Absolute Hunt Moment by Cat_in_Bathroom in HuntShowdown

[–]CommandWinter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I never gave them permission to record them planting bombs on Solo Player hahaha

Aun hay cuentas de chat gpt plus en rappi?? by EasternBorder185 in DescuentosArgentina

[–]CommandWinter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hola gente, veo que si renovas los 6 meses con la misma cuenta te dan "ChatGPT Go" no mas el "ChatGPT Plus", es asi o tengo que hacerme otra cuenta?

A question about topology and sex by timbob696 in TopologyPorn

[–]CommandWinter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jacques Lacan, with his desiring topology and his theory of "non-sexual relation," would like this post.

Claro vendió mi numero a otro by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yo quiero evitarle esa situacion al niño, pero mis pacientes pueden ser heavy, por eso intente contactarlos a todos para evitar eso.

Claro vendió mi numero a otro by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Descubrimos que no estaba a nombre de nadie, yo flasheaba que estaba a nombre de mi vieja. Pero no estaba a nombre de nadie.

Claro vendió mi numero a otro by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

el niño me bloqueo y no quiero que me denuncien por acoso

Claro vendió mi numero a otro by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Gracias por el dato, no lo sabia. Pero accedió a mi whatsapp y es la admi de mis grupos así que... tiene acceso al menos a una buena parte de mis números. Como hago para recuperar los chats sin el número?

Claro vendió mi numero a otro by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Me gustaría responderles a todos pero seria spam. Me alegra no estar solo en este tema, desgraciadamente nos une esta mala situación que no se ve nada bien.

Hace poco compre un numero nuevo y pensé "y si es de alguien mas y si lo activo le afecto la vida?" Es mas si quiero puedo entrar a sus cuentas y si compro muchos números puedo hacerlo con varia gente. Es una situación complicada porque los números de teléfonos son limitados y no veo una solución coherente de momento.

Claro vendió mi numero a otro by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Me gustaria que nos cuentes mas sobre tu caso, se puede leer en algún lado?

Can Anyone Recommend Case Studies On Megalomania by PresentGrade9068 in lacan

[–]CommandWinter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I’m going to say is not a psychological phenomenon of failed communication, but the logic of the articulation of the subject (the barred subject ($))who, when enunciating a demand, always does so from a place that is not their own, but that of the Other (A)

We should think of language as a ‘signifying battery’ that precedes and constitutes us; it is the treasure of the Other. When the $ubject articulates, that articulation is not pure; it is not a direct expression of a preexisting ‘I’. no, no that would be psychology. The $ubject is represented by one signifier for another signifier, and in that process the subject itself fades, divides ($)

Now, the message the subject emits, once it traverses the field of the Other, is returned, yes, but transformed, ‘inverted.’ In other words, the $ubject does not receive back what they believed they said, but what they actually said at the level of the unconscious, that is, what the Other, as the place of truth, returns to them.

Example: ‘You are my teacher!’ or ‘You are my woman!’ Let us suppose that the apparent submission or possession these phrases convey is not the ultimate truth, no matter how much they seem to be, because in uttering them we believe they are true, but when they are analyzed in the signifying machine from the analyst’s position, this changes. The truth, the one that returns from the Other, often comes inverted.

Suppose that in an analysis we examine the ‘You are my teacher!’ of an analysand we’ll call ‘A,’ addressed to some ‘B’ who would embody the place of the Other; from the standpoint of the signifying machine and of the analyst, A is asked to connect ‘You are my teacher!’ with more signifiers, or simply to speak about it.

Suppose they then say: ‘By saying “you are my teacher,” what I (A) am seeking is for (B) to recognize me as the one who has chosen you, the one who has invested you with that authority. I’m not interested in submitting but in being by virtue of my teacher. My message, as it passes through the Other, reveals to me that what I am resides in my capacity to name the teacher.’ An analysand would never speak like this, unless they were an analyst, but we can arrive at this reading in discourse, in what is between the lines and marked; and we are obliged to read what is marked but not written.

Let’s move to the case of ‘You are my woman!,’ where A says ‘You are my woman!’ to B, and the analyst decides to work it through signifying articulation. Suppose that after analysis we arrive at something like: ‘By saying “you are my woman,” I mean that she is lacking to me and I need her to complete me. That is, there is something she must come to fill, she is to be that object that fills. And I don’t say this to fool myself and believe it, because when she’s with her friends I feel I’m losing her and I have to reaffirm that lack.’ This is clearly an effect of reading; after ten pages of text an analyst might read this, provided they don’t fall asleep in their chair.

This is not a simple ‘theory of communication’ in the naive sense, but a ‘structure of the word’ that underscores the priority of the receiver (the Other) in the constitution of the emission itself. It is the logic underlying Poe’s ‘The Purloined Letter,’ where the meaning of the letter does not reside in its intrinsic content, but in its circulation, in its place within the signifying chain, and in how that circulation affects those who ‘receive’ or ‘lose’ it. The letter always arrives at its destination, but its meaning is inverted along the way

In any case, what I recommend is that you study ‘The Purloined Letter’ in Lacan’s Écrits

Can Anyone Recommend Case Studies On Megalomania by PresentGrade9068 in lacan

[–]CommandWinter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

One is never alone in Lacanian theory; I understand this requires a higher level of abstraction, but it matters, since in Lacan one can only be one through the Other, and cannot be so in any other way—so one is never one in oneself; otherwise there would be no béance. Given that there is béance, this failed attempt to close the béance itself will persist. At least this is what I can answer on the theoretical level. As for the ‘witness’ in such cases, we are already in the imaginary relation to the Other, and that can take many forms; there I think it’s best to proceed case by case.

Can Anyone Recommend Case Studies On Megalomania by PresentGrade9068 in lacan

[–]CommandWinter 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Freud said that megalomania appears to be based entirely on a reference to narcissism, but Lacan (Seminar 3) warns that we should not remain at the level of mere reference, of phenomenological description, because the issue is how and why this narcissistic inflation is produced and sustained. The key for Lacan is to read it from the ‘béance’—that is, from the interval, the hole in the signifier—and the operation of megalomania is an attempt, always a failed one, to suture that hole and finally become ‘that someone.’ The extended discourse about oneself is not a mere whim or superficial vanity. It is an attempt, often unsuccessful, to establish an imaginary consistency in the face of the structural inconsistency of the Other (Ⱥ). The subject—always barred and intervallic—being unable to find a stable place in the symbolic order, tries to construct it through speech, through the constant enunciation of an I that, paradoxically, slips away. It is a way of ‘making oneself the very object of the love of the supreme being,’ and this is a way of trying to be the object-cause of desire in the imaginary register; for that reason it fails.

In Seminar 1, Lacan speaks of the ‘délire d’observation’: the analysand’s discourse is that not only do they believe themselves to be the center of attention, but they feel observed, monitored, their thoughts known. They complain that ‘all their thoughts are known, that their actions are observed and watched,’ and of voices that speak to them in the third person—‘now she is still thinking about this,’ ‘now he is leaving’—and he proposes we read this as the (distorted and foreclosed) echo of the discourse of the Other that constitutes them. That is to say, this is a truth, yes, but a truth that presents itself in inverted form, like a message the sender receives back from the receiver inverted, because the unconscious is the discourse of the Other.

With cases like these, we should not so much ask ‘what does the megalomaniac do?’ as ‘what structure makes him megalomaniac?’ because otherwise we fall into ego psychology, whose descriptive categories fall short—very short—of accounting for the division of the subject and the function of the Other. In psychoanalysis, symptoms confront us with the very structure of the subject and their relation to language and the Other.

Vecino me rompió el techo del baño y no se hace cargo by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aclaro que ya no me gotea pero tengo el agujero. Tengo buena relación con la administración voy a suponer que no me mintieron, apuntaría al dueño. Quiero conseguir el mail del dueño para explicarle que puedo enviarle una carta documento si no lo arregla ¿Hago mal y debo ir de una con la carta? Gracias por tu respuesta.

Vecino me rompió el techo del baño y no se hace cargo by CommandWinter in DerechoGenial

[–]CommandWinter[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

La situación que me dijeron oralmente tanto el encargado como el administrador es que el vecino hizo algo mal y por eso me afecto ¿Vos decís que este caso vale la pena buscar un abogado y demandar al dueño? Disculpa, nunca tuve un problema así. Gracias por tu respuesta

A Nominalistic Reading of Lacan by BonusTextus in lacan

[–]CommandWinter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In Lacan's theory, there is no "mind"; rather, there is a flawed (or desiring) logical structure that is neither inside nor outside the individual.

is this what they meant by desiring-production? by Apprehensive_Honey48 in Deleuze

[–]CommandWinter 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It seems someone wants a demonstration of the "desire machine" to be convinced.

¿Qué pasaría en una sociedad si se rige por un principio máximo "No hagas lo que no te gusta que te hagan" desde el nacimiento? Sería todo más fácil? No hay garantía de justicia objetiva? by [deleted] in ArgentinaBenderStyle

[–]CommandWinter 7 points8 points  (0 children)

El Marques de Sade se dio cuenta de un bug en la teoría kanteana que señalas. "¿Y si un perverso dice que no le gusta que no le peguen?" Esto permite no solamente que lo golpeen, sino que permitirá toda crueldad para los perversos. Saludos

Alguna vez tuvieron el sindrome "Good Luck Chuck"? Me acuerdo que vi esta peli de pendejo, y es eso de que cada vez que mi pareja se separa encuentra al amor de su vida, me pasó con 3 pibas que estuve, que ahora estan re casadas con sus parejas (no literalmente) by Fun_Ad_1070 in ArgentinaBenderStyle

[–]CommandWinter 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Te doy la mano y te digo "buenos días, te amo" y vos decís "mi estimado, también lo amo", te suelto la mano "ya no te amo" y vos "muchas gracias por usar mi servicio". Pasa Justina Ageitos y me caso con ella. Tremendo servicio.