Greetings, readers friends. Today I was inclined to a subject whose author makes it unique, the wishes and Jacques Lacan.
I have decided, due to its extension, to divide it into two parts so that its reading and analysis are more accessible.
I introduce the topic with the two questions that constitute the title I chose for this post.
Do we really know what we want?
Why do we feel miserable when our wishes are fulfilled?
Jacques Lacan
It has always been said that I am one of the most difficult thinkers to interpret because my arid and arduous system does not adhere to the logic of the ordinary world in an ordinary way.
Maybe this means that only the gifted manage to understand me, have access to the world of Lacanian logic and understand my interpretations?
If you think so, then it is necessary to clarify some aspects ...
For those who assert that _"when you think you understand Lacan, you do not understand it at all; If you think you do not understand, you're on the right track, "they're really wrong.
I am accessible, perhaps not simple, which is another construct that is used under pain of confusing both terms in practice, as a mystical truth.
The study that has been carried out on my thought, to explain it, from the field of philosophy and psychology, most of the times disarms its essence by the simple insistence of trying to explain everything to conclude it, reduce it. In my opinion, it is one of the great evils of this century.
Having this point clear, I begin by holding the following principle, central to my interpretation of the subject: the desire to desire, to want, can fundamentally have important contradictions due to the belief that we are purely rational, logical and knowledge beings.
We are "subjects of desire" Now, what do I mean?
That the history of humanity is the history of desire. Moreover, I would say that it is the desires that have shaped the story, and I do not mean the history of the world only, but your history.
Perhaps, once again, it seems to you that this explanation is unorthodox and even contradictory. But I assure you that far from that reality it is only a mobile and ductile conception, like desire, because that is its own nature.
For many years I have been dedicated to reading, with passion, patience and dedication, the work of my colleagues Freud and Saussure. It was precisely the crossing of both theories that allowed me to propose that the unconscious was structured as a language.
But beware…
I am not saying that the unconscious has the operation of a dictionary or talking text of the grammar of the language, nor that its function has autonomy nor that it governs itself within a guest (conscience).
What I intend to say is that our unconscious never stops talking to us, to manifest itself, through our words, gestures and actions; and the most important thing is that it does not stop manifesting itself through our attractions and aversions.
Do you follow me?
Desire is your expression, it is you. It is not something, it is not something that can be known as a separate entity, as an object of knowledge or thought, with distance.
Desire is an expression of being. Only with the fact of being yourself, you are already a being_desireant_.
If this dialectic is reasonable, is there a possibility of knowing our desires?
There is no possibility of living untied to the tide of our desires. Do you believe what I say? Observe and observe yourself. The speech on a daily basis indicates this, in spite of our intentions and of ourselves.
I will illustrate with some examples: homophonies, double meanings, failed acts, listening to something different from what they tell us.
Every communicative gesture can be interpreted in terms of desire.
The cura by mediation of the word revolutionized psychology in the early twentieth century, when the Freudian unconscious, through the rigor of the word, was schematized and structured in a clinical setting where the analyst could recognize the desire and know the direction of the same by means of facts narrated.
That is why, by virtue of giving a framework of interpretation, I also raise the need to use this field of clinical reference where the person can solt their desire in a verbal field.
Everything we think is real in reality d is what drives us away, does not allow is our desire.
At this point, if you feel confused, I'll put it more succinctly ...
Desire is the cause, but also the solution to all our problems. You just have to realize that when you want something, be it a job, an article, a person, for example, what you do is really draw, extract a very particular aspect of the world and also turn a large amount of your attention towards this.
But…
If you want is because you lack. If you wish, it supposes, in fact, a lack, that only what is desired can be filled.
What would be the problem?
That if we get what we want, we no longer want it or we change our focus of interest and we want something else, it is this constitutive lack of desire that I call objet petit a or "small object a" and can be interpreted (it is a significant) how to take or be any form or thing in the equation of desire.
So far I leave this first part. I thank you for the reading and your questions, if any have arisen during this brief introductory analysis on the subject.
I hope I can help you to know which place you occupy in the equation of your desire.
References.
The wish theory of Jaques Lacan
And if you want to know more about these topics you can visit my networks.
Supporting the Venezuelan community in Steemit:
, 
, 
, 
, 
Follow @ el-panal, @ la-colmena, @ c-squared because they are permanent supporters of the Hispanic community.
I recommend you visit 
and join the conversations on current issues.
, also supporting our community.
Thank you for your visit. I will gladly answer, if you would like to leave a comment.
Posted from my blog with SteemPress : http://sandracabrera.rockdio.org/2019/03/21/do-you-really-know-what-you-want-why-do-you-feel-miserable-when-your-wishes-are-fulfilled-lacan-explains-it-to-you-in-this-part-i-2/