See also
(Patrick Landman, 2019) Chap 9. The violence of psychiatric diagnosis, in On Psychoanalysis and Violence： Contemporary Lacanian Perspectives, ed. by Vanessa Sinclair, Many Sprinkler, Routledge, 2019
Friday, January 14, 2022
Patrick Landman on French Psychiatry and Stop DSM France (2016-3-31)
https://www-psychologytoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rethinking-mental-health/201603/patrick-landman-french-psychiatry-and-stop-dsm-france?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16421486016017&_ct=1642148611175&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=%E4%BE%86%E6%BA%90%EF%BC%9A%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.psychologytoday.com%2Fus%2Fblog%2Frethinking-mental-health%2F201603%2Fpatrick-landman-french-psychiatry-and-stop-dsm-france
event 書目
(1) Contributions to Philosophy (Of the Event), Martin Heidegger, Richard Rojcewicz (Translator), Daniela Vallega-Neu (Translator), Indiana University Press, 2012
(2) Heidegger's Poietic Writings: From Contributions to Philosophy to The Event, Daniela Vallega-Neu, Indiana University Press, 2018
(3) Heidegger's Ontology of Events, James Bahoh, EUP, 2019
(4) Prio hirity of Events: Deleuze's Logic of Sense, Sean Bowden, EUP, 2011
(5) Being And Event, Alain Badiou, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006
(6) Logics of Worlds: Being and Event II, Alain Badiou, Bloomsbury Academic, 2019
(7) Being Shaken: Ontology and the Event, Michael Marder, Santiago Zabala, 2014
(8) Trauma and Event： A Philosophical Archeology (Vincenzo Di Nicola, 2012) (PhD Dissertation)
(9) Heidegger and Deleuze：The Groundwork of Evental Ontology (James Bahoh, 2016) (phD Dissertation)
(10) Thinking the Event, François Raffoul, Indiana University Press, 2020
星期五 (拉岡桑)
5：29 AM，冷，10：29 AM，陽光，風，
(一)
拉岡桑，似乎對 psychosis 更中意，沒有用力於 perversion，比如說，perversion 的 borromean knot，長什麼樣子？
Objet a ，卡在 RSI 三個環交集處，讓三個環不至於鬆開，甚至三個環，似乎特意各自退讓，挪出交集的空間，讓 objet a 更顯眼，成為存在的腫脹的槓桿點，意思是說，「它」就是，你的存在，所繫，你，因「它」而存在，為「它」而存在，簡單講，它就是「你的命根子」，其他，都不重要，
你要理解，le Sinthome，就是 objet a，就是 jouissance，就是 event，就是基本教義派的，「基本教義」，you name it，我不要舉例了，
(二)
三觀不正，史觀不醇，前者中國，後者台灣，不正者邪惡，不醇者無味，
(三)
Thursday, January 13, 2022
The Principles of Deleuzian Philosophy (Koichiro Kokubun, 國分功一郎, 2021)
Koichiro 桑，上來就說，德勒茲對政治，其實沒有興趣，意思是說，D 和 D&G 是兩件事，對政治狂熱的是 G，但是，你不要忘記，D 和 G 會一拍即合，是有原因的，D 不是一般的哲學家，「看他長相就知道」，你見過哪一個哲學家，疼惜住在自己身上的，愉悅的跳蚤，活得像塊抹布，或用過的保險套，你見過哪一個哲學家，喜歡跟哲學史前輩們，從後面「亂搞」，生出一個個怪胎，而且，D 很挑剔，意思是說，他搞的是 minor literature，是正常的哲學家，看不上眼的，意思是說，正常的哲學家，搞的是莊嚴肅穆的正經大師，意思是說，正常的哲學家，從頭到腳，不知道什麼是瘋狂，不知道什麼是狂野，「還真以為自己在做哲學」，以上，關於，做哲學的恰當的姿勢的可能性，可以類推，心理治療，這是為什麼，我先前說過，你要疼惜，你要嚮往，「不像蘋果的蘋果」，的治療者，和治療，意思是說，你要珍惜，你要嚮往，身上住著「愉悅的跳蚤」的治療者，能夠跟你一起，發生的治療，意思是說，痊癒，就是你身上，也「因此」，住著愉悅的跳蚤，至於，跳蚤需不需要，有沒有可能，過度愉悅 (jouissance)，這是一個有趣的問題，你要請教拉岡桑，回到 Koichiro 桑，德勒茲的哲學的「原則」，就是瘋狂，就是狂野，意思是說，腦筋太「整齊」的人，是讀不懂他的，
https://www.amazon.com/-/zh_TW/Koichiro-Kokubun/dp/1474448992/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1642081404&refinements=p_27%3AKoichiro+Kokubun&s=books&sr=1-1
Deleuze vs. Lacan
(1) Psychoanalysis of Sense: Deleuze and the Lacanian School, by Guillaume Collett, EUP, 2016
(2) Lacan and Deleuze: A Disjunctive Synthesis, ed. by Boštjan Nedoh, Andreja Zevnik, EUP, 2018
(3) Guattari's Diagrammatic Thought: Writing Between Lacan and Deleuze, by Janell Watson, Continuum, 2011
(4) Lacan Deleuze Badiou, by A. J Bartlett , Justin Clemens, Jon Roffe, EUP, 2014
(5) Ontology and Perversion: Deleuze, Agamben, Lacan, by Boštjan Nedoh, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2019
(6) Poststructuralist Agency: The Subject in Twentieth-Century Theory, by Gavin Rae, EUP, 2021
(7) The Myth of the Other: Lacan, Foucault, Deleuze, Bataille, by Franco Rella, Maisonneuve Press, 1994
The bodily event, jouissance and the (post)modern subject (Lissy Canellopoulos, 2010)
https://www.cairn.info/revue-recherches-en-psychanalyse1-2010-2-page-321a.html
Seminar XXIII：Le Sinthome (拉岡桑)
Roberto Harari，Luke Thurston，Raul Moncayo，Colette Soler，Shelly Brivic，
Lacan，June 1975 (Paris，James Joyce Symposium)，Nov 1975 (USA， Yale University)，
I interpret the Sinthome as a voluntary symptom that aims at the unknown to discover new possibilities. (Brivic, 2008, Preface)
Therefore, it's like the event, or, existential imperative, not voluntary, nor involuntary.
Reference
(1) How James Joyce Made his Name: A Reading of the Final Lacan, Roberto Harari, Luke Thurston (Translator), Other Press, 2013
# Chap 1
(2) James Joyce and the Problem of Psychoanalysis, Luke Thurston, Cambridge University Press, 2004
(3) Reinventing the Symptom： Essays on the Final Lacan, ed. Luke Thurston, Other Press, 2002
(4) Lalangue, Sinthome, Jouissance, and Nomination: A Reading Companion and Commentary on Lacan's Seminar XXIII on the Sinthome, Raul Moncayo, Routledge, 2019
(5) Lacan Reading Joyce, Colette Soler, Routledge, 2018
(6) Joyce through Lacan and Žižek: Explorations, Shelly Brivic, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008
(7) The Sinthome: The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book XXIII, Jacques Lacan, Polity, 2016
New Technology Monitors Collapsing Glaciers
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-technology-monitors-collapsing-glaciers/
FDA Approves Novel Drug to Treat Insomnia
https://alert.psychnews.org/2022/01/fda-approves-novel-drug-to-treat.html?m=1
Quviviq (daridorexant) 25 mg and 50 mg for the treatment of adult patients with insomnia.
Wednesday, January 12, 2022
How AI Could Prevent the Development of New Illicit Drugs
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-ai-could-prevent-the-development-of-new-illicit-drugs/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tech&utm_content=link&utm_term=2022-01-11_featured-this-week&spMailingID=71100032&spUserID=MTEwMTQwMDYwODYS1&spJobID=2230442965&spReportId=MjIzMDQ0Mjk2NQS2
RSI (拉岡桑)
R. 真實 ～ f ( . ) ～ 釋
S. 象徵 ～ f ( x ) ～ 道
I. 想像 ～ f ( x y ) ～ 儒
意思是說，真實是面對空集合，空是成住壞空的空，象徵是抽象的，個人內心世界，想像是具象的，人間關係，
想像是具體的，具象的，象徵是人文的，抽象的，真實是語言無法企及的，
一般個案，糾結在關係中，其人生充滿想像，為想像所囿；其中，具才情者，個人內心世界，有其風景，方可象徵，方有解釋可言；面對真實，前提是，治療者自己，是否能來到，那個地方，那個地方是，「人生況味的終點和覺悟」，意思是說，治療者的能耐，限制了，個案的旅途的可能性，假如治療者，不能，不曾，來到那個地方，他的個案，跟他相處的時候，就不可能，來到那個地方；假如，他們，無法，來到，那個地方，基本上，他們只能，扯點閑篇，忽悠了事，這是心理治療的常態，
佛洛伊德說，夢是來到潛意識的康莊大道，但是其實，我們醒著的時候，才是大夢；客體關係理論說，客體關係是一覽，內在世界的落地窗；自體心理學說，「客體關係」相應於「自體狀態」(self state)，這兩者，是一個銅板的兩面，意思是說，你應得 (deserve) 你的關係；拉岡桑說，一般的症狀 (symptom) 非 le Sinthome，前者是「生命的所指」，困擾有餘，強烈不足，不夠真實，後者是「生命的能指」，激情所繫，為之生，為之死，而無憾，或即使有憾，亦必為之，不可，意思是說，le Sinthome 是我們窺見真實的唯一機會，
6：09 PM (2022)
168 - 18 = 150，18 x 4 = 72，150 x 4 = 600，
5 / m，more，maybe，
q3y，visit， RP / PD (IARPP)，EA (SEA)，TCRP，
2022，D&G，PS (not PM)，PH，16 as exercise (maybe)，CW precise & incisive，
2022，18 (NP)，
No time to die，Army of the dead，
Irreplaceable “Thisness” (後結構主義和心理治療)
https://cac.org/irreplaceable-thisness-2018-03-18/
See also
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/deleuze/
存在的個體性 (Haecceity)
意思是說，這個世界，翕辟成變，聚散離合，生生不息，觸目皆為能指，
遂，包括人為之物？比如說，恆大海花島，被拆之樓，
Deleuze uses the term to denote entities that exist on the plane of immanence.
Plane of immanence (French: plan d'immanence) is a founding concept in the metaphysics or ontology of French philosopher Gilles Deleuze. Immanence, meaning "existing or remaining within" generally offers a relative opposition to transcendence, that which is beyond or outside. Deleuze rejects the idea that life and creation are opposed to death and non-creation. He instead conceives of a plane of immanence that already includes life and death. "Deleuze refuses to see deviations, redundancies, destructions, cruelties or contingency as accidents that befall or lie outside life; life and death were aspects of desire or the plane of immanence." This plane is a pure immanence, an unqualified immersion or embeddedness, an immanence which denies transcendence as a real distinction, Cartesian or otherwise. Pure immanence is thus often referred to as a pure plane, an infinite field or smooth space without substantial or constitutive division. In his final essay entitled Immanence: A Life, Deleuze writes: "It is only when immanence is no longer immanence to anything other than itself that we can speak of a plane of immanence."
Tuesday, January 11, 2022
The Undecidable Unconscious: A Journal of Deconstruction and Psychoanalysis (後結構主義和心理治療)
https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/636 (Alan Bass)
The Undecidable Unconscious: A Journal of Deconstruction and Psychoanalysis
Poststructuralism and Psychoanalysis (後結構主義和心理治療)
(1) The Trouble with Pleasure: Deleuze and Psychoanalysis (Short
Circuits), by Aaron Schuster, The MIT Press, 2016
(2) The Politics of Desire:
Foucault, Deleuze, and Psychoanalysis, ed. by Agustín Colombo, Edward F. McGushin, Geoffrey Pfeifer, Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers, 2022
(3) The Psychoanalysis of Sense:
Deleuze and the Lacanian School (Plateaus - New Directions in Deleuze Studies),
by Guillaume Collett, Edinburgh University
Press, 2016
(4) Deleuze and Psychology:
Philosophical Provocations to Psychological Practices (Concepts for Critical
Psychology), by Maria Nichterlein, John R. Morss, Routledge, 2016
(5) Derrida, Deleuze, Psychoanalysis (A
Critical Theory Institute Book), ed. by Gabriele Schwab, Columbia University
Press, 2007
(6) Lacan: Anti-Philosophy 3 (The
Seminars of Alain Badiou), by Alain Badiou, Kenneth Reinhard (Translator), Susan Spitzer (Translator), Columbia
University Press, 2018
(7) The Desire of Psychoanalysis:
Exercises in Lacanian Thinking (Diaeresis), by Gabriel Tupinambá, Slavoj Žižek (Foreword), Northwestern
University Press, 2021
(8) Worldlessness After Heidegger:
Phenomenology, Psychoanalysis, Deconstruction (Incitements), by Roland Végsö, Edinburgh University Press, 2020
(9) Derrida and the Legacy of
Psychoanalysis (Oxford Modern Languages and Literature Monographs), by Paul Earlie, Oxford University Press,
2021
(10) Fetishism, Psychoanalysis, and
Philosophy: The Iridescent Thing, by Alan Bass, Routledge; 2017
(11) A Search for Clarity: Science
and Philosophy in Lacan's Oeuvre (Diaeresis), by Jean-Claude Milner, Ed Pluth (Translator), Northwestern
University Press, 2020
(12) Poststructuralist Agency: The
Subject in Twentieth-Century Theory, by Gavin Rae, Edinburgh University Press,
2021
(13) Psychoanalysis and the Human Sciences (European Perspectives: A Series in Social Thought and Cultural Criticism), by Louis Althusser, Steven Rendall (Translator), Pascale Gillot (Foreword), Columbia University Press, 2016
星期二 (後結構主義和心理治療)
寒流，Omicron，院內群聚，社區傳播，皆已必然發生，
正常的書寫，像正常的人生，是可預期的，安排好行程的，比如說，幾點幾分，行房大便，都要準時發生，否則宇宙的秩序，就會脫序混亂，你要理解，這是失控，這是包子最害怕的事，
意思是說，後結構主義的書寫，比如說，The Logic of Sense (Deleuze，1969)，由三十四盤，下酒小菜，失去邏輯的，邏輯組成，席上，大家都醉了，因此都很有教養，沒有人，無禮問道，「他媽的，到底什麼時候上主菜」，
你要理解，後結構主義的書寫，就是「後結構主義的人生」，這是為什麼，我這麼喜歡德勒茲這個人的原因，意思是說，他到底寫了什麼，其實不重要，意思是說，他這麼愉快，你又何苦當真，
至此，你可以知道，後結構主義和心理治療，就是要在治療室裡，找到「兩個愛好德勒茲者」，
Monday, January 10, 2022
現況
今年上半年，盡量息緣，目前「不得已」，接一案，pro bono，進行中，至三月底，三月底，講 BCPSG vs. RP，六月底，講 Perversion，十二月，也許二講 BCPSG vs. RP，也許另講別的，上半年，按兵不動，維持移動，其實，接下來，最想講的是，後結構主義和心理治療，拼湊中，困難在，須熟讀德勒茲，才講得親切，此題，仿 Deleuze and Psychology：Philosophical Provocations to Psychological Practices (Maria Nichterlein，John R. Morss，2017)，正在等 From Deleuze and Guattari to Posthumanism: Philosophies of Immanence (ed. Christine Daigle，Terrance H. McDonald，2022-1-27)，關鍵詞，decentered subject，transcendence vs. immanence，event (ereignis)，becoming，你要理解，這是無所求的純粹，意思是說，洗碗工混口飯吃之餘，的平行旅程，平行是另一個世界 (life elsewhere) 的意思，
後結構主義和心理治療
起因是，對於 P-H-E (2006)，之外，之後，的可能性，的探索。
尤其是，後現象學 (post-phenomenology)，的可能性，是什麼？
我認為，這個探索，體現在，結構主義，以至後結構主義。
這個探索，對心理治療，有何啟發？ 這個探索，之後，心理治療，還能如往常一般嗎？
比如說，D&G 的 Schizoanalysis 之後，精神分析，還能如往常一般嗎？
有些例子，比如說，家族治療的敘事學派 (Narrative Therapy)，引述傅柯，來為失去聲音的人，找回聲音；Carlo Strenger，引述傅柯，促成，一個人，打造自己 (Designed Self)；Vincenzo Di Nicola，引述 Badiou，構建「事件精神醫學」 (Evental Psychiatry)。
存在治療圈內，Manu Bazzano，反傳統的觀點 (Counter-Traditional Perspectives) ；Del Loewenthal，後現代主義之後的 (after Postmodernism)，「後-存在主義」(Post-Existentialism)；但是這兩者，都沒有特意處理後結構主義 (Bazzano 有提到德勒茲)。
這個探索，對心理治療，有何影響？我想，擅長結構主義思維者，有小聰明，會喜歡玩耍能指，講的話會模仿禪宗公案，莫測高深；擅長後結構主義思維者，會喜歡 van life，casual and lean，坐在廢墟，點起紙菸，微笑不語。
我覺得，能指，給生活，帶來，象徵的趣味，我覺得，後結構者，邋遢落葉，更真實。
這個探索，為什麼必要？我想，起因是，P-H-E 是「沒有質疑」的，「順著」講的，這兩個特點，雖是其誠意，但也正是其盲點。
星期一的套餐行程
歸納一下，精神官能症 (Neurosis)，和變態 (Perversion)，兩種套餐行程，
前者，成長家庭完整，身邊的成年重要他者，沒有人缺席，依附關係完美，有教養，被栽培，個性穩重，不知衝動為何物，彬彬有禮，擅長壓抑，潛抑，自圓其說，自我節制，自我要求，自我懺悔，昇華，人生型態，基本上是，岩島成的超熟吐司，
後者，上述破碎，乃至皆無，無錨無碇，動力不穩，漂泊不定，十分悲慘，人生型態，基本上是，狂風中的落葉，
前者，屬內心衝突 (conflict) 為主，因為內化進去的超我 (superego) 嚴苛，所以，自己怎麼做，都覺得做得不夠好，
後者，屬結構缺損 (deficit) 為主，漫長內化過程，所需之穩定他者闕如，甚且提供內化材料的他者，本身就是漂泊不定者，比如說 Victor Serge 小時候，家裡客廳牆上，掛滿相識之陣亡的革命者遺照，你認為，他除了革命，還能內化進去什麼，
後者，並非無內心衝突 (conflict)，意思是說，deficit 可以合併 conflict，但你可以理解，如此 conflict，與前者的 conflict，是不同的調性，以前，我是這麼說的，更為生猛，更為狂烈，現在，我是這麼說的，當他內心能夠衝突，表示相較之前，他已比較不衝動，意思是說，deficit 者，內心能夠發生 conflict ，對他而言，是一種能力，是一種進步，
反之，前者的人生，是被裹得緊緊的，當他可以不乖，可以犯規，可以大笑，可以轉身，發現身後，沒有人再對自己，指指點點，簡單講，結構鬆動，可以自由，這對他而言，是一種能力，是一種進步，
治療者，作為與之，相應的他者，對於 Neurosis，應像大海，容許佻達，萌芽茁壯，對於 Perversion，應像沉默的山，促成相信，恆定是可能的，
然後，治療者，坐在陽光下，
Sunday, January 9, 2022
deltacron ～ Cyprus reportedly discovers a Covid variant that combines omicron and delta
https://youtu.be/AW1nt7UcNfI
老德，應該是郭文貴的人，他說栗戰書消失，是為包子去處理重要的事，他說他不反習，但是，聽起來，他似乎反共，也反得有點溫吞，我不確定他到底是誰，到底想幹甚麼，
https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/01/08/cyprus-reportedly-discovers-a-covid-variant-that-combines-omicron-and-delta.html?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16417348948807&_ct=1641734899558&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=%E4%BE%86%E6%BA%90%EF%BC%9A%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2022%2F01%2F08%2Fcyprus-reportedly-discovers-a-covid-variant-that-combines-omicron-and-delta.html
「後發優勢論」害了中國：追憶清華大學的一場討論
https://m-secretchina-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/m.secretchina.com/news/b5/2018/04/29/amp857130.html?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16417091721297&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=%E4%BE%86%E6%BA%90%EF%BC%9A%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.secretchina.com%2Fnews%2Fb5%2F2018%2F04%2F29%2F857130.html
See also
https://m.aisixiang.com/data/123734.html
共匪千人打炮計畫
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNTEDX5_faA
共匪千人計畫靈感來自千人斬一詞內容是一個人打一千炮或一千個人每個人打一炮共一千炮或一千個人看著你打一炮或一千個人每人各自打一千炮所以這個計畫本質上是一個龐大的 A 片計畫簡稱 A 計畫成龍拍的是 B 計畫
Hal Brands
https://www.aei.org/op-eds/china-has-started-making-the-same-mistakes-as-the-soviets/
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/24/china-great-power-united-states/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq4yFo7nS5o
Looking back, CCP started declining from 2008, and CCP in decline is more dangerous for the free world, in other words, the politically correct logic is, keep the bastard well fed, otherwise it will bite you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/08/china-rise-vs-authoritarian-decline/
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Comment/Will-China-overtake-the-West-or-has-it-started-to-decline
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/24/china-great-power-united-states/
https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/evergrande-a-harbinger-of-chinas-decline/
https://www-wsj-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/russia-and-china-dangerous-population-decline-indo-pacific-pivot-research-development-taiwan-ukraine-11639497466?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16417004552226&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=%E4%BE%86%E6%BA%90%EF%BC%9A%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Frussia-and-china-dangerous-population-decline-indo-pacific-pivot-research-development-taiwan-ukraine-11639497466
星期天
(一)
Sergio Benvenuto 七講，有點陽光，宋永毅說，被中共洗腦者，須從另一系統，才能反思覺醒，這句話，符合批判思惟的策略，面對系統，須藉系統，方可抗衡之，多年前，林毓生在芝大，與 Paul Ricoeur 有一對話，請教 Ricoeur 如何讀精神分析，Ricoeur 說，精神分析是一自圓其說的系統，唯有從另一系統入，方可破解之，意思是說，老宋和 Ricoeur，講的是同一件事，這件事，就是，你要學兩種語言 （bilingual)，才能思考，當然，如果你能學三種以上，會更有趣，
意思是說，思想，和覺醒，發生在，「兩個系統，之間的對話」，
這符合，互為主體的精神，也符合，批判的精神，
意思是說，兩個系統，之間的對話，可以是友善的，也可以是戰鬥的，
老宋說，他赴美多年，之後，才能擺脫，自幼，卅年，第一世，被共匪洗腦的禁錮，思考才能解放，才能逐漸形成，對中共，對毛，對文革，的歷史判斷，
而且，他說，覺醒意識的萌芽，在遭受迫害的親身經歷，他文革期間，被羈押五年半，1999 年回中國收集資料，又被關半年，
以上，說明，中國人，的覺醒，的困難，
(二)
宋永毅 （2021），詳細紀錄，毛澤東把玩膩的，成千上萬的女人，送給手下「繼續玩」，這件事，是共匪的下半身的潛規則，比如說，習近平和王岐山，也一起玩過「村花小芳」，你要理解，這件事，有一種「為人民的 pussy 服務」的莊嚴的趣味，
(三)
好幾個人都說，栗戰書如果真出事，表示宮廷政變加劇，首先你要理解，每個人，都有被別人捏著的小辮子，就像當年，李登輝手上，捏著宋楚瑜的興票案，關鍵是，怎麼樣的小辮子，才是可以要命的，目前傳出的消息是，是王岐山交的材料，意思是說，一齣戲，搞了包子兩個重臣，我相信，此刻，包子一定很火，
(四)
中國人只有想像，可以耍一點象徵，但沒有能耐真實，古代中國讀書人，尤其儒家，是活在想像的世界，道家正是想逃離，那個儒家的世界，佛家不是中國貨，所以他們的形上世界，超過了中國人的想像，意思是說，遂比較真實，京都學派，沒有出家，抓著「空無」不放手，有點像抓著「一隻鳥」，以為那就是「鳥」，意思是說，真正的出家師父，不會抓著鳥，他們渾身上下，裡裡外外，就是「那隻鳥」，意思是說，這是了不得的鳥「事」(事就是事件)，你要肅然起敬，
Saturday, January 8, 2022
George Orwell’s ‘1984’ Made Into a Graphic Novel
https://www.nspirement.com/2022/01/08/1984-made-into-graphic-novel.html?utm_source=Nspirement&utm_campaign=7d5d642f8c-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0ece06508b-7d5d642f8c-125910857
16 Blocks (2006)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16_Blocks (accessible via myvideo)
This is the last great movie by Bruce Willis. Appropriately, fifty something, loser, alcoholic, divorced, bad leg, dyspnea on exertion, lost everything, except one final event, to right his life, for the one final time, guy. And this one happened to be the final work by Richard Donner, who was 76 that year.
毛澤東和文化大革命：政治心理與文化基因的新闡釋 (宋永毅，2021-10-28)
https://www.books.com.tw/products/0010906060 (ebook ordered 2022-1-8)
https://youtu.be/AFUB36YIBNk
星期六 (perversion)
依照 Sergio Benevento (2022) 的說法，除了在司法精神醫療情境，純粹的 perversion 十分罕見，這意謂著，最嚴重的，才是「純種」。在普通臨床情境，我們見到的，是 neurosis 和 perversion，混在一起的「雜種」(雜並無貶意)，有點像，既然有「精神官能症人格特質」 (neurotic trait)，遂也有「變態人格特質」 (perversion trait)，意思是說，變態是「每個人心裡暗藏的種子」，有點像，「邊緣性人格特質」 (borderline trait)，也是「每個人心裡暗藏的種子」。
意思是說，最安全的地方，你才能見到，最危險的猛獸。那個地方，就是監獄，急性精神病房，或兩者雜在一起的，司法精神病房。
猛獸，的意思，就是「人性的，太人性的：一本獻給自由精神的書」
(Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits，Friedrich Nietzsche，1878)。意思是說，猛獸，就是「每個人心裡暗藏的種子」。
意思是說，你敢跟鄭捷 (1993-2016)，關在同一個囚房，還安睡得了，你就可能，可以治療猛獸。
去年十一月，台灣精神醫學會年會，聽到一場倫理學分的，司法精神醫學研討會，提到設立司法精神病房，前提是，須法務部提供充份安全戒護，意思是說，這樣才安全，這樣才可行。其實，這樣還是不安全，不可行，因為相處日久，他知道你是誰，他知道你的評估，決定了他會被關多久。這裡講的，還只是一般精神醫療，並非心理治療，後者的治療關係，會恐怖複雜到，你完全無法招架。
Sergio Benevento (2022) Chapter 15: Listening to Perversion, in Lacanian Psychoanalysis in Practice: Insights from Fourteen Psychoanalysts, ed. Diego Busiol, Routledge, pp. 225-239
Friday, January 7, 2022
Sergio Benvenuto (b 1948)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergio_Benvenuto
https://fortnightlyreview.co.uk/2017/02/what-are-perversions/
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00332828.2018.1495532
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/666043/pdf
(Sergio Benvenuto, 2016, book review)
https://www.journal-psychoanalysis.eu/book-review-of-conversations-with-lacan-by-sergio-benvenuto/
(Sergio Benvenuto, 2020, book review)
Zizek: Paper Revolutionary: A Franciscan Response (Marko Zlomislic, 2018)
https://www.amazon.com/Marko-Zlomisli%C4%87-ebook/dp/B07G21YWYY/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=22N9XMU38Y7CR&keywords=paper+zizek+revolutionary&qid=1641520151&sprefix=paper+zizrk+revolutionary%2Caps%2C311&sr=8-1 (accessible via scribd)
In this new book, Marko Zlomislić argues that Slavoj Žižek's work does not contain any sort of radical emancipatory project, especially as it passes through the ideology of communism and Lacanian psychoanalysis. The evidence for the failure of communism is vast and includes the more than six hundred mass graves recently located in Žižek's homeland of Slovenia. Zlomislić demonstrates that the way out of the capitalist dilemma is not a repetition of communism but a return to the late medieval notion of haecceity or "individual thisness" that was rejected by modernity. Haecceity, or the indescribable and indefinite here and now of the person, shows that the late medieval Franciscans were already "postmodernists." It is no wonder that the totalitarianism of the modernist Hegel is embraced by thinkers such as Žižek, Badiou, Hardt, Negri, and Laclau and was already rejected by Leibnitz, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Levinas, Deleuze, and Derrida. This important book shows that Žižek's work must be rejected because it does not uphold the dignity, worth, and uniqueness of the person.
6：26 AM
昨天下午門診，C 君說，他等一下要去全家福買鞋，C 君就是，那個有為的，思覺失調，十六歲發病，之後再也沒有回過家，目前廿四歲，自己養自己，住在康家，做清潔工，每月薪水，二萬四千元，四年，存了十四萬，上次康家有人離職，疑似捲病人款，他因而報警，警察吃案不受裡，在門診跟我說起此事，我請社工師去電康家，下一次門診，他說他因此被康家責備，怎麼跟外人說，的那個 C 君，我們遂互祝新年快樂，你要理解，在 C 君身上，你看到台灣的堅強和希望，
德勒茲的書寫策略，是系列 (series)，每段的篇幅比 aphorism 長，而且是一串，有點像葡萄，或香蕉，或螞蚱，七八個系列，串在一起，遂成一本百來頁的書，更用力的話，數個系列當成一個 part，數個 parts ，串在一起，遂成系列的系列，這就是有名的千高原，意思是說，有名的「百果山」，天上飛的、地上跑的、水裡游的、草窠里蹦的，遂什麼名堂都有，不過你要理解，三元路大業路口，那家百果山，已經歇業，搬到大竹，
我們思考滅共的時候，通常會說，共匪數位極權，全方位，無死角覆蓋，維穩極強，無孔不入，人民無處可逃，意思是說，共匪把人民當畜牲，予取予求，人民只能任匪宰割，意思是說，只能絕望，上述，是把人民當成，無行為能力者，無思考能力者，無覺醒能力者，簡單講，把人民當成，被禁治產，被監護宣告者，你要理解，這個絕望，恰恰就是共匪的目的，意思是說，「殺一個共匪夠本，殺兩個共匪賺到」，這是當年東歐猶太人，匿藏山林，「活得跟畜牲一樣，死得跟人一樣」，反納粹的時候說的，
洗碗餬口之餘，讀點沒有用的書，想點沒有用的事，非到萬不得已，絕不洗澡，我相信德勒茲，當年也是如此，度過他的一生，
Thursday, January 6, 2022
【書齋夜話】2022是好的轉折，還是更深的陷阱？關鍵在於中國人民願不願意知道習近平貪了多少萬億美金
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHzV4MXD9f8&t=309s
廣州吊死勞改犯事件 (1967年8月)
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B9%BF%E5%B7%9E%E5%90%8A%E5%8A%B3%E6%94%B9%E7%8A%AF%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHzV4MXD9f8&t=309s
From economic miracle to mirage – will China’s GDP ever overtake the US ? (George Magnus, 2021-12-28)
https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2021/dec/28/from-economic-miracle-to-mirage-will-chinas-gdp-ever-overtake-the-us?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16414741806316&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=%E4%BE%86%E6%BA%90%EF%BC%9A%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fbusiness%2F2021%2Fdec%2F28%2Ffrom-economic-miracle-to-mirage-will-chinas-gdp-ever-overtake-the-us
https://youtu.be/gHzV4MXD9f8
9：12 AM
語言文字，頂多只能 S (symbolic)，若能在罕見的瞬間，一窺 R (real)，已是其極致，
意思是說，在那裡，你無法久留，
比如說，阿甘從東到西，跑了數千英里，到了太平洋邊就折返， 意思是說，阿甘並沒有，從此住在海邊，
意思是說，文本是有限的，意思是說，事件 (event) 的發生，在那個邊界，
一般說法，情緒 (affect) 是心理治療的明燈，智者說，跟著情緒走 (follow the affect)，你就不會迷路，
拉岡桑，講過那些情緒，除了焦慮以外，拉岡桑，怎麼看待情緒，比如說，憂鬱，
你要理解，拉岡桑，情願被逐出 IPA，也不願低頭，這就是事件，Kohut 也發生過類似情節，這兩個例子，都是五十六十間，意思是說，悲劇是中年的事，意思是說，中年以前，只能想像，中年以後，已經來不及發生，或發生了，也沒有用，
這是，我先前說過，Jack Reacher，的困境，意思是說，你無法想像，五十以後，還在四界流浪的傑克，
十六，就是，洒家放你不下，直送兄弟到滄州，多走的那一英里路，意思是說，只是療傷，不是重生，意思是說，我還不了，也不打算還，任何人，一個童年，
拉岡桑，講過移情，拉岡桑，有沒有講過，反移情，
拉岡桑，有沒有，講過失敗的例子，比如說，病人自殺，
至此，你可以理解，我的意思是說，拉岡桑，必須重寫，改寫，精神分析，意思是說，重蓋，另蓋，一棟樓 (edifice)，
昨天，家樂福，看到一條睡袋，質地似棉，考慮，也許，IARPP 續 membership，
數本奇書，Joyce 的 Finnegans wake，Bion 晚年三冊回憶錄，拉岡桑的 Ecrits，D&G 的千高原，
你要理解，大國外交，就是小人外交，意思是說，大國才配小人，意思是說，永遠不要相信，宣稱「比生命大的」 (larger than life)，比如說，日本 A 片的巨根，射得像消防栓的水柱，意思是說，那是撲滅森林大火的水，「十分驚人可笑」，下次，你見到王毅趙立堅華春瑩汪文斌噴水，就知道我的意思，
發現，Sergio Benevento，Msssimo Recalcati，很高興，
Wednesday, January 5, 2022
11：31 PM
被瑣碎窒息，被匪諜搞破壞，傍晚，塞車在匝道，的時候，我歸納，台灣人生的兩個主題，前者，是為生活奔波，需要超越，後者，是台灣的命運，需要判準，
夫復何求，不須在意，安安靜靜，混口飯吃，而已，
5：11 AM (jouissance)
生活的改變，即，關心的信息的重心的轉移，即，時間的比重的板塊的移動，關鍵是，你要知足，要運動，要空下來，要無事，要慢，要偶爾剪指甲，不要洗澡，不要舔共，可以舔別的，如果你真的那麼喜歡舔，至於舔完要不要刷牙，你可以自己決定，我尊重你的口腔的決定，
至此，你可以理解，我無法正經，
RSI
R ～ 哲學
S ～ 藝術
I ～ 心理學
我們，對「這個世界」的，所謂理解，往往是順著既有路徑，既有習性的，枝節的，片斷的，誤解，意思是說，每次迷路，都是「發現」一個新的角落，新的世界，新的視野，的機會，其實，「它一直都在那裡」，只是，你視而不見，聽而不聞，覽而不思，
你要理解，當年，李登輝用郝柏村，陳水扁用唐飛，當行政院長，是因為他們當時，掌握不了軍方，你要理解，軍方是一個幫派性格，山頭性格，極強，的利益集團，講究輩分分贓，謀略實力，觀察解放軍，亦須依此原則，
Perversion 的本質，就是 narcissism，意思是說， 不是 borderline，所以，題目，「變態和自戀的比較研究」，你可以說，變態是自戀者的娛樂，當然，玩過頭了，像 Sade 當年，是會要命的，你必須想像，一般自戀者，是暗中羨慕 Sade 的，
自戀，就是把自己，看得太重要，就是 hubris ，距離邪惡，只有半步，尤其是感覺受辱，因而睚眥必報的時候，意思是說，narcissistic rage ，就是邪惡，當然，你可以說，這是次生的 (secondary) 邪惡，另外還有原生的 (primary) 邪惡，原生就是與生俱有，我想，你不妨把原生的那種，當成種籽，意思是說，邪惡是人性的可能性之一，你可以讓它茁壯，因而決定你，也可以不讓它茁壯，因而它決定不了你，意思是說，原生次生，是交混在一起的，端看，你是誰，你的教養，你的見識，你的努力，你的同理，你的判斷，你的計較與否，你的節制，你的畢竟不忍，你的寬恕，你的原諒，你的不願放棄，善的最終的可能，
Perversion 的起因，是父親功能 (paternal function) 不彰，pervert 有朝一日，成為父親，他會是，能夠是，怎麼樣的父親，這是一個，有趣的，跨代影響 (transgenerational transmission) 的問題，
Jouissance，就是 drive itself ，所以與匱乏無關，所以不是欲望，拉岡桑處理的是 subject ，和主體如何忠實於他的驅力，Kohut 在過世前數月，接受 Charles Strozier 訪談，結集成「自體心理學和人文學」一書，其中有一段話，回答 Strozier 提問，說明自體和驅力的關係，意思是說，where it is ，there shall I be ，當一個人的自體健康，請注意，健康不是平靜的意思，他，就擁有他自己的驅力，他就可以活出他自己的驅力，反之，當一個人的自體不健康，他就會有崩解的焦慮 （disintegration anxiety)，和隨之而來的崩解的產物 （disintegration produc)，他就會為其驅力所使喚，而不得不為之，請問，Kohut 的說法，和拉岡桑，差別何在，
為驅力所使的生命，是自然的生命，那個地方，本無善惡，或超越了善惡，比如說，草原上獅子捕捉羚羊，這是獅子的本性，非獅子的邪惡殘暴，
但是，Kohut 和拉岡桑，都沒有回答一個問題，那就是，如果這個，個人的驅力，的實現，會造成另一個人，另一個生命，的傷害，那怎麼辦，意思是說，酣暢的，忠實於驅力，隱含倫理的兩難 （ethical dilemma），拉岡桑第七研討班，精神分析的倫理 （The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: The Ethics of Psychoanalysis (Book VII，1997），須查閱，Why It Is Good to Be Good: Ethics, Kohut's Self Psychology, and Modern Society (John H. Riker，2010)，Exploring the Life of the Soul: Philosophical Reflections on Psychoanalysis and Self Psychology （John H. Riker，2017)，亦須重讀，克萊茵講的 guilt and reparation，與此亦有關，簡單講，這個倫理的兩難，就是救贖的不可及，意思是說，有些過錯，你是終其一生，無法彌補的，
Cf.
The Jouissance Principle： Kant, Sade and Lacan on the Ethical Functioning of the Unconscious （Christian Fierens，2022）
https://www.proquest.com/openview/67c90fd37ddbc5c095a334146fb9c21d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=105839
Tuesday, January 4, 2022
一月四日
今天，共匪規定，西安清零，意思是說，不清則滅，意思是說，滅則清，滅則零，
Bruce Fink (1997) ，第九章，你要理解，欲望 (desire)，是，你「必須擁有」(have to own)，不是，你「需要用到」 (need to use)，所以，是你「沒有，但想要有」，所以，是你「心裡缺少」(lack)，
而，jouissance，是你「承受不起」(unbearable) 的欲望，意思是說，是必須擁有，但一旦擁有，正確的說，是「被它擁有」，會要你命的欲望，意思是說，就是帶來極大愉悅，超過愉悅的閾值，以致痛苦的，死亡本能，就是第四騎士，pale horse rider，就是克林伊斯威特，起碼是年輕的他，
聽說，jouissance，才是真實，才夠真實，這個蠱惑，說明，一般的欲望，不過是，自衛機轉，不過是，是讓你分心，以避免你毀滅的贗品 (simulacra)，
意思是說，你需要症狀，才能苟活，而，le Sinthome，才是 jouissance，才是玩真的的人生，
五包菸，三加二，
陽光，燦然，
I don't mind moving around, I don't mind being still either.
精神分析，主觀性極強，無法驗誤，本質上屬人文學，文人相輕，語不驚人死不休，非偏執，不足以成其為一說，精神分析史，遂由此偏執，和其對立面，被激起之另一偏執，輪番出現，各領風騷，的辯證，決定其軌跡，
剛剛想到，精神分析史，能以上述方式理解，是因為，它是一個封閉的學科，
哲學史，理應，門關不住，起碼，「這是我們希望」，門關不住的開放系統，可否以辯證理解之，
我剛剛說，這是我們希望，意思是說，「我們常常失望」，意思是說，哲學史，往往也是封閉系統，是一鍋，千年火侯，捨不得丟的湯頭，
當然，據說，那鍋湯，熬的是，永恆無解的 (perennial) 難題，比如說，人從哪裡來，要到哪裡去，人活著的意義是什麼，你怎麼確定，你以為的知道，是真的知道，為什麼要善，為什麼不要作惡，面對共匪淫威，屈從下跪後，你怎麼可能，繼續做人，
辯證帶來張力，這是其可貴，也是其弔詭之處，封閉系統的辯證，是獨斷的，扼殺生命的辯證，開放系統的辯證，是容許生命，繼續森羅，萬象湧現的辯證，前者是歷史的常態，意思是說，人類歷史，基本教義，血腥斑斑，乏善可陳，後者，對於辯證，珍惜之，但不執著，意思是說，生命的可能性，不囿於思考所賴以為之的辯證，意思是說，有本事舉起，你就要有本事放下，比如說，Ronald Fairbairn (1889~1964)，用十幾個命題，顛覆了古典精神分析，開啟了客體關係理論，做完這件了不得的大事之後，繼續種花，但他最自豪的，不是前者，而是曾得愛丁堡園藝獎，意思是說，他真的，他媽的，很會種花，2021，我種了一年辣椒，才知道，很奇妙，但真的，他媽的，蟲子很多，很不好照顧，
Monday, January 3, 2022
5：47 AM
昨天看到一段話，凱因斯九十年前就說 (The Economic Prospects of Our Grandchildren, Keynes, 1930) (Accelerate, Robin Mackay, Armen Avanessian, 2014, p. 354)，未來的人類，每個人每天，只需要工作三小時，你要理解，更新世的人類，早就是，每個人每天，只需要工作三小時，
意思是說，「三」，是一個合理的人生的數字，比如說，佟麗婭，是包子的，小「三」，
周三，家樂福，舊街場，牛奶，
一月，十八行，16 + 2 = 18 ，一千八百公里，
後結構主義和心理治療，有點進展 (Ian James, 2012)
Perversion (Bruce Fink, 1997, Chap 9) ，也有點進展，
BCPSG (2010)，八篇論文，已 PEP 檢索，亦有點進展，
你要覺悟，以上，就是，剩餘價值 (surplus value)，意思是說，人生的意義，是奔波餬口之外，附帶多餘的，那一點甚麼，
1/2，IAPSP，renew membership，
你要理解，從宏觀經濟的數字，你讀不出，人生的真實血淚，
十六，練習，打通任督二脈，還有，十二，
為什麼，bushcrafter，很少喝水，
洗澡，既然，新年，
題目，後結構主義和心理治療，Cf. Del Loewenthal，雖然，他想的可能限於存在治療，
看到生命，才看到希望，
Sunday, January 2, 2022
Nanjing Massacre Graphic Video Upsets HK primary school Students
https://www.nspirement.com/2022/01/02/graphic-video-nanjing-massacre.html?utm_source=Nspirement&utm_campaign=304fe6517d-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0ece06508b-304fe6517d-125910857
這個世界
最重要的是，如何促成系統崩潰，
系統，註定會，自我繁衍，自我茁壯，自我僵化，
意思是說，所有系統，都註定，會變成封閉系統，
除非，制度設計上，讓它定期洗牌，換人作莊，
中國人，黑格爾說過，沒有歷史，只有永恆的下跪，重複跟不同的皇帝下跪，
下跪的人，你認為，還有主體性，還配為人嗎，
一般症狀，不會傷筋動骨，反而會讓系統，自我調節，因而延緩，預防，其崩潰的發生，
所以，
我們需要的是，要命的，燎原的，症狀，
我們需要的是，多重器官衰竭，
我們需要的是，系統的自我調節失靈，
然後，
我們需要的是，下跪的人，站起來，
拿起磚頭，
BCPSG vs RP
Magid, B., Fosshage, J. & Shane, E. (2021) The Emerging Paradigm of Relational Self Psychology: An Historical Perspective. Psychoanalysis, Self, and Context 16:1-23
https://www.relationalimplicit.com/knowing/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7451336/
From the Great Resignation to Lying Flat, Workers Are Opting Out
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-12-07/why-people-are-quitting-jobs-and-protesting-work-life-from-the-u-s-to-china
客觀的存在
樓下數百公尺外，對面街角，那家 7/11，四天前開業，「暗黑荒野，遂點起永恆的燈火」，你要理解，那就是，客觀的存在，我的意思是說，此刻，我所在五樓的微弱燈光，相對於，那個街角的通明燈火，
治療者，與這個世界的關係，發生的困難是，主觀大於客觀，意思是說，治療者，要學習，把自己，和他者，當成，客觀的存在，
工具理性，一路到黑者，不管是，資本主義，還是，共產主義，與這個世界，的關係，只有客觀，不容主觀，比如說，習近平新年講話，說民之所苦，常在包子心，所以，鄭州淹死數十萬人，他去西藏，此刻，西安封城哀嚎，他在喝茅台，
後結構主義及其後
4：35 AM，後結構主義，之後，是什麼，
(1) Why There Is No Poststructuralism in France: The Making of an Intellectual Generation, Johannes Angermüller, Bloomsbury Academic, 2015
(2) Twentieth-Century French Philosophy: Key Themes and Thinkers, Alan D. Schrift, Wiley-Blackwell, 2008
(3) Poststructuralism and Critical Theory's Second Generation (The History of Continental Philosophy Book 6), ed. Alan D. Schrift, Routledge, 2013
(4) After Poststructuralism: Transitions and Transformations (The History of Continental Philosophy 7), ed. Rosi Braidotti, Routledge, 2013
(5) Emerging Trends in Continental Philosophy (The History of Continental Philosophy 8), ed. Todd May, Routledge, 2013
(6) Post-Continental Philosophy: An Outline (Transversals: New Directions in Philosophy), John Mullarkey, Continuum, 2007
John Mullarkey’s Post-Continental Philosophy: An Outline (Mullarkey 2006) is without doubt the most ambitious and fully developed attempt that has been made to date to argue for a paradigm break within the development of contemporary French thought. Post-Continental Philosophy brings together four philosophers, two of whom are also discussed in this book. They are Gilles Deleuze, Michel Henry (1922-2002), Alain Badiou and François Laruelle. As Mullarkey himself points out at the very beginning of the introduction, his work does not address something that is, or which has already occurred, but rather something that ‘is unfolding, an event in the making’ (Mullarkey 2006: 1). More precisely, the book takes as its premise the claim that a certain moment in the ongoing development of French thought might be accorded the status of an ‘event’. The moment he identifies is 1988, a year which sees the publication in French of important texts by each of the philosophers he discusses: Deleuze’s The Fold (Deleuze 2006), Badiou’s Being and Event (Badiou 1988; 2005b), Henry’s Voir l’invisible [Seeing the Invisible] (Henry 2009), and an important discussion between Laruelle and Derrida on the possibility of a science of philosophy (Mullarkey 2006: 11). The event that he identifies is a change in philosophical thought which is centred on the question of immanence. More precisely this ‘event’ marks an attempt by philosophy to articulate ‘an embrace of absolute immanence over transcendence . . . to make immanence supervene on transcendence’ (Mullarkey 2006: 1). Post-Continental Philosophy argues, both persuasively and powerfully, that this attempted embrace of immanence leads to a realignment of French thought with naturalism and with the life sciences, with mathematics and with the reaffirmation of ‘philosophy as a worldly and materialist thinking’ (Mullarkey 2006: 2 ). (Ian James, 2014, p. 4-5)
(7) The New French Philosophy, Ian James, Polity, 2014
In each case, albeit in different ways, the emergence of the 'new' or the possibility of change or transformation can be understood as an 'erosion from the outside', as an exposure to an instance of excess, an excess over the finite limits of conceptual or categorical determination. (Ian James, 2014, p. 3)
Cf. Ferenczi vs. R.N.
The argument of this book is that, beginning in the 1970s, the French philosophers discussed all, in different but decisive ways, making a break from the thought of the preceding generation. The difficulty in making such an argument is that attention to the difference and specificity of each thinker must be balanced with what they might, however loosely, share. The danger, of course, will be that quite divergent developments of thought will be assimilated to a unified paradigm which in fact blurs or misrepresents the specificity of each
thinker.
A very preliminary rehearsal of this book’s argument might run as follows: in different and sometimes directly opposing ways, and beginning in the 1970s, the philosophers treated in this book explicitly distance themselves from the linguistic paradigm which informed much of what has gone under the name of structuralism and poststructuralism and which can be associated with diverse terms: with the order of signifiers, signifieds and of the symbolic, or with the categories of discourse, text, and writing (or arche-writing). They do so in the name of a systematic attempt to radically rethink questions of materiality and the concrete, together with questions of worldliness, shared embodied existence and sensible-intelligible experience. They can all be said to rethink the status of the ‘real’, of worldly appearance, or to re-engage in new and highly original ways with the question of ontology. (ibid, p. 4)
This book differs from Mullarkey insofar as it takes the idea of a break from the linguistic, textual or discursive paradigm of (post-) structuralism as its initial premise and locates the beginnings of this break in the 1970s.6 The broad shift towards a thinking of immanence is certainly a result of this, but not all the thinkers discussed here can easily be said to be thinkers of radical or absolute immanence (at least not to the same degree) and, as will become clear, a range of other important philosophical shifts can be seen to follow on from this break: a re-engagement with the question of ontology as has already been mentioned, but also a sustained renewal with the question of the subject and of subjectivity, with questions of community, politics and political change, and with questions relating to the aesthetic and aesthetics. Within the logic of the break from structuralism and/or post-structuralism, the thought of both Deleuze and Henry arguably offer indispensable resources to some of the thinkers treated here (e.g. the influence of Deleuze and Henry on Laruelle or of Henry in particular on Marion).7 To this extent, it could be argued that they represent an important, and specifically French, trajectory of thought which can be traced from Bergson. (ibid, pp. 5-6)
... what this brief survey of Mullarkey’s and Hallward’s accounts shows is the extent to which any attempt to characterize ‘French philosophy today’ and to articulate what is or is not ‘new’ within this tradition is itself a philosophical argument which entails philosophical decisions and judgements. (ibid, p. 7)
As has been indicated, the principal argument of this book is that, despite their obvious differences from each other and despite the fact that this remains a field defined by major lines of conflict, argument and polemical opposition, all the thinkers treated have come to reaffirm what one might call the ‘materiality of the real’ in the wake of the preceding generation’s focus on language and signification. (ibid, p. 7)
What links all the thinkers who have been included here is a specific set of continuities and discontinuities with the work of the preceding generation of philosophers. It is on the basis of continuity (marks of influence, continued concerns, instances of repetition) and of discontinuity (specific gestures of critical distance, differentiation, and ruptures or breaks) with the generation of Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida and Lyotard that this study identifies something which could be called the ‘New French Philosophy’. (ibid, p. 8)
The fact that an affirmation of materialism can be identified across all the thinkers discussed here and aligned in each instance with an unambiguous break with or distancing from a linguistic, structuralist, textualist or discursive paradigm is striking. (ibid, p. 12)
What might be even more striking in relation to the polemics of Badiou, Rancière, Nancy and Laruelle in the 1970s is that the questions of materialism and materiality were, of course, already central to the (post-)structuralism they sought to repudiate. (ibid, p. 12)
Such a linguistic materialism is perceived by all the thinkers here to be unable to account for a more fundamental materiality: of givenness in the auto-affection of the flesh (Marion), of sense of and embodied existence (Nancy), of technical prosthetics and their constitution of a temporal world (Stiegler), of plasticity (Malabou), of the sensible and its distribution (Rancière), of immanent inconsistent multiplicity (Badiou) and, finally, of the absolute immanence of the One (Laruelle).
The call for a new materialism articulated in the thought of the seven philosophers treated in this book is developed in different ways by each. (ibid, p. 12)
Linking many of these philosophical innovations is also a sustained attempt to re-engage with the question of the subject and to resituate something which might still be called subjectivity within a presymbolic/linguistic and material dimension. All of these philosophers can be said to engage in diverse ways with the question posed by Jean-Luc Nancy namely, ‘Who comes after the subject?’ (Nancy 1991f). (ibid, p. 13)
It may also be that if, in the wake of the Cold War, the orthodoxies of liberal capitalism have enjoyed a significant degree of global hegemony, then our future crises (political, economic, environmental) are likely to be crises of these ideological and philosophical orthodoxies as well as of the political forms they represent.
In light of this, it could be said that the task of philosophical renewal taken up by the seven thinkers presented here is as much orientated towards the future as it is predicated on a logic of continuity and discontinuity with the past. Tiiey might all be united by a shared sense that the destruction or deconstruction of metaphysics, subjectivity, or traditional notions of being, truth and knowledge, is a necessary (and unfinished) but certainly not sufficient gesture to meet the demands of contemporary thinking. (ibid, p. 14)
但是 你要理解 這七個人 包括信奉毛左的那個傻逼Badiou 都沒有生活在共產極權暴政下 意思是說 西方新左 是可恥戲論 共匪甚至不用收買他們 他們就舔個不停
The French philosophies presented here are highly ambitious in their attempt to renew the claims, possibilities and transformative power of philosophical thinking. The renewal of philosophical thinking, however, can only be achieved in the transformation of the techniques of thought itself. (ibid, p. 16)
It might be concluded, then, that the break from the linguistic
paradigm and the categories of discourse, text and writing has led
these French philosophers to renew the practice and techniques of
philosophy. This renewal perhaps finds its most significant expression
in the realignment of philosophy with technological and scientific
paradigms, anthropological, neuroscientific, mathematical or that of
‘science’ conceived in more general structural terms (Laruelle).1 (ibid, p. 187)
If it is possible to speak of the ‘New French Philosophy’, then this may
be so only insofar as philosophy itself has sought to radically renew
itself in the wake of the anti-foundationalism of post-structuralism,
postmodernism and deconstruction. All these philosophies seek in
various ways to move beyond the anti-foundationalist or deconstructive
moment and do so in the name of what might be called the
groundless or non-foundational ground of the real, conceived variably
as givenness, sense, technicity, plasticity, the sensible, the multiple
or the One. (ibid, p. 187)
This variably configured real can perhaps be called a
ground, but not in the sense of providing any solid foundation or
bedrock to thought and knowledge. Rather, as Laruelle might put it,
it is a matter of leaving the illusory ground of metaphysical foundations
in favour of ‘a real base - the only real base’, that of the real
itself. The question then is not exactly one of the philosophical determination
of the real in the service of a foundational gesture. Rather,
it becomes a question of how thought may best position itself up
against, approach or ‘reach’ the real. (ibid, pp. 187-188)
It is a question of what renewed technique of thought might best accomplish this repositioning of, or approach to, the real. The task of thought which these philosophers take up, and the demand of thought to which they respond, is one of thinking material immanence and worldly, shared existence. They do so by way of techniques which affirm themselves as resolutely material. Only on this basis can philosophy renew itself and move beyond the closure of the metaphysics of the past to the opening of new forms in the future. (ibid, p. 188)
你要理解 物優先於心 意思是說 這個世界 優先於你的心 意思是說 外優先於內 意思是說 事件優先於反思 意思是說 你註定永遠遲到 但是 請你不要遲到太久 至於 有沒有可能 你可以預見 明天的世界 這件事很罕見 你可以自許 但不要強求 極可能你做不到 雖然尼采和卡夫卡和德勒茲曾經做到 意思是說 我們通常的命運 是渾然不覺的遲到者而已 你能夠努力 要努力的是 去觀察 去接觸 去疑惑 去試著理解 (make sense of) 這個世界 最重要的是 讓這個世界穿透你 我先前說過 再看你能剩下甚麼 那剩下的 就是你的再出發點 正常情況下 剩下不多 意思是說 一無所有 是你的再出發點
依此 後結構主義 和心理治療 要講的是 拆掉龍天樓 行走荒野 找到 你的路 找到 家 找到 你在歷史中的 和自然中的 家
(8) French Philosophy Today: New Figures of the Human in Badiou, Meillassoux, Malabou, Serres and Latour, Christopher Watkin, Edinburgh University Press, 2016
What we are witnessing in French thought today is a series of returns to the human after the human. (Watkin, 2016, p. 4)
Watkin 不喜後人類，意思是說，當代法國哲學，不喜，也不需，後人類，意思是說，他們以為人類，玩得起 AI 和 Singularity，他們顯然，沒有看過 Blade Runner 1982 / 2049，你要理解，後人類，不是後人類哲學，是後人類「世界」，意思是說，那個世界，已經沒有人了，我先前說過，人文學，如值其名 (worth its salt)，必與這個世界，足夠相應，面對，明天，後天，即將發生的，後人類世界，我問你，人文學，拿什麼，相應，
Saturday, January 1, 2022
一月一日
人文學，與這個世界，「足夠相應」，是其存在的理由 (Raison D'être)，和意義所在，意思是說，不足夠相應，就無法感人，就是自欺欺人，就是可恥戲論，
依此，後結構主義，是否，與這個世界，足夠相應，
後結構主義之後的哲學，能否，與這個世界，足夠相應，比如說，Francoise Laruelle 的 non philosophy，
精神分析，諸家理論，能否，與這個世界，足夠相應，比如說，拉岡桑，自體心理學，克萊茵學派，中間獨立學派，關係學派，
首先，你要理解，這個世界，是指什麼，
三個重災區，一是，新自由主義的廢墟，一是，中共超限邪惡滲透侵略，一是，科技加速奔向浩劫 (Apocalypse)，
你告訴我，哪一個，人文學，學門，作者，能與這個世界，足夠相應，
After Work: The Fight for Free Time (2023)
https://www.amazon.co.uk/After-Work-Fight-Free-Time/dp/1786633078
ACCELERATE MANIFESTO for an Accelerationist Politics (Alex Williams, Nick Srnicek, 2013)
https://criticallegalthinking.com/2013/05/14/accelerate-manifesto-for-an-accelerationist-politics/
Michel Henry (1922~2002)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Henry
- Le fils du roi (The Son of the King): A story of life locked up in a psychiatric hospital and confronted by the rationality of psychiatrists.
一月一日
空，空下來，後者，不等於，前者，前者，是，一無所有，後者，以為，「有」空，可言，意思是說，非，一無所有，遂，一無所知，對於，空，空，空下來，時間，空間，物，心，
Paring Down Life to the Essentials: An Epicurean Psychodynamics of Midlife Change (Carlo Strenger, 2009)
意思是說， 中年以後，理應，減之再減，只剩殘骸，
正確的說，連殘骸，都嫌多餘，
念，至此，我不禁，高興起來，
是為，新年誌，
Friday, December 31, 2021
Sadomasochism, Sexual Excitement, and Perversion (Otto Kernberg. 1991)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000306519103900202
Did Kernberg ever say anything about Lacan ?
perversion
... involves the attempt to prop up the law so that limits can be set to jouissance (to what Lacan calls "the will to jouissance")
... struggles to bring the law into being --- in a word, to make the Other exist.
In other words, in the beginning, the world of the pervert is a lawless one.
Well, sounds like that wonderful Pleistocene, doesn't it？
... as Lacan says, objet a has something inherently fetishistic about it.
STIPO~R (July, 2021) (2022 秋）
https://www.borderlinedisorders.com/assets/STIPORmanual.July2021.pdf
https://www.borderlinedisorders.com/structured-interview-of-personality-organization.php
NORMAL
Identity:
Object Relations:
Defenses:
Aggression:
Moral values:
Consolidated
Stable, complex, and enduring; able to integrate tender and erotic feelings
Healthy defenses predominate; No evidence of primitive defenses
No primitive aggression; control and modulation of aggression
Consistent and flexible; no antisocial behavior
我非常確定，我不正常，
Neurotic I
Consolidated
Stable, complex, and enduring; difficulty integrating tender and erotic feelings
No evidence of primitive defenses, Repression-based and mature defenses predominate; some rigidity.
No primitive aggression; some evidence faulty modulation of aggression (e.g., minor self-neglect or occasional verbal outbursts)
Overly harsh and/or inflexible but fully organized and internalized; no antisocial behavior
Neurotic II
Consolidated; somewhat superficial sense of self and/or others
Somewhat superficial, but enduring; some limitation in capacity for empathy; difficulty integrating tender and erotic feelings
Endorsement of primitive defenses is rare; Repression-based defenses predominate; some rigidity.
No primitive aggression; evidence of faulty modulation of aggression (e.g., minor self-destructive behaviors or controlling interpersonal style)
Organized and internalized but variable; self-critical attitudes and demanding standards may co-exist with disavowal of exploitative or minor self-destructive behaviors
Borderline I
Identity diffusion, mild
Split and/or superficial but with some degree of stability and integration, especially in non-conflictual domains
Combined use of splitting-based and repression-based defenses, significant rigidity and compromised adaptation.
Primitive aggression; aggressive behaviors largely self-directed
Variable
Borderline II
Identity diffusion, moderate
Superficial and based on need-fulfillment; empathy impaired; little ability to sustain interest over time; widely split and unstable
Predominance of primitive defenses with significant impairment; severe rigidity and grossly maladaptive defensive strategies
Primitive aggression; aggressive behaviors directed against other +/- against self
Variable, generally poorly integrated and poorly internalized
Borderline III
Identity diffusion, severe
Based entirely on need-fulfillment, no empathy and no capacity to sustain interest in others
Constant use of primitive defenses; extreme rigidity and failure of adaptation
Primitive aggression with dangerous, aggressive behaviors directed towards self and/or others
No organized moral value system; antisocial behavior
repression，disavowal，foreclosure (2022 秋)
Negation ～ Verneinung
Repression ～ Verdragung
Disavowal ～ Verleugnung
Foreclosure ～ Verwerfung
Repression is constitutive of neurosis. One becomes neurosis due to repression.
Disavowal is constitutive of perversion. One becomes perversion due to disavowal.
Foreclosure is constitutive of psychosis. One becomes psychosis due to foreclosure.
Evil is constitutive of CCP. One becomes CCP due to evil.
上帝說，把傳教士找回來 (2022 秋)
在秋天以前，
今天年末，有風，些許陽光，
Bruce Fink (1997) Danielle Knafo & Rocco Lo Bosco (2016) 跨年，回答一個卅年來，NBD 未解難題，「我接受事情暫時只能如此，我不同意事情一直只能如此，我知道改變很難，我希望你能夠改變，原因是，如果不能改變，你就是笑不出來的，無奈的悲劇，而我和你，都希望，你可以是，讓上帝，下巴掉下來的喜劇」，
你要理解，perversion，就像 PD (personally disorder)，他的症狀，就是他，就是他的存在，意思是說，拿掉症狀，他就不是他，他就不存在了，意思是說，他會死命，抗拒不從，這是前提，也是結局，
所以治療的關鍵，在有沒有可能，有其他可能性，你面對的是千年習性，的超穩定結構，意思是說，你改變不了，覺醒不了中國人，你就治療不了，perversion，和 personally disorder，
至此，你可以理解，為什麼，上帝這麼著急，
改變中國，需要外力，改變 perversion，和 personally disorder，也需要外力，意思是說，治療者，必須，畢竟，是，外力，
弔詭的是，治療關係，必須，畢竟，也是，內力，他，必須，知道，你，畢竟，沒有，完全否定他，意思是說，你必須，畢竟，在他身上，找到，看到，救贖，的，一絲，希望，
意思是說，你必須，畢竟，克服，你的反移情，以致，從投射認同，來到同理，那個同理，是希臘悲劇的同理，所以，就是，悲憫，
意思是說，你知道，人是多麼不堪，多麼不完美，因為，你知道，你自己，是，多麼不堪，多麼不完美，
Thursday, December 30, 2021
Relaxing Music with Beautiful Nature - Peaceful Piano & Guitar Music by Soothing Relaxation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGQwd1_dpuc&t=5059s
Dubliners
https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/01/13/dubliners-anne-enright/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NYR%20Tallman%20Enright%20Frazier%20Wilentz%20Rose&utm_content=NYR%20Tallman%20Enright%20Frazier%20Wilentz%20Rose+CID_9c0a5c1ead6e1a0e6d1e9028af5f7f1f&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_term=Dublin%20scene
Fear to Anger Chinese Communist Party Will Lead to Disaster
https://www.nspirement.com/2021/12/30/chinese-communist-party-disaster.html?utm_source=Nspirement&utm_campaign=1d3528b624-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0ece06508b-1d3528b624-125910857
今天
寒冷，Francoise Laruelle，non philosophy，續訂 Zoom Pro 50 半年，退會 APA IARPP IAPSP SEA，except D39 ，due to PEP Web，你要理解，熙熙攘攘，只為餬口，這是生活的底線，也是生活的本質，Eric 說，台灣人仍處在殖民化和後殖民化的糾結，還未來到去殖民化 (de-colonization)，我說，de 是否意謂 denial，他說，de 是 undo，「so that something different can be created」，我跟 Eric 說，你的命運是 traveller between worlds，你很容易被誤解，but don't be discouraged by the misunderstanding，because your perspective is more enriched than either side，
Ketamine Therapy Is Going Mainstream. Are We Ready?
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-inquiry/ketamine-therapy-is-going-mainstream-are-we-ready?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_122921&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&utm_term=tny_daily_recirc&bxid=5e1b55bc576f2c5df1220065&cndid=59646955&hasha=55cfbc3c817bcf26b54c8d19b8fe535a&hashb=2f53836f758ec35266827c1a73652d20b8cf5159&hashc=bfe0b2e9bf93f6b293aad4baaf1694d4ef3d86677736166ccb6e8563430c861d&esrc=bounceX&mbid=CRMNYR012019
Wednesday, December 29, 2021
Why Topology Matters in Psychoanalysis
https://www.lacanonline.com/2015/01/from-the-bridges-of-konigsberg-why-topology-matters-in-psychoanalysis/
今天
樓上鄰損，修補磁磚，多此一舉，偶而陽光，不宜赤身，
陳松勇遺贈二百萬元，給照顧他至終，的印尼看護，你要理解，這就是自體客體 (selfobject)，黃秋生演過，托爾斯泰寫過，這樣的情節，可見自體客體，是語言前經驗 (pre-verbal)，意思是說，無待乎語言，
Sade 寫肛交一百二十日，只花了三十七天，每天晚上，七點寫到十點，所以，只寫了一百二十小時，然後，把手稿捲起來，藏在囚房，牆壁縫中，你必須想像，Sade 在微弱燭光下，用極小的筆跡，振筆疾書，意思是說，他不能修改，只能一氣呵成，一百二十日，角色逾二百，可見，Sade 腦中，清晰無比，否則寫不出，如此繁複肛交，
今天下午，落髮，狗間食，貓罐頭，衛生紙，你要理解，只是，混口飯吃，不必當真，
4：49 PM，點起紙菸，春日路邊，檯燈？拉岡桑，殊勝在奇特精巧的解釋？Now，問題是，我口袋，和褲襠裡，沒有解釋，我不喜，不願，也不信解釋，或，被解釋，你要理解，解釋，不等同理解，解釋，是你以為，你理解，你要理解，假如，你真的理解，你必然，「無言以對」，遑來解釋，意思是說，解釋，急於解釋，強作解釋，表示，你不理解，
Tuesday, December 28, 2021
Leopold Ritter von Sacher-Masoch (1836~1895)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_von_Sacher-Masoch
The term masochism was coined in 1886 by the Austrian psychiatrist Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing (1840–1902) in his book Psychopathia Sexualis.
Masoch did not approve of this use of his name.
慶祝 7/11 開幕
我先前說過，對面街角，今日下午四時，一家便利商店開幕，此刻，數十萬黑衣人，塞滿街道，口號舞獅鞭炮不斷，豬哥亮佟麗婭主持，上千歌星輪番演唱，陣仗極大，有點像，台灣匪諜慶祝包子登基大典，你要理解，我住在一個荒涼的地方，千山鳥飛絕，萬徑人蹤滅，平均三個月，才看到一個人過馬路，
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)