> The concept that "Language-use is, essentially, alienating" is too hilarious
for words.
Does language encapsulate who you are?
Yoshie wrote:
> Learning to use language, in your psychoanalysis, is like succumbing to the
Serpent & eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge.
Consciousness does not possess knowledge, only the drives *possess* knowledge, which is why Lacan ironically makes the statement, "God is unconscious." Free choices do not exist a priori, we constitute them in retrospect: we are always much more free than we know, and much less free that we believe.
Jacob wrote:
> Could you explain this sentence in greater detail? --> > "Language-use is,
essentially, alienating from our needful state of being(prior to language)."
Prior to language there is no desire, only need. With the acquisition of language our "need" (need food, need attention, need this or that) is transfigured into desire (desire cupcake, desire attention of mom, desire nap). Prior to language there is no differentiation possible between objects, with language, objects become differentiated (that's a ball, that's daddy). Here we have the imposition of language on the bundle of needs - which distorts, contorts, focuses and diverts "needs" by channeling them into specific "things." In short: we don't have a genetic pre-disposition toward building stealth bombers or speaking German or French or Ugaritic. Yes, we probably have a predisposition for making the capacity to speak such languages, but lacking an "object" (an alphabet, a symbol system) such potential has nothing to grasp.
Doug's gonna shit when he sees that I've posted some 28 messages today.
ken