Jouissance, Scapegoating and the Lack of the Symbolic: What Causes the Subject’s Desire and Why?

Drousioti, Kalli

doi:10.1080/14409917.2021.1957357

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Be that as it may, accepting that the incrimination of an Otherness constitutes an unavoidable element of identity does not necessarily result in problematic relationships between the (collective) Self and (collective) Other. In particular, as I have shown elsewhere [27], if an Otherness must be found and blamed for the lost jouissance, this Otherness does not unavoidably involve a present and personalized Other. It might involve past Others (historical figures whose political actions were dreadful for humanity) or vices in the Aristotelian sense: vices "of the body-politic rather than of individual character" [6] (p. 5).…”

Section: What Then Is the Factor That Renders Different Cultures (Or ...mentioning

confidence: 65%

“…(p. 199) Stavrakakis suggests that this impasse of incrimination might be overcome if we "inject passion into the radicalization of democracy and the reinvigoration of political discourse instead of channelling it into racist and nationalist aggression or reducing politics to the unattractive spectacle of the neutral administration of unavoidable necessities" (p. 226, emphasis added). However, once identity is taken as inherently incriminatory of an Other, there is nothing to guarantee that the identity proposed by Stavrakakis (i.e., the one of the radical Democrat) will not be exclusivist and incriminatory of other identities, let us say, for example, incriminatory of the identity of the neoliberals or of ultra left anarchists, and so on [27].…”

Section: What Then Is the Factor That Renders Different Cultures (Or ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Lacanian Subject and the Philosophy of Education: Diagnostic with, or without, Therapeutic?

Drousioti

2023

Education Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jacques Lacan’s ethical insights come up when he engages, inter alia, with Aristotelian and Kantian ethics. Tackling Aristotle’s ethics, Lacan complicates how human life would be best lived and fulfilled, and discussing Kant’s ethics, he sheds a different light on moral duty. In both cases, Lacan emphasizes the role of desire and law in the subject’s actions. Many Lacanian insights constitute a fertile context for political philosophy and philosophy of education to explore the ethic character of the subject. However, some postmodern political philosophers who draw on fundamental Lacanian concepts have theorized the “Self–Other” relationship in a way that ends up in a problematic ontological accommodation of evil. In this paper, I outline the aforementioned to highlight the following lacuna: much of the literature in educational philosophy that has utilized Lacan’s theory to deal with ethics has not addressed, head-on, whether the Lacanian subject is ethical, unethical, or none of these. Treating the subject as ethical or unethical would entail that Lacanian theory can mainly offer “diagnoses”. Treating the Lacanian subject as ethically neutral and, thus, as plastic, entails that Lacan’s theory leaves more ample space for “therapy”. My aim in this paper is to show that some unanswered questions regarding the (un)ethical subject in Lacan’s theory must be tackled if the philosophy of education that transfers Lacan’s ideas to the ethical educational context is to avoid self-contradiction.

show abstract

Section: What Then Is the Factor That Renders Different Cultures (Or ...mentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: What Then Is the Factor That Renders Different Cultures (Or ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Lacanian Subject and the Philosophy of Education: Diagnostic with, or without, Therapeutic?

Drousioti

2023

Education Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Educational Utopianism beyond the “Real versus Blueprint” Dichotomy

Papastephanou

2024

Stud Philos Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much educational utopianism revolves around the “real versus blueprint utopia” dichotomy and the prescriptive normativity that utopian education involves. In this paper, I suggest that the “real and blueprint” distinction should not be dichotomized and that a richer set of normativities, apart from prescription, should operate in educational utopias. Ethico-politically and educationally, it is crucial to have affirmative rather than incriminatory utopias, regardless of their being real or blueprint. To argue this out, first I introduce the concepts of incriminatory and affirmative utopianism. Next, I sketch the educational-theoretical setting and discuss the current reliance on the “real versus blueprint utopia” dichotomy. Then I use the conceptual tool of incriminatory utopianism to show that risks of totalitarianism threaten all visions (even liberal anti-utopian ones) and not only blueprint utopianism. Therefore, we need not dichotomize real and blueprint utopias and embrace the former unconditionally. I conclude with some illustrations of why utopian thought involves multiple normativities rather than prescriptivism alone.

show abstract

Is the sociolinguistic situation in Cyprus diglossic?

Drousioti¹

2022

Critical Inquiry in Language Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jouissance, Scapegoating and the Lack of the Symbolic: What Causes the Subject’s Desire and Why?

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

The Lacanian Subject and the Philosophy of Education: Diagnostic with, or without, Therapeutic?

The Lacanian Subject and the Philosophy of Education: Diagnostic with, or without, Therapeutic?

Educational Utopianism beyond the “Real versus Blueprint” Dichotomy

Is the sociolinguistic situation in Cyprus diglossic?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About