is a joke between us. One of our major dictionaries of the French "le Robert." Instead of saying "according to the dictionary," he said amused "by our friend Robert." (Ref. - Le Petit Robert - N. of T.)

5 LDF - Seminar: The logic of the ghost 1966-67

6 Techne or techne, extend this concept may consult the following Web address: http://serbal.pntic.mec.es/ cmunoz11/techne.html # five
Translator's Note Je suis
7, first person singular of verbs follow / perguir, and also to be / being (être) and follow / pursue (suivre)

9 Paul PAPAHAGI, psychoanalyst.

10 The French word is maintenant, which translates: now this, today, today.

N. T. About Einstein and Gödel, see also: "Time Bandits" by Jim Holt - What WHERE Einstein and Gödel talking about? http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/28/050228crat_atlarge

classified

How To Break Into A Digital Lock Box

VADESA

Last Sunday he could not place the party at midnight was noted due to the failure to present the opposing team. There was little distance between the two locations, but much is done to some, by not showing up on the field just three players VADESA CB
The match officials and our team waited for the regular time on the court and signed the minutes with the aforementioned non-submission of the opposing team. So the Federation
determined following the rules, won the match for us with the score of 20 to zero and the resulting penalty to the opposing team.
I hope I meet many teams as this to detract from the competition for others it seems very nice and serious at once.

Is It Illegal To Sell P90x Dvds

XERIXIA CB-CB VADESA

This coming Sunday December 14th at twelve noon, play us against our neighbors to the Valle de Santa Ana will try to follow the path of victories to keep the head of the group A Diputación de Badajoz .
From these means, I encourage everyone to enjoy another weekend of basketball in our town.

How Do I Know If My Toddler Has A Gum Infection

XERIXIA

A new season has already started with all the enthusiasm of earlier stages and with the aim of achieving equal the previous year or whether to improve, winning the County Council if it can be Badajoz and if we leave the end of the entire region.

To do this, go step by step and keep improving every day and take advantage of new and young recruits and that fit the rest of the team as soon as possible with the aim of providing the best of them.

We have not started anything wrong. Four wins from four games, but this has only just begun.

From this page, I encourage you all to see us this weekend in the pavilion.

AUPA XERIXIA !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!

Good Title For Bacteria Science Project

:: A know-how to the limit.




Presented at the Roundtable: Art representation and violence.
Organized by the Research Group Arts & Trauma.
Faculty of Humanities and Arts. UNR School of Psychology.
November 7, 2008.







Marité Colovini


Explaining the unconscious art strikes me as suspect, and that's what analysts do however. Explain the art for me seems more serious symptoms. "
Jacques Lacan, Yale University, November 24 , 1975





1 - How the art explains the symptom.

In 1913 Freud stated: "the instinctual forces of art are the same conflicts that push the other guys neurosis"

When analyzed as delusions and dreams of W. Jensen in La Gradiva, Freud had raised this disjunction : The protagonist of the novel had a psychic disposition that he was destined to be neurotic or poet.

is thus, as Freud gives us a clue to think about how someone is at the gates of the Poiesis. If the purpose of poetry is to produce purification, catharsis of the emotions of the soul in men, as assumed since Aristotle, "writes Freud," the same purpose can be described in more detail saying that it's open sources of pleasure or joy in our psychic life "Suffering

neurotic or release by the poetic act is Freud explained alternatively, from the instinctual impulses which are the fantasies and delusions of the subject, would turn the state of natural predisposition of the poet, who through their art transfigured her fantasies of desire in artistic creation. New source of satisfaction in the poetic object, or alternative source of satisfaction in the formation of symptoms.

Where does the process that allows the artist to arrange and transfigure their fantasies of desire? In the same work in 1913, Freud narrows the limits of analytical inquiry "is not a matter of psychology to find out where he is the artist the ability to create." No ignore it

Freudian principle, I will present a hypothesis about how the art operation allows a "do" with what is by definition the order of the unrepresentable and unspeakable: the grain of sand in the pearl symptom, the navel of the dream. This hypothesis and its testing in the cases mentioned, illuminate a problem analytic practice: the one formed by the incurable symptom. The economy

psychic trauma appears as a white, a "gap in the psyche," as Freud. No representation of trauma in the psyche. And on this white, this gap, which stands boundary representation, making the hole edge, allowing fantasy defense, defense, Freud recognizes, in principle, daydreams, as a result of phantasy activity and that this approach production of fantasies to the formation of dreams, shows the importance of performing individual game. It is in this sense that production fantasy is a mental training linked to the fulfillment of desires.
border representation, does not reach the status of word representation. It is a kind of brand that stands as a limit on what makes a hole by trauma. Mark of a unrepresentable, memory of the encounter with reality. I find that the words of Freud can only produce "awe." Nameless horror, that leaves only brand. Mark that divides land, island between the living and the defensive work of the unit. Without that mark, there is only "subjugation", devastation, pure abyss. The writing of that brand is what allows the plot of psychic processing of trauma.

Therefore, my hypothesis is that there, in the mysterious ability of the artist, know-how with this boundary representation, which not only allows you to build it from their fantasies, but to give such a way that, its beauty, open the possibility for the artist and the public in a new form of enjoyment.

Freud says: "What the artist seeks first is self-liberation, and gives others who have held the same desire to inform his work. It is true that listed as his most personal fantasies fulfilled desire, but they become works of art only by recasting it shocking that mitigates these desires, hide your personal home and observe rules of beauty to bribe others with pleasure incentives (...) the link between childhood impressions and adventures of the artist's life, on the one hand, and the other works as reactions to these incentives, is one of the most attractive objects in the analytical approach "

Then, the beautiful shape to what is the order of the unrepresentable, and affirming the border representation, the artist manages to trauma, a brand of enjoyment: a work, while the neurotic only made from it a symptom. Freud is authorized checking that the configuration of the poetry, repressed desires the author are displayed in such a way that complied with the rules of art, achieved another satisfaction. In addition, the poetry itself means a valuable resource in the psychic economy of men, because, through it is "purged" feelings held in the person being addressed, an operation that is not possible with the symptom of neurotic only serves the psychic economy of the wearer, who can only, through psychoanalysis, to achieve expertise with your symptoms. So

, and returning to my hypothesis, would the artist know-how to limit the representation, which exceeds the registration significant that not only works to the artist himself, but allows the public an "other" satisfaction. That is the mystery of creation, a mystery that is not for psychoanalysis to explore. But the mystery that allows learning at the same psychoanalysis, as it indicates that by achieving a "know-how, the neurotic can do something else to suffer with their symptoms incurable.


illustrate my point with some examples:

2 - Drawing is an act of faith:

Gerard Pommier in his book Birth and Rebirth of writing, place the child's scrawl as a response to the loss of enjoyment of the body , enjoyment of another mother, equivalent to original trauma. This loss is necessary for the establishment of a desiring subject in the substrate of human puppy, let the child deprived of his image, and through the scribble, infans that produces a certain recovery of the lost image. This is why it Pommier argues that drawing is an act of faith. Run a doodle, however modest, is not the first proposed communication of a message, but only hoped the body exists in spite of repression. The first drawings bear the mark of repression is proportional to the absolute prohibition of the enjoyment. "We can understand
so the child scribble before the child becomes a speaking being, gives examples of how it is possible to operate with that which does not reach the status of representation by position itself as a pure loss, and skirting the line drawing, a vacuum thereby passing of deep sucking and overwhelming, a hole. That is why, in this first appointment with a love that is death for infans becomes necessary, to the limit. There is some creativity in the children's drawing, then, and there is a lot of belief in their doodles. Perhaps the dose of each will determine whether the child is an artist or a neurotic. Is that building must stop believing?







3 - The solution sculpture: Louise Bourgeois

born in Paris in 1911, when a family was restored and sold tapestries. He currently lives in New York. Fernand Léger worked with before settling in New York. There he married the American art historian Robert Goldwater in 1938. It is one of the most famous artists in the world.
traumatic events Bourgeois life is reflected in his works of art, especially in his sculptures. As stated by the artist herself, she uses the sculpture to give their problems a tangible nature. In addition, through the cell or facilities that provide spaces for meditation, built spaces true for psychoanalysis.
"My works are a reconstruction of the past. In the past they have become tangible, but at the same time are created in order to forget the past, to defeat, to revive in the memory and enable its oblivion." All its production revolves around the emotions caused by memories of his childhood, therefore it is located in domestic spaces filled with objects that are both reality and metaphor of what we can not say. Beatriz Colomina
gives us the story of the construction of the first sculpture of Louise Bourgeois: "I was attracted to art because it isolated me from the difficult conversations in which my father bragged of good and wonderful it was ... I took a piece of white bread, mixed it with saliva and mold a figure of my father. When I started figure was made to amputate the members with a knife. I consider this as my first sculptural solution. Was appropriate for the time and helped me. It was an important experience and certainly found my future direction. "
But his works are not limited to mere representation or a certain feeling, but hold on a concept and a form of expression, new and very personal. His background in mathematics, geometry, philosophy and art history explains that sees the memory as a form of architecture, as result is often lower their inner emotions and those produced by its relationship to other structural forms and architectural images.
From 1994 to 1997 displayed the Spiders. They are works of architecture, but are sculptures in themselves that symbolize the memory of his mother, in the sense of providing protection and for your continued hard work, despite its fragility. Again appears as recovery of the memory architecture: "Architecture has to be an object of our memory. When we remember, when conjured the memory to make it clearer, piled associations the same way as we stack bricks to build a building. Memory is a form of architecture. " Louise Bourgeois
need to destroy and fragment and then perform a reconstruction using the union of all elements. The culmination of this approach is carried out with the book The destruction of the father, in 1974. Dipped pieces of meat, animal members of soft cast, then turned to the mold, drained it and molded it back into latex. It was the father of deconstruction and reconstruction embodying the dinner table, the place where they formed the daily traumas of the artist, and again the presence of fragmented bodies in relation to the slaughterhouse and sculpture as invocation of the memory to accept it. "The goal of the destruction of the father was exorcise fear, "said LB in '80. "After being exposed, I felt a different person. The reason that led me to make this work was the catharsis or purification. As a child, I was really scared when the dinner table my father kept boasting, boasted over and over again of their achievements. And the bigger the figure intended to return more insignificant we were their children. My fantasy was, I went at them with my brothers, so we put on the table, and devoured troceábamos ... In sculpture there is a bed and a table. Both furniture are part of our erotic life. In essence, both are the same object. "




4-The stylization of violence: Juan Manuel Echavarria

is a Colombian artist who uses photography as a fundamental means of expression. Alternating his time between New York and Bogota. His work has been exhibited at the Museum of Modern Art in Buenos Aires and in many museums and exhibitions in the world.
Its three photographic series exploring the "beautification of violence" as a means through which states the mechanism of institutionalized violence. In a country where violence has permeated all aspects of daily life, it has found a niche even in the realm of aesthetics. Court works Vase (1991), Bocas Ash (2000-2004) and Bolívar's Platter: (1999), can be described, each in its own way, as incredibly beautiful, however, its effectiveness lies precisely in the awful realization to see reflected in them repulsive reality. Repulsion can look without those pictures, its beauty, is how we can approach Echavarría without flinching, to this terrible reality. Perhaps then, the viewer can, think the unthinkable. Del
series title Vase Court, it is clear that the photographs are an ironic reference to a macabre re-articulation of the body. The bones are arranged to resemble flowers and the overall composition of the work refers to the scientific illustrations of the Royal Botanical Expedition in New Granada, led by José Celestino Mutis in the eighteenth century. The work consists of a series of photographs of human bones, re-configured in the forms of Colombian flora, beautifully evoked in an ironic the gruesome act of dismemberment.
"Bocas de Ceniza" confronts us with a group of people displaced by armed conflict to sing, each in its own way and capella, their own history. Stories that meet a key role not only cathartic order to interpret it and to the listener, but also the writing of history. The third
photographic series Bolívar's Platter: 1999, originally exhibited as a video installation, the artist uses a replication of a tray that was given to Simon Bolivar at the consecration of the newly founded Republic of Colombia. In the midst of a lush garden paradise of flowers, the tray reads the inscription "Republic of Colombia for good."
Gradually, the tray is being ripped apart, while an incessant hammering impact in space. This spraying process the end result is the image of an unexpected pile of white powder, presumably cocaine.
face violence, usually we have two options: terror and escape. Echavarria's work confronts us with a third, closer to reality lined with art resources.





5 - "We have no more than an appeal against the death
: making art before it comes." (René Char)

as a struggle between Eros and Thanatos, the book (posthumous "? Last? True rite of black ink), C'Est Tout by Marguerite Duras, combines, as an executor, this fight announced by Freud the last paragraphs of discomfort in the culture.
Since its title announces a conclusion, "that's all." Death is also a cessation, a cut, final.
But what is written in the dedication, also said no-it all ends when one accepts the inevitability of the fate of being-towards-death, but that little freedom to meet the possibility of death is what open to all possibilities.

"For Yann.
never know in advance what is written
.
not take too long to think of me.

For Yann my lover of the night.

Signed: Marguerite, the mistress of this
adored lover,
November 20, 1994, Paris, Rue Saint-Benoit. " Dedication

writing to start writing, and not as is usually done when the book is finished. Because Marguerite knew that the finish was Yann who will make these manuscripts was a book. I knew that from that dedication opened hiancia including the dying and surviving. And I say Marguerite, the undersigned, the adored lover lover, and not Duras, writer. Because he loves is Marguerite, the dying, he writes without knowing in advance what he writes. And Duras, the author, surviving in their writing. Quote
love with death, Marguerite teaches us about love another. It was not by chance that his writing has been taken to provide what the feminine as specified structural logic, contrary to feminist attempts to find the signifier of the woman.


6 - A feminine style, but each one:

Just as the style is thought of writing as a sublimation operation, the feminine style can be seen as the result of operations on the marks left by the child-relationship mother. A woman's style is characterized, in short, so that she can do with these brands, both in its passage through the Oedipus and his love for the father, as in the position taken in connection with the discovery of sex differences anatomical, ie in front of his own castration. In other words, the style of a woman is defined by what it can do with the marks left by his encounter with maternal desire. "The style marra vacuum, a slave always coming and which supports continuous, and should throw his stroke again, renewing its form." Thus, each woman will find his style, feminine and unique. Style to be found as the order is not spontaneous. Style that can forge if you find a know-how to slaughter. Style made of love and hate and kneaded with deprivation.
access to writing, and therefore the writing of the law, depend upon the registration of the mark-read operation by-and therefore metaphorization Name. There is an identity of operation accounts for the specificity of the name in psychoanalysis, what is at stake in the origin of writing, and clarifies the structure of the unconscious.
feminine style, his unique style, will report on the relationship of a woman's name, the instance of the letter, with the unconscious, and have the hallmark of this period pre-Oedipal relationship with his mother.


7 - Letting yourself be taught by the artist: Freud and Lacan

invite psychoanalysts to let us teach by the work of art. That is why I insist that it is not "psychoanalyze" the art, but to collect what the artists "know" without knowing it, for question through the same analytical know our practice.

I apologize for the tightness of my speech, as I believe that every point of it might result in a much more vast.

also thank warmly invited to this panel, and that forced me to enjoy that power tamer providing art to the "Seres thrown into the world," which, in terms heiddeggerianos, must be emptied to get transformed into its possibility.

Finally, let me state a wish: I wish the practice of skirting the gap was as simple as playing the instrument of the Italian shepherd called Scaccia pensiero, "dispels thoughts." This instrument is played by pressing a metal tape to the lips and cupping his mouth once for maximum resonance. This will serve the shepherds to communicate from valley to valley, empty vacuum.
My Italian ancestors used it and perhaps the intergenerational transmission took me to meet with the passion of a practice that is between vacuum and vacuum.

November 2008.

classified

Do Italians Have Baby Showers?

:: THE DECLARATION OF SEX

Chapter X Fragment: "The declaration of sex." Doctoral Thesis: Love, madness and femininity. Erotomania, the delusion of being loved: "Crazy women? Dr. Marité Colovini. 2005. PhD in Psychology. School of Psychology. UNR


The declaration of sex. [1]

Marité Colovini

Because there is no sexual relationship, being speaker is obliged to declare their gender. Lacan introduces the concept of "declaration of sex" in defining the role, place and impact of the phallus in the analytic experience.

"The experience of analysis is nothing else to do what corresponds to this function as such the subject. It turns out that this opens a certain effect that teaches us that what they are interested primarily the function of the signifier, is dominated by a difficulty, a flaw, a hole, a significant lack of this operation, which is very precisely related to the confession, the articulation of the subject, as it affects one sex. Is significant because the sample manifest failures elected at the time this is what he says "I" is read as male or female. Is because it can not say this does not imply the emergence, at the level of desire, something strange, something that represents nothing less than sneak symbolically (take it in the sense that it is not in place ) one thing quite unique is precisely the organ of intercourse, to know what in real is better placed to provide proof that there is one that is male and the other is female. This is the great discovery of psychoanalysis. " [2]

can say that if there is something real that is better placed than the signifier to define what is male and what is female, there is a specific failure symbolic for someone to find that record what you mean as a man or woman.

The falls unconscious man or woman, only registered phallus. And this entry is insufficient to write sex. Therefore, one can only function as either by assuming a certain position in relation to the phallus. Front

sex, the subject is perplexed, faced with an enigma, something unintelligible to which it has no knowledge or resource that makes him an answer. We have seen what the question is fundamental to the subject: [3] "What am I here?" In reference to their sex and their contingency in being.

For Freud, the unconscious there is no representation of sexual difference or even death. Lacan formalizes the text of the question, when in "From a preliminary ..." sets the scene of A as one who, occupied by an individual or a pure vacuum allows the subject to receive your question, and post investment. [4] This question, made since before the encounter with the analyst, is particular: it is the fantasy axiom. The ghost candle reality and attempts a provisional answer to the question. If it is real, the question of sex and death ex-systems to the symbolic. How

limited analytic discourse real sex? In 1970, Lacan [5] is unequivocal: to be speaking, the relationship that the biology part of the animal (or humans conceived as an animal) does not exist. This does not mean there is no mating, but it is not enough to recognize each other or to defined as sexed. The relationship with language subverts the nature and animal instinct programmed. [6]

1-Two real

say that there is no sexual relationship involves a real difference between psychoanalysis and real science, as this statement implies that there is no law of attraction between people human. There, each invented their own way that works more or less well. Both biology and ethology write modes of relationship between the sexes. But for these sciences, the gender difference is subordinated to the reproduction, and as such made a deed of relationship. With regard to biology, it is the encounter between female and male cells known to have a precise genetic structure and require fertilization conditions for their meeting. Ethology studies and describes the rules of animal breeding, previous behavior, changes in these behaviors in the wild or in captivity.

Since psychoanalysis is found that the unconscious has a structural difficulty in responding to the excitement and bodily sensations that go beyond the subject since childhood. Freud divided the notion of drive of the concept of instinct and from this separation was introduced in problematizing and theorizing in the human instinctual life. Nothing in the plane of the psychic any “naturalidad” de la sexualidad, de modo que no se sigue ninguna regla ni camino preestablecido en cuanto a la elección del partenaire y a la finalidad de las prácticas sexuales. Cuando Freud escribe su “Teoría sexual”, utiliza un concepto ampliado de sexualidad, en tanto ésta no comienza en la pubertad (como se creía hasta esa época) ni se limita a la genitalidad. La reproducción no es el fin o el objetivo de la sexualidad humana.

El planteo de la sexualidad desde el momento del nacimiento, revoluciona el pensamiento de su época, y la definición de la disposición perversa polimorfa de la misma, suscita muy pronto las resistencias a su teoría. De este modo, la sexualidad is irreducible to biological data and it is not possible for human beings defined in subjective terms as to their sex or sex partner.

sex as the child arrives and shows very soon experience the division between sex and know how to install the form of questions, both conscious and unconscious. These questions give rise to infantile sexual theories that are linked to the fantasies and foreshadow the role of the ghost when they articulate with the Oedipus complex. The

sex impasses in the speaking being from the fact that in the unconscious sex was not addressed through language and not the sexual union of gametes. By subverting the natural the biological, the meeting of the body and subverts the natural language of the object of satisfaction.

is clear that questions about sex not only confronting our children. The real address that corresponds to psychoanalysis is the difference between the sexes. In the couches listening to also insist on other ages. And this is said in many ways:
- around the issue of sexual identity ("I have not chosen ...")*
- about the search of knowledge about what the other experience (" You can me say what she wants ?").*
- about enabling the relationship. ("There's always a hole for a tattered") .*

2 - Sexology and gender theory

social discourse in many ways seeks to answer these questions. For the past few years, the sexology offers a "sexual technique" of teaching and learning possible. For the sexologists, the difficulty and conflict own sexuality become "learning problems." There is a knowledge about sex, and just about to learn. The sexual difference is, for them, a matter of anatomy, and sex is a practice for which there is "good" technique. [7]

Lacan says: "As I stated just now is instead of sexology which there is nothing to expect. One can not observe what falls under our senses, that is perversion, build anything new on love. " [8]

From the grammatical notion of gender, the social sciences is the "theory of gender." This theory posits that there would be a "gender identity." The genus is distinct from biological sex and may even oppose it. It is a social and historical construction that posits as values, ideals and roles that are expected of a man and a woman at a time and a specific social context. This theory has taken a highly political turn, placing discrimination and domination exercised over women by men and boys, in a critique of patriarchal societies in which power is exercised only by men.

The patriarchy theory that emerges from the ranks of modern feminism to refer to the form of social organization that creates and reproduces the subordination, oppression and exploitation of women, is the most systematic attempt of analysis about the factors that determine the social status of women. This theory also became a proposal for the Social Sciences who had not been outside patriarchal cultural traits characteristic of our societies. Until then, sociological research, economic, historical, political and psychological on women had been made from theoretical approaches had certain biases. The lack of a theory about differences systematically prevented propose how the sex was no longer a biological characteristic to become a social element. Thus, feminist theories are articulated in an attempt to call scientific conceptualization of gender theory as a way to legitimize a political-ideological position in terms of science. What logic

supporting these explanations as theories? Aristotelian logic class and the attribute states that if an individual has such an attribute, such as a penis, is in a class of males, if any, will be in the class of females. This logic implies a complementarity, a two in one that is a metaphor of sexual intercourse accomplished: each with his partner, his penis in vagina, assets with liabilities.

This logic is the same logic used Freud as phallic. Just as for Freud, the logic was to phallic-castrated, because the female was always a hole in the theorizing. Since ignorance of the vagina in childhood to the confession he made to Marie Bonaparte, Freud pointed out that libido is male, which the opposition active / passive is not coated or equal to male / female, and that, despite interrogating him since the beginning of his theorizing, female is an enigma, a black continent, a mystery.

3 - Freud and sexuality

then briefly be raising two key points of the Freudian theory of sexuality:

1 - the phallic phase is essential in identifying male and female sexual
2 - As a consequence The anatomical sexual difference is not a sign of mental difference between the sexes will

Freud to address these issues as problems in infantile sexual theories, where the phallus is always positivized: either have it or you are to grow. [9] These theories made the cover of a double fault: the sex of women, and lack in knowledge. In the infantile genital organization, Freud shows how the female genital seen and heard as a threat, not enough for the child to recognize the fault. While the child's universe is divided into two halves, those with phallus and those who do not, the fault is interpreted as punishment for masturbation. Thus, it is afraid of losing, and no, I envy and want to own it. This is called by Freud, the rock of castration and represents the limit of Freudian analysis.

4 - The relationships between the sexes and the phallus

can infer that the phallus in Freud's work refers to a body linked to enjoyment. Is a dominant invariant says a significance beyond the natural sense of body and seat imagery of the area.

In the phallic phase is an attempt to subsume sexuality under his supremacy. In both sexes the phallic claims the right to represent the whole sexuality. Fiction woven between the phallus and castration works as a knowledge indicating locations and functions of men and women, but sailing and reveals a lack: the feminine. The subject can be identified emblems and models that establish the ideal of each sex.

With Lacan, the Freudian theory of sexuality articulate with the logic of the signifier. Then, through the paternal metaphor, where the subject is forged, the phallus can be thought of as imaginary object and metonymic but also as a symbol of the act that gives meaning. Any phallic significance is, therefore, sexual. But the phallus is a signifier like the others, because it does not refer to another signifier, but to enjoy it.

Sexuality is ordered on the phallus as a signifier. "You can, subject to the role of the phallus, to identify the structures that are subject relations between the sexes. " [10] These relationships revolve around being and having, which refer to a signifier, the phallus, has the opposite effect of giving reality to the subject in this significant and unfulfilled relationships to be signified .

An apparently replaced by having to protect it (in humans) and also mask the lack (in women). This view has the effect of projecting into the comedy of the sexes ideal or typical manifestations of the behavior of each sex to the limit of the act of copulation.

Lacan says that as the signifier, it is a subject, but not sexed. The man and the woman did not recognize, They are recognized as such. Men and women are significant, are only valid for their opposition, their difference.

is the Ideal which allows for "as if", but copulation does not reach the ideal, as there comes in the enjoyment of the body. A marked feature allows for the ideal dream of being or having neurotic, to be sited in a class. But this only applies to the demand, social regulation, the comedy of the sexes. The Ideal does not guarantee obtaining satisfaction.

If the signifier allows identification with the Other's desire, there is no possibility of any identification with the satisfaction of the Other. Nothing in the A significant other that accounts for the enjoyment of the body. There is to Know About Sex, which is written S (A /).


4.1-No sexual act

Some may imagine becoming a man or woman through sexual intercourse, but this is purely imaginary: the subject does not prove anything about their sexual being. The sexual act does not allow the subjectivity of sex, which reveals neurosis. The sexual act is not truly an act, [11] as if it were, should put the subject as gendered. However, this does not mean that there has not satisfaction.

In short, sex is not the relations established two partners, but from the incestuous relationship, ie the relationship with the Other. Both men and women rush into sex as an attempt to reunite with the mother, in another primary. When the subject is precipitated by sexual intercourse, it is confronting someone with the idea of \u200b\u200bUnity. That's why the sexual act is presented as subjective satisfaction torn apart. The seminar

ghost logic, Lacan writes the terms involved in the "dyad" sexual, like, 1 and A. As shown, there are three terms for what he called "essential dyad" in which "needs to be forged the drama of subjectivity sex. " [12] In these terms, 1 is the most litigious, while their field is where you will question whether it is possible to produce the act of partition that needs the functions defined as male and female. Furthermore, this field is a hole. The A is where the signifier that takes place there rather than repetition. Between these two camps, that of 1 and that of A, there is no loop. Finally, to the immeasurable is where any question of measurement arises.

on sex, Lacan insists, is planning the shadow of the unit. But this act bears the mark of a thing to represent a fundamental lack.

As I said, Lacan speaks of three terms to put the "essential dyad" and stresses that the sexual act involves the third element at all levels. This element is the mother in the Oedipus complex, linked to the degradation of love life, and also to be missing phallus who has it and becomes the person with whom she does not.

Lacan points out that precisely the coupling becomes important an aspect Anatomical penile erection is a necessary condition. [13] And it is for both men and women. Phallus again, the only one, is the condition of satisfaction for both sexes. But it is also in the sexual act which is verified detumescence penis. Limit the enjoyment, the detumescence of the penis is a symbol of castration. The long-awaited meeting

unifying culminating in playing a fundamental lack, and sexuality is organized around a radical absence, metaphor in the phallus (in its difference from the penis detumescence) and the separation of bodies seeking to one flesh.

However, if the sexual act are not ignoring this side's disappointing that there is also satisfaction: what is it that is satisfied? There is a repudiation of the mismatch of subject and Other, the incommensurability of the relationship between these fields, which operates in both the embodiment of failure is made on the detumescence of the penis.

The fault is located in the phallic level of calculation error and this makes it appear that nothing is missing. It produces the illusion that is not the subject that has been dragged into the act which is in him as an object, but this object to write the castration is located in the flaccid penis, allowing the illusion that it is identical to the fiction of man or woman who is represented.

Where and how is this illusion? Oedipus is in and through the symbolization of failure, it becomes desirable horrible. For this operation allows the interplay of two positions that dramatize having and being. These two fictions, represented by the man who has it but was not, and the woman who is without it, failure to retain the same time as the watch. And for this concealment is possible, for man, by a significant desire embodied in the whole body of a woman, and women, the same significant place in the penis that a man possesses. [14]

This overlay to the phallus, which takes consistency in the phantom, makes it seem attainable in desire, ie the phantom sail the radical inaccessibility, structural failure of a.
Then, the subject sinks to the sexual act in pursuit of unity, and get, thanks to him that the absence, transformed in phallic lack, becomes evanescent, removable. That is, get the hope of a future meeting that would belie the radical absence of purpose. Although disappointing in terms of the Unit not met, there is hope that someday, some meeting ...

5 - Two joys

Ghost In The Logic of Lacan says "no sex." For any, would be necessary that this act joined two pleasures in one. Tiresias and [15] had answered the question on the enjoyment by saying that there was an irreducible difference between male and female enjoyment. The seminar

XX, Lacan worked on the difference between the enjoyment of being and sexual enjoyment, and he defined that there be, and therefore enjoyment of self-pre-significant. Divide the enjoyment in enjoyment of the Other, of course, para-sexed, outside language and sexual enjoyment outside the body and semiotic. Then, the enjoyment of being the Other sexed, is produced by sexual enjoyment as an afterlife. That there is an injunction on the enjoyment does not become their exclusion, but installs the hope that there is another pleasure, more complete and body attributable to women.

The enjoyment female supplemental cleared from the field significantly, but is outside. It is a joy for which there is no possible knowledge. He feels it is not known. There is no way to put it into terms of the phallic significance. There is no way to locate or limit it. So it becomes to find the fault in the system now significant. There is no way to name this pleasure that, while requiring the phallic order and its significance, does not belong to the field of the signifier: it is beyond the phallus. The flaw in the Other, called encore by Lacan, is the place from where the demand for love.

6 - The need for love

call upon the poets, along the lines of Freud, to bring the love and need:

love is the greater acceptance, but also the largest
wonder.
may not know what to do,
but finally we see something more than different, perhaps more than
yet.

And thus it becomes crisis, outpatient
the duplication that exists.
The effort to be a

finds its rest in the effort to be both. And only then

two is more than one.

Or perhaps more than anyone. Roberto
Juarroz [16]

Hence the need for love, too weak to ensure the consistency of our being. This "unbearable lightness" is more tolerable to the action of love. But this resource is shown helpless, but it is reciprocal, to ignore the possibility that it is not more than the desire to make one, leading to the inability to establish the relationship between the two sexes.

is not with the love relationship is, that this relationship is written. No one can expect sexuation a relationship. And as we have seen, not a sexual act. Therefore, it is demonstrated that neither the anatomy nor imagination nor the symbolic system account for sexuation.

7 - What we have to sexed? [17]

There is a single signifier, the phallus, to account for the difference between the sexes. Attributive logic can only allow the comedy of the sexes. Both for men and for women, addressing sexuality depends on the phallus. But this is also a significant obstacle as the phallic jouissance prevents man enjoy the woman's body. With the presence of the phallic signifier, the sexual relationship that there is reduced to phallic jouissance.

IDs do not exhaust the subject's relation to sex and that of others, since this ratio is also real. The identifications are insufficient to solve the problem of sexuation the subject.

If you take the classic example of Dora, a feature identified with the father, is that this is the second type Freudian identification: identification with the trait, which is remove the other one trait, a signifier, to which the subject is identified. This identification is a simple mechanism and is observed in all structures.

Dora, as hysterical symptoms, shows a cough and intermittent hoarseness. That cough is a symptom unties from significant "unvermögend" impotent, which makes mistake with "vermögend" lucky. The father is certainly rich and powerless. But this identification is not a gendered identification. Signa her hysteria, while identification with the castrated father's enjoyment. And this does not solve their gendered position. On the contrary, it reinforces the question of femininity and sex.

formulas sexuation to define the two gendered positions as two different ways to use the phallus in the loop with the opposite sex, relationship fails in various ways to establish a relationship.

"The logic bears the mark of sexual impasse. Following it in its movement, its development, namely in the field where, have any relation to what is at stake in what is articulated in our experience, namely the analytic experience, you find the same impasses, the same obstacles, the same hiancias in short, the very impossibility of closure of a fundamental triangle. " [18]


8 - Times of sexuation

I shall draw on the theories of Geneviève Morel [19] to place three times sexuation logic. These times are not thinkable in order of time evolution, but in a logical order, and are proposed as conceptual stages sexuation process.

is part of a first time, legendary, consisting of the actual anatomy: the anatomical difference between the sexes, with genetic and chromosomal correlation. We have seen with Freud that these anatomical differences only make sense insofar as they produce psychological consequences, and there is a social discourse that interprets these differences in terms of roles, values, images, etc. Nature requires interpretation and no difference discourse is unthinkable without the signifier. Finally, the subject makes his choice of gendered identification. [20] Morel

sexuation poses as a process, taking into account a triple determination made by the anatomy, sexual speech and choice of subject, so that may explain the different ways in which they are presented in analytic practice difficulties regarding sexuation.

While surrounding sexual discourse is not simply a reflection of nature, always suggests a difference in accordance with phallic criteria. "Nature face becomes. Thereby succumbs under the weight of a significant difference only categorizes natural in terms of the phallus and castration. The phallus becomes the signifier of sex. " [21] This" common error "generates community, says Lacan, from the sharing of the phallus, which is attributed to the mediation of the relationships between people humanos.El subject can accept or not this error, but if it comes under the phallic reference will have to invent how to express his enjoyment crazy and incommunicable in delusional discourse. [22] Thus, the subject is out of discourse.

accepting the common mistake of speech sexual, the subject enters the discourse community, register your enjoyment under the phallic reference, which can mean only sexual difference. Choosing the sex, make the option of identifying sexually, involves choosing how to enroll in the enjoyment phallic. These options are just two: man / woman. [23]

I have said that Lacan choose the path of logic to formalize the impossibility of writing sex. Subjective choice, then, is how each subject used the phallus in its relationship with the opposite sex or the same.

recap, there are three logical times that reflect the process of sexuation:
- first Weather: anatomical sexual difference.
- second half: sexual discourse.
- third time: the choice of gendered position.

9 - The statement ...
sex
The sexuation is the way in which each subject is recorded with respect to the phallus. Implies a choice, and you can sign or not (partition neurosis and psychosis) side hand man or woman. This registration involves two different positions with respect to the enjoyment. Ie, they correspond to actual enjoyment mode in its reference to the phallus.

If "making love" is a resource to make a relationship there is, for lack of what the write, each and every one must confess the other as affected by sex, by saying "I" being revealed as a man or woman. This statement itself is castration.

Like the fact of believing man or woman is not to be, and the identifications are sufficient to determine the sexuation, the decision to be a man or woman is rooted in their ways of enjoyment.

analytical practice testifies to the difficulty inherent in this statement, since the phallus is the object with which men and women are about the bond between them, while masking the absence, the emptiness of the absence of relationship.

Morel says:
"The fact that these two entries correspond to actual enjoyment mode in its reference to the phallus, thus does not contradict the fact that a subject of fuel the vagueness about sexual position, do not want to know anything about it or deny it in the case of neurosis, or other, outside the common phallic reference, is invented sexuation outside the norm, unpublished, psychotic. " [24]

that happens to be speaker, and precisely because it is there a sleight of representation of the organ of copulation. There are no set of signifiers. The Other is barred. And that bar is written S (A /).

The phallus signifier missing from the system. This significant odd couple does with other significant, but is intended to denote a whole the effects of meaning. Is the bar which the subject denotes his being at all what it means to get out, even in fading, the condition of the real object in coming to the world, the absolute alienation of the Other. But it is also chosen for this function because it is the highlight of what can be captured in the real of sexual copulation. Also, as pure symbol, the phallus is equivalent to intercourse logic, the mathematical symbol of the union (which combines two sets by one).

The phallus as a computer is the empty set, signifying the no, that is at once the source of all series and excluded from all of them. The phallus is a signifier unique in that it does not refer to another signifier, but to enjoy it. Therefore, in the phallic order and the law of castration that is inherent, it shows its two limits: the father as an exception and female enjoyment as that which exceeds it.

To declare a man or woman to confess that I was male or female, should be eligible. And the choice is revealed as one that sets limits to the hope that there relaciónr, that the woman exists. The choice of subject position on sex is determined in the discourse of the subject. This position is the way in which the subject is subjected to the law declares phallic.

The proposed speech hystericization always a tomorrow where there will be relationship, which may occur to achieve a knowledge that relation between man and woman. Is the analytical discourse that limits this hope, as the rotation of speeches change the bet of each. [25]

The desuposición of the existence of the universal that would make the female half of humanity, falls through the analytic discourse through the logic that lets talk sexuation. This limit is also a limit to the phallocentric universe and, therefore, consistent with the axiom "There is no sexual relationship." It is the passage from one discourse to another, a homosexual discourse [26] one heterosexual.

[1] Chapter III, "Clinical and sexuation" p. 20. . The feminine in the clinic. Colovini, M. 2008. Laborde Publishers, Rosario, Argentina.
[2] J, Lacan, J. Petit discours Psychiatr aux Lacan, 1967, unpublished. Emphasis added.
[3] See "The phallus" in the chapter "Women, feminiedad, the feminine" in Colovini, M. : Love, madness and femininity. PhD thesis. Unpublished.
[4] "For it is a truth of experience to the analysis for the subject raises the question of its existence not in the kind of anxiety level raised me and that is only one element of his entourage, but as articulated question: 'What am I here? ", referring to his sex and his contingency in being, [...] namely, that a man or woman on the one hand ... ....." J. Lacan, "From a preliminary matter ...", p.
[5] J. Lacan, Seminar XX Still, Polity Press, Buenos Aires 1981.
[6] See the chapter "The debate feminism / psychoanalysis" in Colovini, M. : Love, madness and femininity. PhD thesis. Unpublished.
[7] All salience is the cavity where it fit. "There's always a hole for a disjointed", "God makes them flock together."
[8] J. Lacan, Psychoanalysis, radio and television ', Anagram, Barcelona 1977, p.118.
[9 ] A analysand gives his analyst (both women) a plant and says: "May you grow like mine."
[10] J. Lacan, "The significance of the phallus', Writings 2, Century XXI, Mexico 1987.
[11] According to Lacan, an act is one that modifies subject position. In addition, highlights the significant fabric of the act.
[12] J. Lacan, La logique du XIV Seminar ghost (Ghost Logic), Class of 4/19/1967.
[13] Ibid.
[14] See sexuation logic. Jacques Lacan. Seminar XX. Polity Press. 19 81.
[15] Cf Pierre Grimal, Dictionary of Greek and Roman mythology, Polity Press, Buenos Aires 1981.
[16] R. Juarroz, Poetry vertical. Essential anthology, Emecé, Buenos Aires 2001.
[17] For the comprehensive development of the consequences of the axiom that there was no relationship sexual suggest reading Chapters 4 and 7 There is no sexual relationship.
[18] J. Lacan, Seminar XVIII D'un discours qui ne serait pas du semblant (From a speech that would not appearance), Class of 19/05/1971, unpublished.
[19] G. Morel, sexual ambiguities. Sexuation and psychosis. Manantial, Buenos Aires 2002.
[20] J. Lacan, Seminar XXI errent Les non-dupes (the delude or disappointed parent's names. Translation: Irene M. Agoff Palm. Technical review: Evaristo Ramos. EFBA). I want to stress that this is a subjective choice and that when Lacan uses this meaning is not talking about the ownership of the unary trait, but another run of identification. I retain this term, as well as Lacan and Morel is using it, but I think it is better to refer to this time as a subjective choice gendered position.
[21] G. Morel, op. cit., p. 138.
[22] Ghost In Logic, Lacan said that the phallic reference is also required for women in their enjoyment in sex.
[23] According to this view espoused by, there would be another possible option for psychoanalysis. This is a point of debate with postures that are derived from the theory of Foucauldian constructionism gender and who claim, on behalf of "identity" the acceptance of other possibilities for gendered identification options. In the field of psychoanalysis, Jean Allouch theory has begun to make inroads in this regard. See J. Allouch, "To enter the sex of the master," Litoral, 27, Edelpa, Córdoba, April 1999, pp. 47-125.
[24] G. Morel, op. cit., p. 143.
[25] If the hysterical discourse knowledge is to have (have a knowledge about the relationship that would make it possible), and the truth is "do want" (the Other) in the analytic discourse, failure is written.
[26] XX Even in the seminar, Lacan refers to an encompassing discourse that dominates the phallic function.

classified