There is nothing absolutely primary that would be subject to interpretation, as all, in fact, already have interpretation of any character by nature is not a thing offers themselves to interpretation, and the interpretation of other signs.
If anything,there is no interpretandum, which would not be already interpretans. In the interpretation of the set rather than the relationship explanations, and the relation of coercion. The interpretation does not clarify a the object to be interpretirovany and her supposedly passive surrender, - it can only forcibly seize the existing interpretation, and have to overthrow, overturn, overwhelm blows of the hammer. This is evident in Marx, which interpreterpath not history industrial relations and attitude, which is already interpretation, as it appears as a substance. Freud also interpreterpath no signs, and interpretation. What Freud discovers in symptoms? Not "injuries", as is commonly believed,and phantasms, bearing the burden of anxiety, that is the core, which by its very nature is already interpretation. For example, anorexia is not a reference to the time of withdrawal from the breast, as meaning - to oznacenom; as a sign or symptom which should be interpreted, it refers to fantasma about hostile breast, and this is already an interpretation, is already "talking body" [corps parlant]. Therefore, Freud was able to interpret what what patieny predyavlyaet him like symptoms, only in the language of the patients themselves. His interpretation is the interpretation some interpretation, and in its own terms. It is known, for example,that Freud coined the term "super- I" [surmoi] after one of his patients said to him: "I feel me [sur moi] - the dog"
There is nothing absolutely primary that
ReplyDeletewould be subject to interpretation, as all, in fact, already have
interpretation of any character by nature is not a thing offers
themselves to interpretation, and the interpretation of other signs.
If anything,there is no interpretandum, which would not be
already interpretans. In the interpretation of the set rather than the relationship
explanations, and the relation of coercion. The interpretation does not clarify a
the object to be interpretirovany and her supposedly passive surrender, -
it can only forcibly seize the existing interpretation, and
have to overthrow, overturn, overwhelm blows of the hammer.
This is evident in Marx, which interpreterpath not history
industrial relations and attitude, which is already
interpretation, as it appears as a substance. Freud also
interpreterpath no signs, and interpretation. What Freud discovers in
symptoms? Not "injuries", as is commonly believed,and phantasms, bearing
the burden of anxiety, that is the core, which by its very nature
is already interpretation. For example, anorexia is not a reference to the time of withdrawal
from the breast, as meaning - to oznacenom; as a sign or symptom
which should be interpreted, it refers to fantasma about
hostile breast, and this is already an interpretation, is already
"talking body" [corps parlant]. Therefore, Freud was able to interpret what
what patieny predyavlyaet him like symptoms, only in the language of the patients themselves.
His interpretation is the interpretation some interpretation, and in its
own terms. It is known, for example,that Freud coined the term "super-
I" [surmoi] after one of his patients said to him: "I
feel me [sur moi] - the dog"