Content deleted Content added
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: title, journal, pages. Formatted dashes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Anas1712 | Category:French psychiatrists | #UCB_Category 72/113 |
m →Mathematics in psychoanalysis: typos |
||
Line 275:
In their work ''[[Fashionable Nonsense]]'' (1997), through which their stated intention was to show that "famous intellectuals" abuse scientific terminology and concepts,{{r|n=Fashionable Nonsense|p=x}} professors of [[Physics]] [[Alan Sokal]] and [[Jean Bricmont]] examine Lacan's frequent references to [[Mathematics]]. They are highly critical of his use of terms from [[mathematical]] fields, accusing him of "superficial erudition", of abusing scientific concepts that he does not understand, and of producing statements that are "[[not even wrong]]."{{r|n=Fashionable Nonsense|r={{cite book | last1=Sokal | first1=Alan |author-link=Alan Sokal |last2=Bricmont |first2=Jean |author2-link=Jean Bricmont | title=[[Fashionable Nonsense|Fashionable nonsense: postmodern intellectuals' abuse of science]] | publisher=Picador USA | publication-place=New York | year=1998 | isbn=0-312-20407-8 | oclc=39605994}}|p=21|q=[Lacan] mixes [the terms] up arbitrarily and without paying attention to their meaning.}}
In a seminar held in 1959, he confuses the [[irrational number]]s with the
Sokal and Bricmont find Lacan to be "fond" of [[topology]], in which, though, they see Lacan committing serious errors. He uses technical terms erroneously, e.g. "[[Topological space|space]]", "[[Bounded set (topological vector space)|bounded]]", "[[Closed set|closed]]", and even "topology" itself, and posits claims about a literal and not just symbolic or even [[metaphor]]ical relation of topological mathematics with [[neurosis]].{{efn|E.g. Lacan states: "[The] [[torus]] really exists and it is exactly the structure of the [[Neurosis|neurotic]]. It is not an [[analogy|analogon]]; it is not even an [[abstraction]], because an abstraction is some sort of diminution of reality, and I think [the torus] is reality itself." Lacan (1970)}}{{r|n=Fashionable Nonsense|p=18-21}}<ref name=>{{cite book |last=Lacan |first=Jacques |date= 1 May 1970 |editor-last1= Macksey|editor-first1=Richard |editor-last2= Donato |editor-first2=Eugenio |title=The Languages of Criticism & the Sciences of Man: the Structuralist Controversy|publisher=[[Johns Hopkins University]] Press|pages=186–200 |chapter=Of structure as an inmixing of an otherwise prerequisite to any subject whatsoever|isbn=978-0801810473}}</ref>
In the book's preface, the authors state they shall not enter into the debate over the purely psychoanalytic part of Lacan's work.{{r|n=Fashionable Nonsense|p=17}} Nonetheless, after presenting their case, they comment that "Lacan never explains the relevance of his
===Incomprehensibility===
| |||