Content deleted Content added
→Criticism: removed nonsense |
→Criticism: ce; cn |
||
Line 258:
Many feminist thinkers have criticised Lacan's thought. Philosopher and psychoanalyst [[Luce Irigaray]] accuses Lacan of perpetuating [[Phallocentrism|phallocentric]] mastery in philosophical and psychoanalytic discourse.<ref>Luce Irigaray, "Cosi Fan Tutti," in Clive Cazeaux, ''Continental Aesthetics Reader'' (New York, 2011), pp. 377–386.</ref> Others have echoed this accusation, seeing Lacan as trapped in the very phallocentric] mastery his language ostensibly sought to undermine.<ref>[[Jacqueline Rose]], "Introduction – II", in Juliet Mitchell and Jacqueline Rose, ''Feminine Sexuality'' (New York 1982) p. 56</ref> The result, [[Castoriadis]] would maintain, was to make all thought depend upon Lacan himself, and thus to stifle the capacity for independent thought among all those around him.{{r|n=Roudinesco 1997|p=386}}
of how most members of the [[École Freudienne de Paris|Association]] talk about Lacan."{{efn|When the French Society of Psychoanalysis requested official recognition from and affiliation with the ''Association Psychanalytique Internationale'' ([[International Psychoanalytical Association]]) in 1959, the API demanded the sidelining of Jacques Lacan as a didactician. Two currents of the ''[[Société Française de Psychanalyse]]'' (French Society of Psychoanalysis) then stood opposed at each other: one current, which became the majority in the SFP in November 1963, was led by Daniel Lagache, and others, while a second current, which became the minority, brought together the supporters of Jacques Lacan.}}<ref>{{cite book |last=Turkle |first=Sherry |date=1978|url=https://www.scribd.com/document/228963082/Psychoanalytic-Politics-Freud-s-French-Revolution-Sherry-Turkle|access-date=October 24, 2023|author-link= Sherry Turkle |title=Psychoanalytic Politics: Freud's French Revolution |publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0465066070}}</ref>
|