top of page

Response to Tom Dalzell

The Letter, Issue 41, Summer 2009, Pages  127 - 131

Response to Tom Dalzell

Christian Fierens

Christian Fierens argues in this paper against understanding Lacan's exception as a transcendental reality and, preferring L'Etourdit's topological approach to Lacan's geometric one in 1958, he contends that Schreber was right to foreclose the exception since “Schema I” is the truth of “Schema R”.

Keywords: L'Etourdit; exception; Name-of-the-Father; topology; phallus

First of all, we must consider how we think. It always difficult to get rid of “transcendental realism”: we too easily consider that when we say “there exists an x not phi of x”, then there exists in reality “an x not phi of x”; in a similar way, when we are speaking about a “psychotic”, we consider that the psychosis exists as the reality of this person.

To consider that there exists an exception or that there exists a psychotic as a reality independently of our thinking (and that we afterwards come to think about it) is already to give to this reality a power which undermines all our thinking.

Want to read more?

Subscribe to to keep reading this exclusive post.

Related Posts

See All

Laytour, Latetour, L'Etourdit

This paper introduces L'Etourdit by first examining the places where Lacan taught – St. Anne, ENS, Sorbonne – as important places for him...

Issue 41: Editorial

This issue of The Letter concentrates on Lacan's L'Etourdit from 1972, published in Scilicet in 1973. While Charles Melman had originally...

Schreber in L’Etourdit

This article examines Lacan's interpreting Schreber in terms of the “not all” of the formulae of sexuation. It demonstrates how a...


Impossibile caricare i commenti
Si è verificato un problema tecnico. Prova a riconnetterti o ad aggiornare la pagina.
bottom of page