Notas

Zupancic, Alenka (2000), Ethics of the Real, Verso

FOREWORD
What is Good in what zizek is saying and what does he mean by his supplement.
Object-cause of desire/ Transcendental subject/ Decentered subject
What is the relation of subject and ethics
What has Good to do in all this?
Why does he take the utilitarian approach in this?
Why does he use an example from cinema to explain or to break the relation good
supplement?

So how are we to break out if this vicious intertwining of the Good and its
obscene supplement? [foreword, xii]
He links the movie with the relation between Good and its obscene supplement.
The good is the greater good or what?
What is the obscene supplement of the Good?

Kant was the first to delineate the dimension beyond the pleasure
principle [foreword, vii]
What is the pleasure principle?, What is beyond the pleasure principle? And why is
this important? PLEASURE PRINCIPLE

()Lacan() Oh, yes, the guy who asserted the subjects decentrement
against the Cartesian and Kantian tradition of transcendental cogito
[foreword, vii]
Que significa decentrar el sujeto, para qu decentrarlo?

Lacans thesis is that the Freudian decentered subject of the unconscious

is no other tan the Cartesian cogito, further radicalized in the Kantian
transcendental subject [foreword, vii]
El inconsciente descubierto por Freud es el sujeto cartesiano. Descubre donde
est. Es el inconsciente.
Soy todo lo que est a mi alrededor, lo que me determina es lo que veo que otros
hacen pero que no tiene nada que ver con ellos sino conimgo

()it is false to try to ground ethics in some calculus of pleasures or gains

()or in expanding this calculus to include our exchange woth God himself
[foreword. ix]
Que sea falso fundamentar la tica en el calculo de los plaseres tienen que ver
con la division de la tica y el bien. Beause Good means for me right now, the
greater good, this is to say if you ground ethics in the Good, then you behave in
consonance to that Good. That is a calculus, a utilitarian approach because you do
something taking into account some future good.
Question: How is the disjunction between ethics and the Good related to the
decentrered of the subject.

the human subject is not only less moral than he knows, but also much
more moral than he believes himself to be: we accomplish moral acts for the
sake of duty, even if we (wrongly) think that we do it on account of some
utilitarian calculus [foreword, x]

(...) one always has to add an x, the unknown remainder, which, of course
, is the Lacanian object petit a, the onject-cause of desire. In this precise
sense, for Lacan, ehics is ultimately the ethics of desire [foreword,x]
This means that the object-cause of desire is the unknown element in every
thinking caused by our own unawareness of ourselves. I dont know me, and
because of that, theres always a part of my projections that I cannot get. The
pathological object of our desire.

Even the most egotistically calculated exchange of favours has to rely on a first
move which cannot be explained in these terms, in some grounding gesture of

giving () which cannot be accounted for in the terms of future benefits [foreword,
x, xi]

What is that object which cannot be calculated? I know is desire, but what could be
an example.
How the Ego-ideal and superego fuction in the example.
The official ideology exhort to do something to avoid something they dont want.
Maybe the wal street people in strike ignoring Microsoft founder is an example .
They exhorted to do it in a cynical way but not to do it really.
Fullfilling the Ego-ideal but cynically not wanting that at all.
Requesting self-management but doing that to oppress.
HOW DO lACAN MAKE THESE THREE CONCEPTS: ETHICAL ACT, EGO,
SUPEREGO, DRIVE.

Introduccin
La relacin entre tica y sicoanalisis se centra en el tema del sujeto tambin. De
qu se trata? De qu se habla exactamente en filosofa cuando se toca el tema
del sujeto? El sicoanalisis es todo acerca del sujeto. La tica es sobre la ley moral
y sobre las acciones de las personas.

The Freudian blow to philosophical ethics can be summarized as follows:

what philosophy calls the moral law and, more precisely, what Kant calls
the categorical imperative is in fact mothing other than the superego.
[intro, 1]

El imperativo categorico no es otra cosa que el superego El superego no es

otra cosa que el componente oculto del sujeto. Por lo tanto Kant no hace
ms que servir de justificacin para las ideologas y lo que sea que quieran
ocultar como moral.

The Lacanian blow to ethics can thus be summarized: the best thing
philosophy has to offer in the name of ethics is a kind of Practical
Philosophy in th the Bedroom, to paraphrase the title of Sades famous
work. [intro, 1]
the moral law, loooked at more closely, is simply desire in its pure state.
This statement is far from innocent, since, as is well know, this concept of
pure desire plays an important, even a central role in Lacans seminar on
the Ethics of Psychoanalysis. [intro, 2]
Kant was the one who introduced the dimension of desire into ethics, and
brought it to its pure state This step, crucial as it was, nevertheless needs
another supplementaru step, which Kant at least according to Lacan did
not take: th step that leads beyond desire and its logic, iinto the realm of the
drive. [intro, 4]
rethink ethics by recognizing and acknowledging the dimension of the
Realin the Lacanian sense of the term as it is already operative in ethics
[intro, 4]
The term ethics is often taken to refer to a set of norms which restrict or
bridle desire which aim to keep our conduct (or, say, the conduct of
science) free of all excess [intro, 4]

Resumen
Temas alternos
Filosofa moral de Kant
Sujeto decentrado de Lacan
El unconsiente de Freud