In his PhD defence the author discusses the theoretical evolution of the Lacanian concepts jouissance and psychosis. He analyses how nuanced shifts in Lacan’s thinking on psychosis influence his theory on jouissance, and vice versa, and how changes in his conceptualization of jouissance force a reconsideration of his theory of psychosis. This is done based on the cases Lacan presents throughout his writings and seminars.
This paper argues that the diagnosis of psychopathy, promoted by the author of the PCL-R Robert Hare, contains many implicit assumptions. It is not the logic pertaining to the decipherment of the subject’s urge to a criminal act that is central within this account, but a calculation of danger and the nomination of evil. Hence, in our opinion scientific research that is rooted in the work of Robert Hare should always question these implicit assumptions. Therefore the author offers a close reading of Hare’s work, in which he discerns a political factor in its incessant attempt to reduce the anxiety related to the Other. In contrast with Hare, an important aspect of Freud and Lacan is highlighted concerning the issues of crime and guilt. Finally, recent attempts to recuperate the concept of psychopathy in psychoanalytic theory are criticized.
The evolution of Lacan’s theory of the body in psychosis is presented, starting from his seminar on the sinthome. Some points of rupture can be found retrospectively in Lacan’s theory. From his first conceptualization of the imaginary body, then of the symbolic body and finally of the real body, Lacan comes to the conclusion that the imaginary, the symbolic and the real must be knotted. Lacan’s latest teaching offers novel perspectives on the difficult relation between body, language and jouissance for every speaking being. This is illustrated by means of three short case studies about James Joyce, Antonin Artaud and Michel H.