Drive between Brain and Subject: An Immanent Critique of Lacanian Neuropsychoanalysis.

Despite Jacques Lacan's somewhat deserved reputation as an adamant antinaturalist, his teachings, when read carefully to the letter, should not be construed as categorically hostile to any and every possible interfacing of psychoanalysis and biology. In recent years, several authors, including mysel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Southern Journal of Philosophy Vol. 51; pp. 48 - 85
Autor principal: Johnston, Adrian
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Sep2013 Supplement
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=89479871&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 89479871
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00384283
        2GW
      jtl: Southern Journal of Philosophy
      issn: 00384283
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Sep2013 Supplement
      vid: 51
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        89479871
        10.1111/sjp.12019
      ppf: 48
      ppct: 37
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 147KB
      tig:
        atl: Drive between Brain and Subject: An Immanent Critique of Lacanian Neuropsychoanalysis.
      aug:
        au: Johnston, Adrian
      su:
        Lacan, Jacques, 1901-1981
        Psychoanalysis
        Biology
        Naturalism
        Materialism
        Neuropsychology
      sug:
        subj:
          Lacan, Jacques, 1901-1981
          Psychoanalysis
          Biology
          Naturalism
          Materialism
          Neuropsychology
      ab: Despite Jacques Lacan's somewhat deserved reputation as an adamant antinaturalist, his teachings, when read carefully to the letter, should not be construed as categorically hostile to any and every possible interfacing of psychoanalysis and biology. In recent years, several authors, including myself, have begun exploring the implications of reinterpreting Lacan's corpus on the basis of questions concerning naturalism, materialism, realism, and the position of analysis with respect to the sciences of today. Herein, I focus primarily on the efforts of analyst François Ansermet and neuroscientist Pierre Magistretti to forge a specifically Lacanian variant of neuropsychoanalysis (as distinct from Anglo-American variants). Taking up Ansermet and Magistretti's interlinked theories of drive ( Trieb) and autonomous subjectivity, I develop an immanent critique of their project. Doing so in a manner that is intended to acknowledge and preserve this neuropsychoanalytic duo's significant insights and contributions, I seek to bring into sharper relief the exact set of necessary, as well as sufficient, conditions for what Ansermet, Magistretti, and I all are commonly pursuing: an account of the genesis of denaturalized subjects out of embodied libidinal economies, itself situated within the framework of a nonreductive, quasi-naturalist materialism synthesizing resources drawn from psychoanalysis, neurobiology, and philosophy.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Southern Journal of Philosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Southern Journal of Philosophy
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2013
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N