J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 2023 Oct;71(5):843-853. doi: 10.1177/00030651231208229.
This paper explores the principal reasons for the exclusion of Lacanian ideas from psychoanalytic training institutes in the United States. The history of Lacan's role in the International Psychoanalytical Association, from which essentially he was expelled, occupies a central place in this story. Significant issues arose also from his practice style and technical innovations, whose rationale remains controversial today. Another major obstacle for the reception of his work is the theoretical framework of Lacanian analysis, so different from that of other schools. Inclusion of its unfamiliar vocabulary and concepts poses practical problems for training programs. At a more fundamental level, the strong antihumanist evolution of Lacan's thought runs contrary to the increasingly relational and intersubjective orientation of American psychoanalysis. The incompatibility between the disparate languages of a scientific theory aiming at objectivity and a phenomenology of personal intentionality and meaning greatly limits the possibilities for dialogue. The tension between these perspectives cannot be resolved, but a productive exchange between them is possible if they are accepted as valid and complementary ways of speaking about human behavior.
本文探讨了拉康思想被排除在美国精神分析培训机构之外的主要原因。拉康在国际精神分析协会中的角色历史，他基本上是被驱逐出该协会的，在这个故事中占据了中心地位。他的实践风格和技术创新也引发了重大问题，其基本原理至今仍存在争议。拉康分析的理论框架与其他学派如此不同，也是其作品被接受的主要障碍之一。包含其不熟悉的词汇和概念给培训项目带来了实际问题。在更根本的层面上，拉康思想的强烈反人文主义演变与美国精神分析日益增强的关系和主体间性取向背道而驰。旨在追求客观性的科学理论的不同语言与个人意向性和意义的现象学之间的不兼容性极大地限制了对话的可能性。这些观点之间的紧张关系无法得到解决，但如果它们被视为有效且互补的关于人类行为的言说方式，那么它们之间的富有成效的交流是可能的。
