Premium
Drive between Brain and Subject: An Immanent Critique of Lacanian Neuropsychoanalysis
Author(s) -
Johnston Adrian
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
the southern journal of philosophy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.281
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 2041-6962
pISSN - 0038-4283
DOI - 10.1111/sjp.12019
Subject(s) - materialism , subjectivity , naturalism , epistemology , embodied cognition , subject (documents) , philosophy , situated , realism , psychoanalysis , sociology , psychology , artificial intelligence , library science , computer science
Despite Jacques Lacan's somewhat deserved reputation as an adamant antinaturalist, his teachings, when read carefully to the letter, should not be construed as categorically hostile to any and every possible interfacing of psychoanalysis and biology. In recent years, several authors, including myself, have begun exploring the implications of reinterpreting Lacan's corpus on the basis of questions concerning naturalism, materialism, realism, and the position of analysis with respect to the sciences of today. Herein, I focus primarily on the efforts of analyst F rançois A nsermet and neuroscientist P ierre Magistretti to forge a specifically L acanian variant of neuropsychoanalysis (as distinct from Anglo‐American variants). Taking up Ansermet and Magistretti's interlinked theories of drive ( Trieb ) and autonomous subjectivity, I develop an immanent critique of their project. Doing so in a manner that is intended to acknowledge and preserve this neuropsychoanalytic duo's significant insights and contributions, I seek to bring into sharper relief the exact set of necessary, as well as sufficient, conditions for what Ansermet, Magistretti, and I all are commonly pursuing: an account of the genesis of denaturalized subjects out of embodied libidinal economies, itself situated within the framework of a nonreductive, quasi‐naturalist materialism synthesizing resources drawn from psychoanalysis, neurobiology, and philosophy.