El Anti–Edipo, un hijo hecho por Deleuze–Guattari a espaldas de Lacan, el padre del “síntoma”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24142/indis.v8n16a3Keywords:
psicoanálisis, clínica, antipsiquiatría, críticaAbstract
El Anti–Edipo consiste en un diálogo crítico y cerrado, a veces provocador, pero más a menudo lleno de humor, con el psicoanálisis constituido. A diferencia de la disputa poco contemporánea que conduce Robert Castel, éste no se dará por fuera del campo analítico a nombre de razones sociológicas, sino a nombre de la clínica. Se trata de volver: “con la capacidad inventiva inicial del psicoanálisis […]” como lo recuerda el manifiesto fundador de Chiméres. No se trata de hacer anti–psicoanálisis, sino de construir una “máquina de guerra” contra el reconocimiento clínico al que ciertas prácticas psicoanalíticas dan lugar, particularmente, cuando trata de la psicosis.
References
Robert Castel, Le psychanalysme, l’ordre psychanalytique et le pouvoir (1re édition), Maspero, Paris, 1973, reediciones 10–18, 1976 et Champ–Flammarion, Paris, 1981.
Félix Guattari, Edicto, Chimères, revue des Schizo–analyses, numéro 1, Gourdon, Édiciones Dominique Bedoux, verano de 1987, p. 3.
Gilles Deleuze, Presentación de Sacher Masoch. Lo frío y lo cruel. Buenos aires, Amorrortu, 2001.
Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, El Anti–Edipo. Capitalismo y esquizofrenia. Barcelona, Paidós, 1985, p. 87.
Jacques Lacan, De la psychose paranoïaque dans ses rapports avec la personnalité, Paris: Le seuil, 1975 (1932).
Jacques Lacan, “Sobre una cuestión preliminar a todo tratamiento posible de la psicosis”, Écrits, París: Le Seuil, 1966–1955–1956.
J. Lacan, Séminaire III, Les psychoses, Paris: Seuil, 1981, 1956.
Serge Leclaire, Principes d’une psychothérapie des psychoses, Paris: Fayard, 1999 (thèse de médecine, 1958).
Jean Allouch, «Presentación de la enfermedad», 132 bons mots avec Jacques Lacan, Toulouse: ERES, 1984.
Charles Melman, Les structures lacaniennes des psychoses, Séminaire du 17 janvier 1984, Paris, Edición de la Association freudienne internationale, 1999.
Lacan, Jacques. Seminario XX: Aún. (París: Seuil, 1972), Buenos Aires, contrastar.
François Dosse, Biografía cruzada (París: La découverte, 2007), pp. 252–253). Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2009.
Jacques Lacan, Séminaire XXIII, Le sinthome, Paris, Seuil, 2005 (1975). (Buenos Aires, Paidós, 1976).
Jacques Lacan, Séminaire XXIV, L’insu que sait de l’une–bévue s’aile à mourre, Paris: inédit, 1977.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Florent Gabarron–García; Román Aguiar Montaño
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authorship of scientific works
In order to establish the authorship of the scientific works, the Universidad Autónoma Latinoamericana considers that within its publications it is understood as an author:
- Who participated in the formulation of the problem and the hypothesis.
- Who conceptualized, created, designed, studied, reviewed, analyzed or interpreted the data.
- Who participated in the creative elaboration or the manuscript, or edition of the statistical analysis.
- Who played a leading role in the final version of the work or wrote a portion of the text.
- Who participated in the interpretation of the results.
- Who is the principal investigator of the research project and has generated the central idea of the entire manuscript.
- Who has the ability to explain and defend portions of work or study in public or academic places" (CNRSI, 2008).
- Who is a co-author in the work for having participated in any of the stages of the research in any of the previous items (Official Journal of the European Union, 2005) [1]
[1] Law 93 of 1998, judgment C-1023/12 of the Colombian Constitutional Court- 14. At first, the judgment in question carried out a complete study on the constitutional protection of copyright, based on its consecration in article 61 Political Constitution of Colombia 1991 Thus, it established the following rules in this regard:
14.1. From the national and international regulations on the subject, it is concluded that the legal protection of copyright falls on all those creations of the spirit, in the scientific, literary or artistic field, whatever the genre, form of expression, and regardless of the literary or artistic merit, or its destination. Within this protection, and in the aforementioned terms, books, brochures and other writings are included, without excluding any species. 14.2. Copyright contains two types of prerogatives: moral rights, which are related to the faculty of the creator, as a natural person, so that his work is known and maintains its integrity and ownership, so they are personal, extra-patrimonial, imprescriptible, inalienable, and inalienable. Moral rights, in this sense, deal with (i) the right to disclose the work; (ii) the right to recognition of intellectual paternity; (iii) the right to respect and integrity of the work, preventing unauthorized modifications to it; and (iv) the right of withdrawal, which allows the author to withdraw it from the trade.
On the other hand, the author's economic rights have, as its name implies, economic content and are concentrated in the payment to the creator or the natural or legal person who owns the rights for those activities that involve the exploitation of the protected work. Among the variables of these faculties are (i) the right of material reproduction; (ii) the right of non-material public communication, representation, public execution and broadcasting; and (iii) the transformation, translation, adaptation and musical arrangement, as well as any other form of use of the work. Intellectual property rights. Employers and / or funders must ensure that researchers benefit, at any stage of their careers, from the possible exploitation of their R&D results through adequate legal protection, especially in the area of intellectual property rights protection and of copyright. Policies and practices should specify the rights that correspond to researchers and / or, where appropriate, their employers or other interested parties, including external commercial or industrial entities, as envisaged possibly under specific collaboration agreements or other types agree. Co-authorship. When evaluating staff, institutions should positively value co-authorship as it demonstrates a constructive approach to research practice. Therefore, employers and / or funders must develop strategies, practices and procedures that offer researchers, including those who are at the beginning of their careers, the necessary conditions so that they can enjoy the right to be recognized, mentioned and / or cited, within their actual contributions, as co-authors of reports, patents, etc. or publish the results of their own research, independently of their supervisors ("The Commission of the European Communities", 2005).
