思想主體的套疊：拉岡與德希達

Abstract

自笛卡爾以降，哲學長期將主體抽離出主體自身，而將它等同於一種可認識的客體。如此，在所謂主、客對立的二元論中，對立只不過是假象。主體與外在世界的客體無異，它不過是一種被外在客體的知識所預設出來的東西，是外在客體的替身、陰影。相對地，精神分析始終主張主體並非處在一種二元的主、客對立局面，亦即非笛卡爾式的認知或被認知的主體，而是一種被捕捉在動力的、經濟與拓樸關係網絡中的獵物；或就拉岡觀點而言，被捕捉在「說」與「話」之間的慾望辯證網絡中的獵物。這是精神分析為現代所帶來的革命意義之一，那麼這個革命完成了嗎？從傅柯所展開的知識考古視野，我們可以質疑若現代的生命主體已接受過精神分析的洗禮，那麼思想主體呢？換言之，何以一個專有名詞能夠代表一個思想或理論學說，如拉岡的精神分析、傅柯的思想、德希達的解構主義等？處在精神分析時代－借用德希達借用傅柯的話（此處的雙重借用已經點出思想主體的悖謬性）－應該如何去描述思想主體的系譜關係？一個思想（精神分析）與三個或四個專有名詞（佛洛伊德、傅柯、拉岡－德希達）將是本文對思想主體「套疊關係」的思考起點。

Since R. Descartes, philosophy has long detached the subject from itself and equalled it to a comprehensible object. In this so-called dichotomy between subject and object, the dichotomy is merely an illusion. Subject is no different from the external world; it is merely something presupposed by the knowledge of the external object, a substitute or shadow of the external object.By contrast, psychoanalysis has always insisted that the subject never be understood from a dichotomy of subject and object relationship. It is not a Cartesian cognizing or cognized subject, but a prey caught in the dynamic, economic, and topographical network; or to put it in J. Lacan's view, it is a prey caught in the dialectics of desire between enunciating (énonciation) and enunciation (énoncé). If this is one of revolutions that psychoanalysis brings to the modern time, then is this revolution completed?Viewed from the archaeology of knowledge proposed by M. Foucault, we may question that if the modern living subject has undergone the trial of psychoanalysis, then how about the thinking subject? In other words, why can a proper name represent a body of thought or a theory, such as Lacan's psychoanalysis, Foucault's thought, or J. Derrida's deconstructionism? Situated in an era of psychoanalysis-to borrow what Derrida borrowed from Foucault (here the double borrowing has revealed the paradox of thinking subject)-how should we describe the genealogy of thinking subject?A body of thought (psychoanalysis) and three or four proper names (Freud, Foucault, Lacan-Derrida) will serve as the paper's starting point on ”invagination” of thinking subjects.