拉岡講座224

Transference and the Drive

移情與驅力

The validity of psychology,

心理學的有效性
Illusion and its rectification
幻覺及其矯正
The transference is the enaction of the reality of the unconscious
移情是無意識在真實界的扮演
3
Any departure taken from the relation of the subject to a real context may have its raison d'être in this
or that psychologist's experience. It may produce results, have effects, make possible the drawing up of
tables. Of course, this will always be in contexts in which it is we who make reality—for example,
when we arrange for the subject to take tests, tests which have been organized by us. It is the domain of
validity of what is called psychology, which has nothing to do with the level at which we sustain the
psycho-analytic experience, and which, if I may say so, reinforces to an incredible degree the
denudation of the subject.

只要出發立場是主體跟真實界的關係，從心理學家的經驗來看，都能自圓其說，因為它可能產
生結果，影響所及，井然有序，有如飛機班次表的排定。當然，場域總是要在人間，我們作為人
的主體在創造真實界。例如，我們安排主體接受心理測驗，測驗內容的編寫者是我們自己。這就
是我們所謂的心理學的有效性，跟我們所主張的精神分析的經驗風馬牛不相及，因為它百般耍
弄主體，到匪夷所思的程度。

What I have called the psychological isolate is not the old, or ever young, monad traditionally set up as
the centre of knowledge, for the Leibnizian monad, for example, is not isolated, it is the centre of
knowledge; it is not separable from a cosmology, it is, in the cosmos, the centre from which, according
to the inflections, what is contemplation or harmony takes place. The psychological isolate comes up
again in the concept of the ego, which—by a deviation which, I think, is merely a detour—is confused,
in psycho-analytic thinking, with the subject in distress in the relation to reality.

我所謂內心總是孤獨的主體，並不是以往哲學，或曾經盛行的學說，傳統上建立作為知識中心
的單子主體。例如萊布尼斯主張的單子主體並不孤獨。他是知識的中心，他跟宇宙論的天地精神
相往來。他沉緬思維或淡泊寧靜，甚至顛沛流離，都是以自己作為寰宇的核心。另外，自我的觀
念也同樣涉及到主體的內心總是孤獨的主張。可是，這種主張常被誤認為是主體痛苦於真實界的
疏離，從精神分析的角度來看，我認為這僅是一種迂迴的偏離。

1
I would first like to stress that this way of theorizing the operation is in flagrant contradiction, totally at
variance, with what in other respects experience leads me to stress, and which we cannot eliminate
from the analytic text, namely, the function of the internal object.

我首先要強調，那些理論的主張，所顯現的矛盾昭然若揭，跟我以精神分析經驗所要強調的內
容格格不入，我要揭露的，換言之，就是內部客體的功能。

The terms introjection or projection are always used rather recklessly. But, certainly, even in this
context of unsatisfactory theorization, something is given to us that comes into the foreground on all
sides, namely, the function of the internal object. In the end, this function is polarized into the extremes
of that good or bad object, around which, for some, revolves everything in a subject's behavior that
represents distortion, inflection, paradoxical fear, foreign body. It is thus the operating point on which,
in conditions of urgency—those, for example, involving the selection of subjects for various
responsible jobs, in cybernetics or management, for example, or when it is a question of training air-
line pilots or train-drivers—some have pointed out that it was a question of concentrating
the focusing of a rapid analysis, even of a lightning-analysis, even of the use of certain so called
personality tests.

投射或融入這樣的術語總是被使用得浮濫。但是，那些理論儘管不盡人意，他們提供的東西還是
紛至沓來，換言之，內部客體的功能。最後，這個功能被分為善與惡兩個極端客體，主體的行為
諸如扭曲、變態、驚恐交加、或被惡魔附身等，都繞這兩個善與惡的客體牽強附會。因此，這就是
他們的運作點。有迫切需要時，例如，選拔各個工作單位的員工，無論是資訊業或業務部門，航
空飛行員或高鐵駕駛員，有人曾指出，問題出在要求精神分析的急功近利，甚至還有「閃電分
析」，使用某種所謂的「人格性向測驗」。

We cannot avoid posing the question of the status of this internal object. Is it an object of perception?
From what angle do we approach it? Where does it come from? Following this rectification, in what
would the analysis of the transference consist?

我們無法避免要質疑，內部客體的地位是什麼？它是一種感官的客體嗎？我們要從哪一個角度
接近它？它來自哪裡？移情的精神分析經過這樣的矯枉過正，它的內容是什麼？

I will present you with a model, which will have to be improved a great deal later, so take it as a
problematic model. The schemata centered on the function of rectifying illusion have such adhesive
power that I will never be able to launch anything too prematurely that, at the very least, acts as an
obstacle to them.

我舉一個模式給你們看。這個模式還必須改進，所以我們就把它當著是一個問題模式。這個矯正

2
人的幻覺的基型，很多心理學家樂此不疲，我現在不宜過早給它下定論，但至少，我要阻攔它
一下。

If the unconscious is what closes up again as soon as it has opened, in accordance with a temporal
pulsation, if furthermore repetition is not simply a stereotype of behavior, but repetition in relation to
something always missed, you see here and now that the transference—as it is represented to us, as a
mode of access to what is hidden in the unconscious—could only be of itself a precarious way. If the
transference is only repetition, it will always be repetition of the same missed encounter. If the
transference is supposed, through this repetition, to restore the continuity of a history, it will do so
only by reviving a relation that is, of its nature, syncopated.

假如無意識是心靈的瞬間悸動，一展開就封閉，假如進一步的重複不僅只是制式的行為，而且
徒有重複的行為，沒有靈犀，你在此時此地將會看到，移情本身只是飄忽不定，因為它呈現給
我們，作為無意識若有若無的接觸模式。假如移情只是重複，那總是邂逅的失落的重複。假如經
由重複，移情被認為能夠重續往事的綿綿舊情，那充其量是重溫彼此的關係。

We see, then, that the transference, as operating mode, cannot be satisfied with being confused with the
efficacity of repetition, with the restoration of what is concealed in the unconscious, even with the
catharsis of the unconscious elements. When I speak to you of the unconscious as of that which
appears in the temporal pulsation, you may picture it to yourselves as a hoop net (nasse) which opens
slightly at the neck and at the bottom of which the catch of fish will be found.

因此，我們看出，移情作為一種運作模式，無法僅是滿足於能夠有效地重複，或滿足於無意識
隱約的恢復，甚至無法僅是滿足於無意識的昇華。當我跟你們提到，無意識作為瞬間悸動所展現
的東西，你們可以自己將它想像成為一種「圈套魚網」，圈套開口稍微展開，底端的魚獲源源不
絕。

Whereas according to the image of the double sack (besace), the unconscious is something kept in
reserve, closed up inside, in which we have to penetrate from the outside. I therefore reverse the
topology of the traditional imagery by presenting to you the following schema.

類似雙層袋的意象，無意識是某件被貯藏的東西，內裡封閉，我們必須從外面貫穿。我因此到轉
傳統意象的地形學，提供給你們以下的基型。

You will have to superimpose it upon the optical model I gave in my article Remarque sur Ic rapport de
Daniel Lagache,' concerning the ideal ego and the ego ideal. You will then see that it is in the Other that
the subject is constituted as ideal, that he has to regulate the completion of what comes as ego, or
ideal ego—which is not the ego ideal—that is to say, to constitute himself in his imaginary reality. This

3
schema makes Schema of the hoop net clear—I stress it in relation to the latest elements I have
introduced around the scopic drive—that where the subject sees namely, where that real, inverted
image of his own body that is given in the schema of the ego is forged, it is not from there that he looks
at himself.

我在「理想的自我與自我的理想」那篇文章中，曾提出視覺的模式，你們不妨參照一下。你們會看
出，就在大它者處，主體形成為一種理想，他必須調適作為自我的完成，或成為理想的自我。這
還算不是自我的理想，換言之，他只是在他想像中的真實界塑造自己。這個基型可以使「圈套魚
網」的基型更加清楚。在最近介紹視覺驅力時，我曾強調，主體觀看的地方，換言之，在自我的
基型中，被賦予的身體，倒轉形象成為真實被鍛造的地方，主體並不是從那個地方觀看他自己。

But, certainly, it is in the space of the Other that he sees himself and the point from which he looks at
himself is also in that space. Now, this is also the point from which he speaks,. since in so far as he
speaks, it is in the locus of the Other that he begins to constitute that truthful lie by which is initiated
that which participates in desire at the level of the unconscious.

但是，的確，就在大它者的空間，主體看到他自己。他觀看他自己的那個點，也是在那個空間。
現在，這就是他言說出發的那個點。當他言說的時候，他是在大它者的軌跡上，開始建構那個真
理的謊言。憑藉那個真理的謊言，無意識層次的欲望的參與被撩撥起來。

So we must consider the subject, in terms of the hoop net—especially in relation to its orifice, which
constitutes its essential structure—as being inside. What matters is not what goes in there, as the
Gospel has it, but what comes out.

用圈套魚網的模式，特別是主體跟洞口的關係，因為那個關係形成它基本的結構，我們必須認
為主體存在於自己內部。但是，重要的不是內部那裡發生什麼事，如聖經福音書所說，而是出現
到外面的東西。

We can conceive of the closing of the unconscious through the effect of something that plays the role of
obturator—the objet a, sucked, breathed, into the orifice of the net. You can draw an image like those
great balls in which the number to be drawn in a lottery are enclosed. What is concocted in this great
roulette out of the first statements of free association emerges from it in the interval in which the object
is not blocking the orifice. This brutal, elementary image enables you to restore the constitutive
function of the symbolic in its reciprocal contraposition. It is the subject's game of odds and evens
constituted by his renewed meetings with that which in the effective action of the analytic maneuver is
made present in the subject.

透過類似封印扮演的角色，我們能夠構想無意識的封閉是個小客體，無意識被吸收、被吸進圈套

4
魚網的洞口。你可以得到一個意象，六合彩會被抽中的的那些滾球的數字被封閉。人生就是我們
憑藉自由想像，構想的大輪盤賭檯，精巧設計的東西間隔一段時間會出現，小客體並沒有堵塞
這個洞口。這個殘酷而基本的意象，使你能夠將組成人生的意符，恢復在其互動位置的功用。人
生有如奇數與偶數重新組合的一場賭，經由精神分析師有效地操盤，主體的真實是否顯現在此
一搏。

This schema is quite inadequate, but it is a bulldozer schema which renders congruent the notion that
the transference is both an obstacle to remembering, and a making present of the closure of the
unconscious, which is the act of missing the right meeting just at the right moment.

這個描繪輪廓並不十分週延，但是足以充份讓人明白以下的觀念：移情既是一道回憶的阻礙，
又是一個無意識封閉的展現，因緣際會的情愫，若有若無。

1 could illustrate all this from the variety and divergence of the definitions that analysts have given of
the function of the transference. What is certain is that the transference is one thing, the therapeutic end
another. Nor is the transference to be confused with a mere means. The two extremes of what has been
formulated in analytic literature are situated here.

對於移情的功用，精神分析師所下過的定義多樣繁複，但都可以讓我作為例證。確定的是，移情
是一回事，治療又是另一回事。精神分析領域曾經研究過的，有兩個極端說法，我表述如下。

How often will you read formulas that associate, for example, the transference with identification,
whereas identification is merely a pause, a false termination of the analysis which is very frequently
confused with its normal termination. Its relation with the transference is close, but precisely in that by
which the transference has not been analysed. On the other hand, you will see the function of the
transference formulated as a means of rectification from the standpoint of reality, to which everything
I am saying today is opposed.

你難道不曾好幾次聽過這樣的說法？例如，移情跟認同被聯想在一起，而認同僅僅是一個病徵
的停頓，一種精神分析的虛假的療治，往往跟正常的療治混為一談。認同跟移情的關係是非常密
切，但那只是因為我們對於移情並未仔細分析。在另一方面，你將會看到移情的功用，從真實界
的觀點，是被用來當著從事矯治的媒介。這跟我上面所提到的各家說法，可是大相逕庭。

It is impossible to situate the transference correctly in any of these references. Since it is a question of
reality, it is on this plane that I wish to bring my criticism to bear. Today I will leave you with an
aphorism by way of introduction to what I will say next time—the transference is not the enactment
(mist en acte) of the illusion that seems to drive us to this alienating identification that any conformity
constitutes, even when it is with an ideal model, of which the analyst, in any case, cannot be the

5
support—the transference is the enactment of the reality of the unconscious.

我們不可能要將移情正確地茍同以上的各家說法。因為這是一個真實界的問題，我希望將我的批
判建立在這個基準上。今天，我將留給你們一句箴言，作為我下一次要介紹的起點：移情是無意
識在真實界的扮演，而不是幻覺的扮演。幻覺似乎驅使我們到這個人云亦云的疏離的認同，即使
認同的是一位理想的典範，但是精神分析師無論怎樣，也支撐不了這個理想的典範。

I have left this in suspense in the concept of the unconscious —oddly enough, it is the very thing that is
more and more forgotten that I have not recalled until now. I hope, later, to be able to explain why this
is so. In discussing the unconscious, I have been concerned so far to remind you of the effects of the
constitutive act of the subject, because this is my primary concern here. But let us not omit what is
especially stressed by Freud as being strictly consubstantial with the dimension of the unconscious,
namely, sexuality. Because it has increasingly forgotten what this relation of the unconscious to the
sexual means, analysis has inherited a conception of reality that no longer has anything to do with
reality as situated by Freud at the level of the secondary process. So it is by positing the transference as
the enactment of the reality of the unconscious that I shall begin next time.

我將移情的問題懸置在無意識的觀念領域。說來奇怪，無意識越來越被人遺忘，我自己也是直到
現在才回想到它。以後，我希望能夠解釋，為什麼會發生這樣的情形。談論到無意識時，我迄今
所關心的是提醒你們，構成人作為主體的本質會產生怎樣的影響，因為這是我念茲在茲的關懷。
但是我們不要忽略，佛洛伊德曾特別強調，跟無意識的國度幾乎是同時並存的還有性。性跟無意
識的關係有何意義，越來越被人忘記，所以精神分析學就接管了真實界的觀念領域。不過我這個
真實界的觀念，跟佛洛伊德定位在次級過程的真實界，已經沒有多大關係。所以，我假設移情是
無意識在真實界的扮演，下一次我再細談。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw