In his debate with the logicalism of the Cahiers, Lacan had always maintained,
in opposition to Miller, that thought was a pas-tout (not-whole) .
But this “not-whole ” was only possible, in his view, because of the opening,
rift, or flaw introduced into science by the Freudian revolution: the divided
subj ect, the fallen object, loss , lack, etc. So when he thought desire for revolution
might reflect merely desire for a master, Lacan saw it as his duty to
contrast the Maoist revolution-denounced as totalitarian-with the
Freudian revolution, in his opinion the only possible alternative to a thought
of the whole, and an action to match, that aimed at destroying the whole of
thought.
ELISABETH ROUDINESCO – JACQUES-LACAN

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s