In Fields of reflection, Champs Libres, in partnership with the Society of Philosophy Breton (represented by Nathalie Monnin, Patricia and Denis Heulot-Limido Kermen) held in Rennes, in late January 2010, a series of lectures around the theme: "You shalt not kill. "
Réfabert Philippe, a psychoanalyst who le11èmeblog often opened his space (see, for example, In normal psychosis or the ability to reverse transfer I and II , posted 12 and May 16, 2008), intervened on 30 January, after having spoken with the ex officio director of the Centre Sevres, the theologian Paul Valadier.
be found below its communication. RZ
*
[Here is the plan of the talk:]
1) I will do a reading of Isaac ligation [1] as the story reads, under which a paradoxical founder. The story, well known to recount one hand, the magnanimity of Abraham and Isaac and secondly the miracle of divine intervention that interrupts this cruel ordeal, can also be read as the narrative where sees a father support the paradoxical "kill and not kill." The situation thus created father and son escape, as escape stairs, offering a ram as a sacrifice to God. This symbolization of the imaginary father's murder leads to the succession of generations and the coexistence of father and son. Such a father donated the trace of the death of her son.
2) In opposition to this account I will discuss the clinical psychoanalytic soul murder. One where the child is facing a paradoxical explicit. "I want him to want to learn," I want him to be spontaneous "I've offered two ties, one yellow and one blue, you put the blue tie, you do not like your mother" all orders that are all double-binds that freeze the child immediately if a witness does not denounce the trap is so tight. The soul murder is also this event where a child suffers a blow as he did not remember because its enrollment opportunities were transiently psychic annihilated. At the moment it was as dead mentally. To illustrate this clinic soul murder I repeat the story by Kafka called "The Verdict" [2] where I read the antithesis of the ligation of Isaac. Where a father kills the son. He bruised the soul of her son.
*
I want with Winnicott [3] and Freud the figure of the paradox is consistent with the existence, that it is innate. For Winnicott - and for this reason that I start with him - the figure of paradox characterizes potential space where the child and the person who acts as the maternal relationship. A special relationship since the "good enough mother" [4] is the one with the breast (or bottle) when and where the child can create. This is a major contribution to psychoanalytic thought Winnicott. Here's womb is first part of the child and mother "good enough" is one that gives the child the illusion - vital - that is within him, a breast perceived by him as he "has been created right here and now." As for the mother, she "gives milk to a child who is part of itself."
This area of illusion is a neutral area of experience where the child has the ability to play and create. As for the transitional object, that object simultaneously me and not me, it is he who comes to embody the area of illusion where the principle of excluded middle does not progress [5]. This area, preserved throughout the life of the individual, will continue in the field of creation, be it technical, scientific or artistic. The transitional object, we can say it is the location of an agreement between parent and child that he did not asked if this object he has designed himself, or if it was introduced from outside. The key, says Winnicott, is to expect no decision on this point and, more importantly, "never to formulate the question" (The question is Not To Be Formulated) .
It is the same image and breast cancer. When the good enough mother watches her infant, she eats ... [Eye] and do not eat. This couple eating / not eating is not resolved but escapes, and this in the image formation is the mother of the child. It is in the maternal gaze that the child is reflected and creates the image of himself. My image is mine to have transited through the other breast. If the mother is clutching her defenses, if applied to prevent the recurrence of a traumatic experience, if it is divorced from experience that the based, then the child sees. And he sees what? The mother's face, objectively. Such a child is deprived of the ability to play to create his own image. It is such experiences that reminds the schizophrenic girl who looks in vain in the mirror a reflection of his face.
Each part of the psycho-physical entity exists to have been libidinal investment by the other, have been seen, welcomed and reflected by the other, the other breast.
Clinical Illustration
A colleague analyst who works in a day hospital told me that a scene can be read as an illustration clinic this trial. He spoke of a girl aged 13-14 who were separated because of wet wraps. This child, whose gaze plateau, which stereotypies, who self-injures and swallowed his food more than it eats, when she urine, it is certainly the most often in the toilet but beside the bowl. One day, during a wrap requires it to urinate into the bowl where caregivers moisten the sheets. After concerted quickly they accept. From that day she has not urinated in the toilet anyway. She created the wet pack suited him. She had captured his urine.
That is to say the urine, like any body part, pertain to the ego as having been received by the other. Any object to become my own must have been well received as a gift and returned. Nothing that I can not own without being found in another place, without having been returned by the other. Radical dependence on each other to belong to themselves, of their own. Here we refer to the continent of Levinas' thought in a way that extends that Freud abandoned after it discovered [6].
II clinical illustration
Hortense under this name I designate an analysis in which hatred, the desire to kill, had not found a place in another psychic, did not find any entry in it. For several weeks with two sessions per week, Hortense had held face-to-face position in a quiet and sullen, refusing all interventions of the analyst and his invitations to speak.
Everything he said was challenged or ridiculed. He wanted to send him to hell and for entire sessions defended himself as best he could to test feeling very uncomfortable, all-in-fact unspeakable, a feeling that is summed up by the phrase "it is to kill."
He tried for two weeks which could feed him such a feeling. Until he could tell him - and he is also failing - it made him feel hatred. He does not remember what formula he used, he thinks he first said: "You make me feel hatred" or "someone feels hatred for someone." What was his surprise to see the face of Hortense lighting a smile that he had not seen in years. "Finally someone who dares to tell me. I see that I raise this feeling wherever I go. "
In this sequence the analyst had donated - a gift to pay its price - the ability to appoint a feeling that had no right to existence with his parents. Hortense on his side, later, by interviewing the relatives of the family learned she had been fed to the funnel until later in childhood after the birth of a baby sister. For several months she refused to eat and had been force-fed.
The vow to kill the little sister had been banned. It had been formed because they can be thought or said. The motion was psycho-physical form of sensation remained, translation prohibited. Forbidden history. Her parents had opposed a plea in bar to calls that the child was fed to his feelings towards his sister are welcomed.
*
The paradoxical "kill and not kill," disguised as a test where a father is called to sacrifice his beloved son, is a replica of the original injunction contained by YHWH in the guise of original sin. Eat from any tree in the garden and not eat the tree of knowledge of good and bad [7], tree included in the set of "all trees" and which should therefore eat and not to eat.
There, on Mount Moriah, the instance Paradoxically, that the universe Roman-Christian name means "God" asks Abraham to kill his son Isaac: "do mount a holocaust," and not to kill "does not send your hand on the and boy do anything to him. " The price of escape is twofold: firstly pay Abraham himself, he suffers on the other hand, it offers a ram. The ram comes in metaphor, in meaningful, is an adult animal. As this sacrifice symbolizes the father's murder fantasy where one can recognize the father of the primal horde the story of Freud [8]. Abraham was one who sacrifices his omnipotence, the unlimited nature of his power, and accept the succession of generations, that gives body to temporality. It gives a symbolic trace of the death of Isaac's death by giving the imaginary father he carries within him [9].
Freud, the paradoxical figure of the original is far from the origin, time of resolution of the Oedipus complex. It was so throughout the history of science where the founder is located far from home and left his successors to approach it, as in astrophysics that approach the big bang . Thus in the corpus of Freud this paradoxical figure finds its clearest formulation in The Ego and the Id, in 1923. It reads: "You have to be true (and father), [and] you must not be true (and father)." You have to be like him, you must have all its qualities and you must not claim her husband as his wife, your mother. conjunction "and" be found here in the same place as in the original paradox "of all trees and you eat from the tree of knowledge [...] you shall not eat." So that the child has the opportunity to play at being like his father, the husband of his mother before him is revealed the impossibility of being.
Not the ban but impossible. The key here again is that the prohibition is not made to the child but it is revealed to him. The ban can not be made because "what can be shown can not be said" as stated in Wittgenstein's Tractatus . The ban is not asked, but if conditions are satisfied, if both parents have supported their position, that is to say, they have protected the area of illusion where there is another principle than that of the excluded, the child has an opportunity to escape and appropriate a singularity son, s'intriquent position where continuity and discontinuity. It is a different and and at the same time similar.
continued ...
Notes :
[1] [About Genesis 22 where Abraham is tested by God and commissioned to provide his son Isaac as a holocaust, Jewish tradition does not mean "sacrifice" (which reads the influence of the Christian reading of scripture that identifies the ram, the Passover lamb and Jesus) but of "ligature" (Hebrew Akeda ): Isaac was bound Certainly, but he was spared, as we know. RZ. ]
[2] [F. Kafka The Verdict ( Das Urteil ) 1913 , tr. Fr Pierre and Pierre Klossowski Leyris, Bifur No. 5, 1930. RZ]
[3] [ Donald W. Winnicott (1896-1971), pediatrician, psychiatrist and psychoanalyst UK, author of process of maturation in children (1965) and Playing and Reality, potential space (1971). He is the highlight of the transitional space, potential space located between the baby and mother, and the transitional object held inside / outside (the "security blanket" for example) and allows the child to "tame" the world. RZ ]
[4] [Name a book published in 1953 Winnicott, T he good-Enough Mother . RZ ]
[5] [ P rinciple of excluded middle : two contrary propositions If one is true, the other is necessarily false, and vice versa. RZ ]
[6] Read on this subject: Monique Schneider, "The proximity to Levinas and Nebenmensch Freudian in Emmanuel Levinas, Les Cahiers de l'Herne, Editions de l'Herne, Paris, 1991.
[7] Genesis 2: 9: "He pushed the ground all kinds of trees to look nice and delicious fruit. He placed in the center of the garden the tree of life, and the tree that gives knowledge of what is good or bad. "
[8] Cf . S. Freud Totem and Taboo (1913). In this story no father is killed but a leader of the horde. The next day the brothers refer to as the "father", posthumously.
[9] The fact that the animal is sacrificed a ram , an adult sheep, not a lamb, leads me to ask that, contrary to the views of readers and pressed fond difference trench, Jewish tradition knows this Freud theorized that in the guise of "killing the father." It supports without explicitly stating, as "good enough mother" in Winnicott maintains the illusion that creates the child never make "the" truth.
give the trace of the death or commit suicide (I) © copyright 2010 Philip Réfabert
