This is the introductory part of chapter I of the Catalytics of Schizophrenia, in which it explains in detail the pioneering significance of the core concepts of schizophrenia analysis and "assembly". Cartography is also considered to be an important writing of the abstract theory of psychoanalysis in Gatali. It can be said that Qatar's psychoanalytic approach to "the assembly of words" adequately represents the theoretical direction of Lacanian psychoanalysis in our time.
Over the past decade, I have tried to extract some fragments from the remains of the still standing Psychoanalysis Building. That is precisely because I think it is worth revisiting these fragments in a theoretical framework that is different - and, if possible, further away from Freud and Laconists' restitution.
I think I should clarify immediately that I never thought of splitting analysis as a self-conclusive technology and put it somewhere in the realm of "psychological" science.
In my view, the objectives of the divisive analysis are more modest, but also more ambitious. It is more modest because if the method of divisive analysis really survives one day in the future, it is because it already exists in any corner of our world today - in a new, diverse posture and without the need for a particular form of "separate analysis body". Greater ambition, given its function in my eyes, is a matter of principle in looking at all other models of analysis. But not as a universal model, but as a tool to decrypt other system models at many dimensions. A "meta-model", so to speak. It may be objected that there does not seem to be a clear division between models and meta-models. This is precisely true, and in a sense the subject matter has always been a meta-modeling movement (in the context of model system transfer, cross-cutting perspectives of different problem consciousness).
But for me it is important to shift the problem of psychoanalytic awareness, from a systematic, pre-loaded body structure to an assembly of words, to forge a new way of viewing psychoanalysis and to stimulate a whole new appearance and proposition.
Thus, in essence, divisive analysis is odd compared to other "psychological" technical studies - considering their companies, communities, schools, preaching and "development history". A provisional definition of partition analysis may be: an analysis of the effects of the assembly of words on symbolic and dominant production in the context of a particular problem area.
I do not intend to dwell on the concepts of "problems", "situation", and "visibility" in this paper. By the way, I would just like to briefly say that they mean a series of differences from clinical scenes, unconscious visions, daydreams, aesthetic production to micropolitical facts. What is really important is that they contain a self-determinating theory of existence: a self-invocational essence - assembly - as can be said, a process of eccentricization and self-organization.
Why choose the assembly of words as the main object of the article? It is precisely to escape the "unconscious" concept. It is precisely to prevent the simple reversion of the subjectivity to the relationship of drive, emotion, instinct and interactive subjectivity. Of course, these concepts are also the focus of divisive analysis, but only as part of the construction, and as part of the role, they are always performed in a particular script of divisive analysis. It may be noted that there are statements of assembly that do not involve any indicative symbolic parts, or of parts that do not involve the subject matter or "self-consciousness". Thus, rhetoric goes beyond the awareness of individual subjects, the monolithic bodies of these ideas, which are limited by the concept of "consciousness", and the outstanding talents of the soul in the traditional sense (understanding/will...). I need to stress that we are always confused at the beginning without distinguishing between material/indicators, individual/collective, active machine/passive mobile assembly-general.
The problem has since evolved into a picture of the parts involved in the assembly - parts that we have always found to be sitting across and interacting with completely different interfaces. I said somewhere, I don't remember where it was, that we were going to build a science that would include rags and napkins, even more heterodox, and that would remove both rags and napkins from the linen. Instead, in this science, people are prepared to divide the rag into a different generation and place it in a background sequence influenced by it - from the rag of the landlord wipes the glass to the army's "coop de Tochon" operation against the resistance. The traditional psychoanalytic perspective is understood only from the context in which the effects occur, and never takes into account the occurrence of such a relevant assembly of effectiveness in the social sphere. For me, it is this kind of official micropoliticalism that needs to be subverted. In this way, we can expect that the effects of the analysis will no longer be the derivative of an expounded chain of fingering, but rather a condensed state of generation, a plurality of dimensions. In this state of affairs, the single meaning of sudden changes in the worldwide context - the fate of the picture. Collective/individual rhetoric will also be the main object of our research on images and structures that are said to support the dominant structure. In some occasional cases, this particular configuration is also placed in the unconscious structure of the analyst's position - whether the "characteristics" of these analysts to whom they refer are perceived or placed in this position by other instincts. The configuration of the analysis can be concretized in many different ways
That's where Floyd invented psychoanalytic technology.
2 - A sociological group, a group of young people who show the potential of the Jewish community to flourish
3- A pre-subject practice, an attitude, a creative mutation linking individuals or subjects to their unconsciousness.
These examples and other assembly-samples can be combined in different ways. Thus, the task of divisive analysis would not limit itself at all to the interpretation of the creation of the subject, but rather maintain a deeper theoretical interest in the "given" and "creation" activities themselves, and conduct analysis in the assembly of such subjects: such a configuration would facilitate the integration of accidental effects with fractures and pragmatic approaches. It is because the operators of division analysis do not understand themselves as predefined machines, nor do they pretend to have some kind of legitimate speech-programming, that they distance themselves from traditional psychoanalyst practitioners. Not only does there not exist any "common paradigm" of divisive analysis, but it even has a more basic paradigm - a "anti-model" paradigm - which means persistent torture of analysts and placement in responses to analysts.
This response is negative in the sense that it simply leads the assembly of collars to harmony. But it is also positive when it is engaged in the production of divisive, even devastating, major disasters and, as a result, produces the best analytical material. How can one assembly replace another in the light of the new circumstances given? How can the assembly of analysis, or at least the analytical assembly claimed by the analyst, obscure other assembly? How do these packages enter into their interactions and what will they lead to? In a closed field, what potential is the generation of a new assembly for its own attention? In such cases, how can assistance be provided to micropoliticals that produce these relationships, breed and assemble? These are the problems facing division analysis. These studies on the subject matter - in the sense of its robust operation - or these studies on the richness of the stairwell, the time of its growth at the latitude, are here marked by the production it refers to itself, or, more precisely, the meta-model of the interaction-assembly relationship. It draws a clear line from the traditional meaning of the term "subject matter" and is no longer in a relationship with subjects that I do not know are subtle and inexplicable. Such a traditional subject is searching emptyly for its dazzling maturity - an activity that is always understood to be inexhaustible, that is to say, all these actions, of course, escape anyone's knowledge, and only God knows it. The essence of the division analysis is based on the convergence of the flow of signals with the flow of machines and on the convergence of perceived facts, materials and social facts. And, in general, this subjectivity builds a sense of its own changes caused by collisions in different assembly forms. Thus, such a subject loses its territorialized identity as an individual and is integrated into a process of a more original, new wave of alienation - it becomes easier to become an animal, to plant a vegetable, to the universe, to become an unsettled, multi-priced sexual, to become a commotional, intangible... it does not need to be captured as a "thinking reed", in which people now look more like "the reed of their own thoughts", an abstract machine that constantly crosses previous possibilities.
The old forms of speech are mainly based on language and direct dialogue, and the new assembly-prospectives are more of an intermediary flow of information transmitted by machines (not just as machines of technological order, but also as machines of science, society, aesthetics). The transmission of this new assembly transcends the old individual/collective domain at all stages. The old territorializations are centralism, and imply the overall control of the meaning of individual statements; the new decolonizations are machine-centreisms, whose operation depends on inhuman processes and inertia to transpose the symbolism of words that, in most cases, go beyond conscious control.
But we will not study this dichotomy of overly retrogressive theory. In this way, we naturally lead to a variety of different forms of narrative assembly, as symbolic, dominant and conscious or as a result of no functional change (the list can be expanded as the needs of the description change).
Non-signed assembly
The consensus initiative structure of bees or termites provides us with a first example: this highly sophisticated standardization mechanism obviously does not rely on any symbolism, substance or consciousness. In the order of human speech, similar systems, such as endocrine rhythms, may have a decisive place in human assembly -- I'm sorry. Although psychoanalytic researchers usually leave this outfit in brackets. I wonder what role it plays in the self-addiction of human abuse, specific forms of severe anorexia, as far as taking thorphins is concerned.
Non-principal symbolic assembly
William Ritchie talks about the "character armour" as an example. The subject's appearance is tilted towards the symbolic side of the body.
Mainized, unconscious symbolic assembly
In the unconscious engraving, the delimitation of territories, their reception, their display, and the conquest and hostilities, man was first accustomed to such assembly.
Psychoanalytic researchers, especially those of the Lacanian community, may object to me saying that all I'm saying is good, but that it has nothing to do with unconsciousness - at least not with genuine psychoanalytic. They'll say that unconsciousness is just a concept of a language trick... and we all know that! In response, I would say that the concept of the assembly of schizophrenia analysis is very eager to study this retrospective structure of the Oedipus triangle and symbolic castration, because it is precisely these inflexible rules that lead to dominant production in capitalist terms. However, this does not in any way mean that these traditional scholars can disregard other psychiatric, or even anthropological, domain production, the provisions of which are closely related to the personal identity of the researcher and the person being analysed. In this sense, I re-emphasize that the task of schizophrenia analysis is to create itself as a meta-model to be assembled within such diverse boundaries - Each of these may be identified as a possible option for developments.
We will start with one of the broadest assumptions, namely, that the existence of an unconscious human interface is associated in the sense of parity with the structure of the re-emergence of languages and things, with coding, casting, mapping, engraving heterosexual systems, with organisms, society, economy, parts and components, etc. To introduce such a dominant phenomenon into the discussion of the creation of the realm of survival, to accept its relationship with the world to which it is addressed and the "alter-egos", i.e. to introduce randomity and selectivity into the subject. In other words, the core of unconscious questioning is neither subject nor linguistic ability. The same is true of awareness issues. Consciousness - different processes, one after another, will play a more important role. The process of driving a car can be used to illustrate these connections and fractures. This is not unusual: the driver is in some kind of a dream-like state. The subject was not asleep, and some of her conscious systems were operating in parallel, some observing the road and others observing the future. The change in the signal light, a traffic accident or the scream of a passenger could re-establish a high level of alarm for the subject. In the broader sense of what I'm talking about, there are so many layers of machine coercion (I borrowed this term from the theory of control). As a result, the subject does not go back to the same structure, which is considered to be the foundation, nor to the same prototype and the same anticipation-retroactivity; the meta-model of schizophrenic analysis chooses to mark unconscious creation, occasional transition, which also includes social formation, technology, art and science. Even at times, it talks about the scripts of unconscious plays - individualism, personality, family and family-centred structures. It will never talk about them in the sense of a model of the main structure.