Tuesday 24 June 2008

Lacan

Just like Althusser, who appropriated his paradigm, Lacan can be viewed as a high Modernist, in the sense that he gives place to any subject only to the degree that the subject has become a predictable machine (a machine = by definition calculable, predictable). In terms of this paradigm, the subject must be a thoroughly scientifically comprehensible object in order to be recognised as a proper social subject. The object, "woman", is thus an empty set, precisely because the subject-position of "woman" in patriarchal society is thought not to yield anything predictive about the behaviour of whatever is there, within this patriarchal subject-position.

So to understand Lacanianism is to understand that neatness and predictability must prevail within this paradigm -- a paradigm which is essentially mechanistic.

What kind of people does such an actual social system (if the paradigm as a form of analysis, is anything like accurate about it) churn out? What kind of view of people does such a paradigm (in itself) reinforce?

Do we see anything like those sort of people in the contemporary Zimbabwe of today?

No comments:

Cultural barriers to objectivity