What I went through last year, I can only describe as an "Awake Coma", trapped for 8 months inside my mind, I didn't speak during these 8 months and couldn't understand why. I wouldn't leave my bedroom, or my bed. I felt like I was told not to speak, leave etc. It was somewhat scary, more confusing, completely, accepted as normal, but I (the me) knew it wasn't or something was off. However, I kept questioning things that didn't logically make sense. I fought myself (mind) with tricking my mind, to find my way back. Most amazing, unexplainable journey and I hope to never venture back in, that was 100s of lifetimes that I experienced. I also believe that if any human could experience what I have or others do like me, I'd jump in knowing what I know now. However, a month is more than suffice. I do not think like the "norm" anymore. I have things that I can explain, and things that I cannot. Such as...I suddenly wake in the middle of night, pick up charcoals, sketch pad, and in 5 minutes, I sketch a picture in the dark. The picture was perfect or the best sketch I had ever done. How? I don't draw, sketch and haven't since I was a child. I was not allowed to say words, read, draw, or use pens, pencils, colors, books, and the list is unlimited, etc. So, I asked my husband to buy me a sketch pad, charcoals. The way I asked was singing, I made myself a privacy policy, I changed the "rules". I could say anything as long as I was singing, and my privacy policy was for me only. Although mentally, I knew what was private to me, I suppose. I look in all these sketch books that I sketched in during that experience and I never made actual rules in the sketch pads. Anyway, I used charcoal which replaced other pencils, and sketch pad vs. Drawing, or sketch book, and tricking the way I was thinking at the moment, I slowly began to break free. Now, I have so so so so many remarkable experiences during this past 2 yrs. I don't look at sketches, I slowly talk more about things, ideas, creativity is ridiculous with the ideas I came up with. I constantly learned or was being taught during it. Real vs Fraud, I have doubt about all things. I will say 0 or nothing is much greater than All. Numbers, time, letters, mean nothing to me. It's all creative writing. Time is absolutely incorrect. Universal time is closer to being relevant, good luck with that, lol. I believe that the universe is mass and I believe it curves. the oldest language being music or nature's music (long before the existence of...) should be taught in school. I also say that if all walks of life, created music at the same moment universally, its the only multi-linguel language understood by all walks of life. I'm sure I sound a bit ignorant with my words or trying to express them or even these are known thoughts prior to me expressing them here. However, I didn't learn any of this in college, I learned this during my mental lock. Please forgive me as I am still trying to recover fully from this experience. I do not see a Dr. I also have to say, no one person is ignorant nor are they intelligent, yet they are both since we all have something to learn and knowledge that we can gift. Everything has a beginning-center-end. I learned so much about how the brain works, how hearing works, and even eyesight. I truly experienced a demise of self only to come out with wisdom gained, unknown strength and a beauty that I never saw within myself. Idk, if this is up ur alley but, I hope to find someone that will be able to see my drawings, writings, converse via emails and possibly help somehow help ppl recover from mental or brain damage. It's truly a battle of wills. Hope all are doing well. I enjoyed your lecture and was happy to hear some of the things I had learned in it. Thanks
You should really see a doctor or something. Not that what you're saying isn't insightful, but the events are very worrying. Sounds like schizophrenia or something. I agree about music. Thought consists of heavily structured feelings progressing according to a rhythm. It carries ideas as if they were motifs, repeating and reshaping them to perform various functions, moving the thought forward. Before thinking there must have been music. And about 0 and All I suggest you check out Hegel's writings. He believed that Being and Nothing necessarily and immediately pass over into each other, and that only this passing over (Becoming) can be understood as their truth. But this Becoming is also incomplete, for in the moment of thinking it immediately switches origin and destination. Thus you need a fourth: Existence, which is neither Being or Nothing but contains both. He's a very dense author but with your creativity I'm sure you could manage it.
Sounds like a most enlightening experience. I am happy that you were able to return relatively intact to the "real world" and that you are finding ways to integrate your insights into your daily living. Your experience will probably be understood by few people, but please believe in what you have discovered, it seems precious.
Thanks for your testimony. I went through a "dark night" of the soul, some years ago that your account reminds me of. The theme that got me out of it was "Resistance is Futile". I had to stop fighting the "other" so hard.
Bless you for real, I hope the comeback trail has been good. It’s not easy, even when it’s exhilarating, to go to that kind of place. You’re in good company, and we’re rooting for you to find peace with your experience as some of us are also trying to do. 🙏
It's still a good example of what the Imaginary is all about, right? I realize that there's also a lot of stuff about self-image, but what was said in this video made a lot of sense to me, and I want to know if I can trust it to some extent.
Allow me to give you a full definition of the Imaginary from "An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis": (imaginaire) Lacan’s use of the term ‘imaginary’ as a substantive dates back to 1936 (Ec, 81). From the beginning, the term has connotations of illusion, fascination and seduction, and relates specifically to the DUAL RELATION between the EGO and the SPECULAR IMAGE. It is important to note, however, that while the imaginary always retains connotations of illusion and lure, it is not simply synonymous with ‘the illusory’ insofar as the latter term implies something unnecessary and inconsequential (Ec, 723). The imaginary is far from inconsequential; it has powerful effects in the real, and is not simply something that can be dispensed with or ‘overcome’. From 1953 on, the imaginary becomes one of the three ORDERS which constitute the tripartite scheme at the centre of Lacanian thought, being opposed to the symbolic and the real. The basis of the imaginary order continues to be the formation of the ego in the MIRROR STAGE. Since the ego is formed by identifying with the counterpart or specular image, IDENTIFICATION is an important aspect of the imaginary order. The ego and the counterpart form the prototypical dual relationship, and are interchangeable. This relationship whereby the ego is constituted by identification with the little other means that the ego, and the imaginary order itself, are both sites of a radical ALIENATION; ‘alienation is constitutive of the imaginary order’ (S3, 146). The dual relationship between the ego and the counterpart is fundamentally narcissistic, and NARCISSISM is another characteristic of the imaginary order. Narcissism is always accompanied by a certain AGGRESSIVITY. The imaginary is the realm of image and imagination, deception and lure. The principal illusions of the imaginary are those of wholeness, synthesis, autonomy, duality and, above all, similarity. The imaginary is thus the order of surface appearances which are deceptive, observable phenomena which hide underlying structure; the affects are such phenomena. However, the opposition between the imaginary and the symbolic does not mean that the imaginary is lacking in structure. On the contrary, the imaginary is always already structured by the symbolic order. For example in his discussion of the mirror stage in 1949, Lacan speaks of the relations in imaginary space, which imply a symbolic structuring of that space (E, 1). The expression ‘imaginary matrix’ also implies an imaginary which is structured by the symbolic (Ec, 221), and in 1964 Lacan discusses how the visual field is structured by symbolic laws (S11, 91-2). The imaginary also involves a linguistic dimension. Whereas the signifier is the foundation of the symbolic order, the SIGNIFIED and SIGNIFICATION are part of the imaginary order. Thus language has both symbolic and imaginary aspects; in its imaginary aspect, language is the ‘wall of language’ which inverts and distorts the discourse of the Other (see SCHEMA L). The imaginary exerts a captivating power over the subject, founded in the almost hypnotic effect of the specular image. The imaginary is thus rooted in the subject’s relationship to his own body (or rather to the image of his body). This captivating/capturing power is both seductive (the imaginary is manifested above all on the sexual plane, in such forms as sexual display and courtship rituals; Lacan, 1956b:272) and disabling: it imprisons the subject in a series of static fixations (see CAPTATION). A-Z 85 The imaginary is the dimension of the human subject which is most closely linked to ethology and animal psychology (S3, 253). All attempts to explain human subjectivity in terms of animal psychology are thus limited to the imaginary (see NATURE). Although the imaginary represents the closest point of contact between human subjectivity and animal ethology (S2, 166), it is not simply identical; the imaginary order in human beings is structured by the symbolic, and this means that ‘in man, the imaginary relation has deviated [from the realm of nature]’ (S2, 210). Lacan has a Cartesian mistrust of the imagination as a cognitive tool. He insists, like Descartes, on the supremacy of pure intellection, without dependence on images, as the only way of arriving at certain knowledge. It is this that lies behind Lacan’s use of topological figures, which cannot be represented in the imagination, to explore the structure of the unconscious (see TOPOLOGY). This mistrust of the imagination and the senses puts Lacan firmly on the side of rationalism rather than empiricism (see SCIENCE). Lacan accused the major psychoanalytic schools of his day of reducing psychoanalysis to the imaginary order; these psychoanalysts made identification with the analyst into the goal of analysis, and reduced analysis to a dual relationship (E, 246-7). Lacan sees this as a complete betrayal of psychoanalysis, a deviation which can only ever succeed in increasing the alienation of the subject. Against such imaginary reductionism, Lacan argues that the essence of psychoanalysis consists in its use of the symbolic. This use of the symbolic is the only way to dislodge the disabling fixations of the imaginary. Thus the only way for the analyst to gain any purchase on the imaginary is by transforming the images into words, just as Freud treats the dream as a rebus: ‘The imaginary is decipherable only if it is rendered into symbols’ (Lacan, 1956b:269). This use of the symbolic is the only way for the analytic process ‘to cross the plane of identification’ (S11, 273).
hard agree. imaginary as in comprised of images. the peter pan line is nonsense. butchers the symbolic too. 'Symbolism' ?? this whole video is a misleading appropriation of Lacan's terms. I wonder what the source material was. still finds time to label Lacan a 'French chauvinist patriarch.' This is bad content. bad
Real is not accessible to anyone. It's not the reality of senses (this is constructed with symbolic knowledge & imaginary hallucination of senses). Real is that which is obscured from senses, that which supports the existence and emergence of everything. Real is similar to the final goal of science - some kind of ultimate reality which we can only probe, simulate, but we are never directly confronted with it, and which must be approximated due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which is inscribed in the fact we probe reality against itself, and this probing always looses information, because it is by design selective. Lacans understanding goes far beyond psychology. It is in perfect sync with the Einsteinian universe and the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum dynamics. Ultimately we will never be able to distinguish Real from mistake in thinking/science, because Real emerges precisely as mistake in current theoretical paradigm. We could only assume we reached Real if all the experiments were 100% according to prediction all the time. This NEVER happens even in hardest science. Everything is blurred and statistical. Everyone who studies neurology knows world is not what we think it is. Different people view it differently and that is precisely the only difference between subjects, only real ego everyone has. To claim there is some universal knowable reality is equal to ideology. Therefore whenever we make claims about reality as a whole, we can only make them ironically, always having in mind we create an approximation for the use of everyday life, and not actually state the truth about the Real. This notion of obscured origin of everything is already in Hegel. What is not in Hegel is the trialectics (Real, imaginary, symbolic). What is similar there is always a sense of direction, and therefore imbalance. Things come from the Real, through Symbolic & imaginary, and create within this diad an image/symbol of Real, called reality.
not to bust your balls but the the general consensus in the physics community as i understand it is that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum dynamics is almost certainly wrong. Its remaining prevalence is a consequence of a) there being no satisfying new model to take its place and b) it provides an adequate teaching framework in the interim, in the ense that it is initially less confusing or "less wrong" than the alternatives.
Real is fundamentally out of balance, and this imbalance is what precisely makes symbolic and imaginary possible. This also means it is not eternal, because the most fundamental imbalance is time, which results in evolution. Real is not a perfect cycle. It is a broken cycle, or an entangled cycle which results in symbol and imago. Tao is too my knowledge a primitive self contained perfect balance, repetition, eternity, etc. , which are purely symbolic concepts. In that sense Tao is an primitive symbol raised to a level of ultimate reality, through hallucination of meaning (which is a relation between symbolic and imaginary).
@@HerrBaton No, Tao should much more be viewed as Heideggers Sein. It is precisely that which is to be found in every experience yet resists signification.
Being present to what comes and goes CF with what is left, makes it possible to see the fraudulent and symbolism as a parts tangle for what it's worth and to leave and hold space for what's left...i.e. the impossible.
lol, did you say "and vote" at the end? I love it. Thanks a lot for the help. You did a very good job describing this in understandable terms. Thank you!
A table is not a table but our preception of light and some imagination, my mother is not my mother just some light and imagination..... whaaattttt ???? I am going crazy.... is this derrida's deconstruction????
Which is a good thing i would say, Lacan only knew about the tractatus as far as i know. The philosohical investigations would have been of great use to Lacan.
What I went through last year, I can only describe as an "Awake Coma", trapped for 8 months inside my mind, I didn't speak during these 8 months and couldn't understand why. I wouldn't leave my bedroom, or my bed. I felt like I was told not to speak, leave etc.
It was somewhat scary, more confusing, completely, accepted as normal, but I (the me) knew it wasn't or something was off.
However, I kept questioning things that didn't logically make sense.
I fought myself (mind) with tricking my mind, to find my way back. Most amazing, unexplainable journey and I hope to never venture back in, that was 100s of lifetimes that I experienced. I also believe that if any human could experience what I have or others do like me, I'd jump in knowing what I know now. However, a month is more than suffice.
I do not think like the "norm" anymore.
I have things that I can explain, and things that I cannot. Such as...I suddenly wake in the middle of night, pick up charcoals, sketch pad, and in 5 minutes, I sketch a picture in the dark. The picture was perfect or the best sketch I had ever done. How? I don't draw, sketch and haven't since I was a child.
I was not allowed to say words, read, draw, or use pens, pencils, colors, books, and the list is unlimited, etc.
So, I asked my husband to buy me a sketch pad, charcoals. The way I asked was singing, I made myself a privacy policy, I changed the "rules". I could say anything as long as I was singing, and my privacy policy was for me only. Although mentally, I knew what was private to me, I suppose. I look in all these sketch books that I sketched in during that experience and I never made actual rules in the sketch pads.
Anyway, I used charcoal which replaced other pencils, and sketch pad vs. Drawing, or sketch book, and tricking the way I was thinking at the moment, I slowly began to break free.
Now, I have so so so so many remarkable experiences during this past 2 yrs. I don't look at sketches, I slowly talk more about things, ideas, creativity is ridiculous with the ideas I came up with. I constantly learned or was being taught during it. Real vs Fraud, I have doubt about all things.
I will say 0 or nothing is much greater than All. Numbers, time, letters, mean nothing to me. It's all creative writing. Time is absolutely incorrect. Universal time is closer to being relevant, good luck with that, lol.
I believe that the universe is mass and I believe it curves. the oldest language being music or nature's music (long before the existence of...) should be taught in school.
I also say that if all walks of life, created music at the same moment universally, its the only multi-linguel language understood by all walks of life. I'm sure I sound a bit ignorant with my words or trying to express them or even these are known thoughts prior to me expressing them here. However, I didn't learn any of this in college, I learned this during my mental lock. Please forgive me as I am still trying to recover fully from this experience. I do not see a Dr. I also have to say, no one person is ignorant nor are they intelligent, yet they are both since we all have something to learn and knowledge that we can gift. Everything has a beginning-center-end. I learned so much about how the brain works, how hearing works, and even eyesight. I truly experienced a demise of self only to come out with wisdom gained, unknown strength and a beauty that I never saw within myself. Idk, if this is up ur alley but, I hope to find someone that will be able to see my drawings, writings, converse via emails and possibly help somehow help ppl recover from mental or brain damage. It's truly a battle of wills. Hope all are doing well. I enjoyed your lecture and was happy to hear some of the things I had learned in it. Thanks
You should really see a doctor or something. Not that what you're saying isn't insightful, but the events are very worrying. Sounds like schizophrenia or something.
I agree about music. Thought consists of heavily structured feelings progressing according to a rhythm. It carries ideas as if they were motifs, repeating and reshaping them to perform various functions, moving the thought forward. Before thinking there must have been music.
And about 0 and All I suggest you check out Hegel's writings. He believed that Being and Nothing necessarily and immediately pass over into each other, and that only this passing over (Becoming) can be understood as their truth. But this Becoming is also incomplete, for in the moment of thinking it immediately switches origin and destination. Thus you need a fourth: Existence, which is neither Being or Nothing but contains both. He's a very dense author but with your creativity I'm sure you could manage it.
Sounds like a most enlightening experience. I am happy that you were able to return relatively intact to the "real world" and that you are finding ways to integrate your insights into your daily living. Your experience will probably be understood by few people, but please believe in what you have discovered, it seems precious.
Thanks for your testimony.
I went through a "dark night" of the soul, some years ago that your account reminds me of.
The theme that got me out of it was "Resistance is Futile".
I had to stop fighting the "other" so hard.
Hi. I would be happy to correspond with you. My name is Fariz. Here is my email: fariz64@hotmail.com
Bless you for real, I hope the comeback trail has been good. It’s not easy, even when it’s exhilarating, to go to that kind of place. You’re in good company, and we’re rooting for you to find peace with your experience as some of us are also trying to do. 🙏
Speaking as a chronic alcoholic, my main difficulty is the lack of ability to grasp reality among those who society commonly regards as healthy.
Hi Celestial Teapot. I know you will get through this. Remember to maintain FRAME and de-frame those whose fall short.
You are equating the imaginary with imagination. That's a cardinal sin in understanding the Lacanian edifice.
It's still a good example of what the Imaginary is all about, right? I realize that there's also a lot of stuff about self-image, but what was said in this video made a lot of sense to me, and I want to know if I can trust it to some extent.
Allow me to give you a full definition of the Imaginary from "An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis":
(imaginaire) Lacan’s use of the term ‘imaginary’ as a substantive dates back to 1936 (Ec, 81). From the beginning, the term has connotations of illusion, fascination and seduction, and relates specifically to the DUAL RELATION between the EGO and the SPECULAR IMAGE. It is important to note, however, that while the imaginary always retains connotations of illusion and lure, it is not simply synonymous with ‘the illusory’ insofar as the latter term implies something unnecessary and inconsequential (Ec, 723). The imaginary is far from inconsequential; it has powerful effects in the real, and is not simply something that can be dispensed with or ‘overcome’.
From 1953 on, the imaginary becomes one of the three ORDERS which constitute the tripartite scheme at the centre of Lacanian thought, being opposed to the symbolic and the real. The basis of the imaginary order continues to be the formation of the ego in the MIRROR STAGE. Since the ego is formed by identifying with the counterpart or specular image, IDENTIFICATION is an important aspect of the imaginary order. The ego and the counterpart form the prototypical dual relationship, and are interchangeable. This relationship whereby the ego is constituted by identification with the little other means that the ego, and the imaginary order itself, are both sites of a radical ALIENATION; ‘alienation is constitutive of the imaginary order’ (S3, 146). The dual relationship between the ego and the counterpart is fundamentally narcissistic, and NARCISSISM is another characteristic of the imaginary order. Narcissism is always accompanied by a certain AGGRESSIVITY. The imaginary is the realm of image and imagination, deception and lure. The principal illusions of the imaginary are those of wholeness, synthesis, autonomy, duality and, above all, similarity. The imaginary is thus the order of surface appearances which are deceptive, observable phenomena which hide underlying structure; the affects are such phenomena.
However, the opposition between the imaginary and the symbolic does not mean that the imaginary is lacking in structure. On the contrary, the imaginary is always already structured by the symbolic order. For example in his discussion of the mirror stage in 1949, Lacan speaks of the relations in imaginary space, which imply a symbolic structuring of that space (E, 1). The expression ‘imaginary matrix’ also implies an imaginary which is structured by the symbolic (Ec, 221), and in 1964 Lacan discusses how the visual field is structured by symbolic laws (S11, 91-2).
The imaginary also involves a linguistic dimension. Whereas the signifier is the foundation of the symbolic order, the SIGNIFIED and SIGNIFICATION are part of the imaginary order. Thus language has both symbolic and imaginary aspects; in its imaginary aspect, language is the ‘wall of language’ which inverts and distorts the discourse of the Other (see SCHEMA L).
The imaginary exerts a captivating power over the subject, founded in the almost hypnotic effect of the specular image. The imaginary is thus rooted in the subject’s relationship to his own body (or rather to the image of his body). This captivating/capturing power is both seductive (the imaginary is manifested above all on the sexual plane, in such forms as sexual display and courtship rituals; Lacan, 1956b:272) and disabling: it imprisons the subject in a series of static fixations (see CAPTATION).
A-Z 85
The imaginary is the dimension of the human subject which is most closely linked to ethology and animal psychology (S3, 253). All attempts to explain human subjectivity in terms of animal psychology are thus limited to the imaginary (see NATURE). Although the imaginary represents the closest point of contact between human subjectivity and animal ethology (S2, 166), it is not simply identical; the imaginary order in human beings is structured by the symbolic, and this means that ‘in man, the imaginary relation has deviated [from the realm of nature]’ (S2, 210).
Lacan has a Cartesian mistrust of the imagination as a cognitive tool. He insists, like Descartes, on the supremacy of pure intellection, without dependence on images, as the only way of arriving at certain knowledge. It is this that lies behind Lacan’s use of topological figures, which cannot be represented in the imagination, to explore the structure of the unconscious (see TOPOLOGY). This mistrust of the imagination and the senses puts Lacan firmly on the side of rationalism rather than empiricism (see SCIENCE).
Lacan accused the major psychoanalytic schools of his day of reducing psychoanalysis to the imaginary order; these psychoanalysts made identification with the analyst into the goal of analysis, and reduced analysis to a dual relationship (E, 246-7). Lacan sees this as a complete betrayal of psychoanalysis, a deviation which can only ever succeed in increasing the alienation of the subject. Against such imaginary reductionism, Lacan argues that the essence of psychoanalysis consists in its use of the symbolic. This use of the symbolic is the only way to dislodge the disabling fixations of the imaginary. Thus the only way for the analyst to gain any purchase on the imaginary is by transforming the images into words, just as Freud treats the dream as a rebus: ‘The imaginary is decipherable only if it is rendered into symbols’ (Lacan, 1956b:269). This use of the symbolic is the only way for the analytic process ‘to cross the plane of identification’ (S11, 273).
Ah! Now that’s alienation!
hard agree. imaginary as in comprised of images. the peter pan line is nonsense. butchers the symbolic too. 'Symbolism' ?? this whole video is a misleading appropriation of Lacan's terms. I wonder what the source material was. still finds time to label Lacan a 'French chauvinist patriarch.' This is bad content. bad
I prefer the simplicity in Baudrillard's definition of the real: "that which cannot be simulated".
the simplicity of Baudrillard - isn't that ironic!
I like that, can you tell me where he said that?
Real is not accessible to anyone. It's not the reality of senses (this is constructed with symbolic knowledge & imaginary hallucination of senses). Real is that which is obscured from senses, that which supports the existence and emergence of everything. Real is similar to the final goal of science - some kind of ultimate reality which we can only probe, simulate, but we are never directly confronted with it, and which must be approximated due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which is inscribed in the fact we probe reality against itself, and this probing always looses information, because it is by design selective. Lacans understanding goes far beyond psychology. It is in perfect sync with the Einsteinian universe and the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum dynamics.
Ultimately we will never be able to distinguish Real from mistake in thinking/science, because Real emerges precisely as mistake in current theoretical paradigm. We could only assume we reached Real if all the experiments were 100% according to prediction all the time. This NEVER happens even in hardest science. Everything is blurred and statistical.
Everyone who studies neurology knows world is not what we think it is. Different people view it differently and that is precisely the only difference between subjects, only real ego everyone has. To claim there is some universal knowable reality is equal to ideology. Therefore whenever we make claims about reality as a whole, we can only make them ironically, always having in mind we create an approximation for the use of everyday life, and not actually state the truth about the Real.
This notion of obscured origin of everything is already in Hegel. What is not in Hegel is the trialectics (Real, imaginary, symbolic). What is similar there is always a sense of direction, and therefore imbalance. Things come from the Real, through Symbolic & imaginary, and create within this diad an image/symbol of Real, called reality.
not to bust your balls but the the general consensus in the physics community as i understand it is that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum dynamics is almost certainly wrong. Its remaining prevalence is a consequence of a) there being no satisfying new model to take its place and b) it provides an adequate teaching framework in the interim, in the ense that it is initially less confusing or "less wrong" than the alternatives.
This was an unfair attack on the imaginary order.
why is the volume so low?
Sir thank you so much. This is a work of dedication. You have helped me so much in understanding that. Regards from Paris
What is the relation between the real and Tao?
"The Tao that can be spoken is not Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name"
Real is fundamentally out of balance, and this imbalance is what precisely makes symbolic and imaginary possible. This also means it is not eternal, because the most fundamental imbalance is time, which results in evolution. Real is not a perfect cycle. It is a broken cycle, or an entangled cycle which results in symbol and imago. Tao is too my knowledge a primitive self contained perfect balance, repetition, eternity, etc. , which are purely symbolic concepts. In that sense Tao is an primitive symbol raised to a level of ultimate reality, through hallucination of meaning (which is a relation between symbolic and imaginary).
@@HerrBaton No, Tao should much more be viewed as Heideggers Sein. It is precisely that which is to be found in every experience yet resists signification.
very nice. like the thought that the real is not translatable.... i'll look into this.
Being present to what comes and goes CF with what is left, makes it possible to see the fraudulent and symbolism as a parts tangle for what it's worth and to leave and hold space for what's left...i.e. the impossible.
Finally ... thanks...no I can understand zizek .. thanks again 👌
Great video! 💚💛💙
Wow that's really useful brother. Thanks for the info. This deserve more views simple and informative
Thanks
Great content! Very informative video, thanks.
excellent video!
Cam somebody explain how Lacans concept of Hysteria relates to Freuds concept of Hysteria?
Can this be related to Plato's allegory of the cave? Reality creating symbols on the wall that spark our imagination?
i have also wondered about the relation...
lol, did you say "and vote" at the end? I love it. Thanks a lot for the help. You did a very good job describing this in understandable terms. Thank you!
how does Lacan's view of the symbolic tie in with RFT?
hold up i thought the "real" is different from "reality". the latter refers to what we perceive the real may be but never is
A table is not a table but our preception of light and some imagination, my mother is not my mother just some light and imagination..... whaaattttt ???? I am going crazy.... is this derrida's deconstruction????
great, easy to understand video. thanks very much!
Hello, Donald Trump...
Hmmm speaking of "fraud"
...you?
audio
6:00 a bit wittgensteinian
11:00 and again
Which is a good thing i would say, Lacan only knew about the tractatus as far as i know.
The philosohical investigations would have been of great use to Lacan.
q u i e t a u d i o
The gray greasy great pilot aerobically guard because party actually repair absent a skinny bull. sad, daffy daisy
5:11 yea likre right now
noooooo