PART 2

Circuit interpretation.

Herewith follows the second part of Karl Louvet´s introduction to the “Circuit inerpretation”. He describes here the philosophical framework he uses to explain the development of the different drive levels; this time focused on the theoretical start and finish from P0 to P5.  The translation of these 12 pages was still more difficult than that of part 1 because Karl used several Lacan concepts which were difficult to translate as I never studied Lacan´s theories.

Karl´s philosophical vieuw is described in a more extended form in the works of KEN WILBER , e.g in: “Sex, Ecology, Spirituality”, Band 6, ca 800 pages.

In case you will be surprised by the conclusions of Karl it might be worth while to remember Prof. Richard Hughes reference to Szondi´s religiosity: 

“Behind his professional roles of physician, scientist, scholar, and teacher lies one basic quality. Szondi was a genuinely religious person, a man of profound spirituality and prayer. Prayer essentially is participation with God. The analysis of destiny gives way to an ultimate mystery, to which one transfers one’s entire being in solemn gratitude. Meditation on an ultimate mystery empowers a pure experience of love and joy”

The contents of the next translation Nr.3 will be less philosophical and more technical and will explain the Patoanañytical method to calculate the different levels of functioning. (I hope you read this translation with some tolerance for my shortcomings as a translator. Anyhow in case anybody can make a better translation I will immediately transfer yours to the Forum in exchange).

Leo Berlips, editor

==============================================

PP step by step – 1

In the beginning in PP1 the contact has as a basic quality that it is like a sandbag. Everybody is together, there is no a difference between anyone. For example, at a party all are together, everybody is considered in the same way and on the same equal footing: woman, man, old people, child, having the same nationality or not. It is the same price for everyone; one is in the same bath so to speak.  Now, if I start to say to a person: “And you, you are a woman, and me I am a man, and if I touched you?” then I introduce the difference of the sexes. Idem if I take account of the age or of the difference in nationality. These differences need not necessarily to taken into account, it is precisely all typical for each level to take in account one after one these differences, whereas in the (basic) contact, one experiences it without being conscious of it.  It is the same thing with the objects, one sees them, but they are not considered for themselves. In this form of contact, what counts is to be with the others, despite the kind of the objects they are.

On the other hand, at the stage of the PP2, there is an important super object and that is Oneself, and what counts consequently at a party is to be seen with one’s beautiful clothing, one’s bronzing, etc. and when this Ego goes towards people, it chooses particularly towards whom he goes, preferably towards the same type as oneself, as good (looking) as oneself, another person who will spotlight the existence of the “beautiful Ego”. Therefore, the question of the object,that oneself is becomes important and passes before anything else.  To refer again to the meeting where the difference between the sexes plays a role, there are two possibilities: either the meeting is counted for (registered) in time and it is a couple, or the meeting is not accounted for in time and it is a passing fancy (“one night’s stand”. lb) with the intention to experience sensual and sexual intensity.

 The aspect “intensity” is rewarded each time that the other only is regarded as an object in the service of oneself, something that can be reciprocal. In any case, if time is taken in account during this meeting, then the “intensity” aspect passes to the second plan and decreases to leave the place for a relation where I now myself became the object of this relation, in other words I do not decide any more all alone how that meeting will evolve.

  In the case when the deeper ground of the the Ego (causalité de soi) has an “intensive sensoric-sexual aspect”, the subject is guided by an image of himself – the Super object - to which he subjects the other objects.  They are selected according to narcissistic criteria.

For example, the presentations of the homosexual - photographs of the faces of the type (h) chosen positively - and of the sadist  - photographs of the faces of the type (s) chosen positively - were gathered in the test within the same vector: the Sexual vector, including the factors (h) and (s).

They have in common not to want/to be able to account with the evolutionary and historical temporality in order to remain fully in the Ego’s “intensive sensory-sexual orientation. (Causalité de soi)  In other words they want to avoid the symbolic castration (limitation) which oblige us to accept death, ageing, and to refuse the personal absolute power of one’s desires. Under these conditions, the others are apprehended as objects in the service of a narcissistic scenario, which presupposes a “contract of mutual pleasure” between partners. This is not necessarily pathologic. It is a mode of existence, which prefers to stick to a certain stage of development in order to exploit all the assets, even if it means to lose something on the side of the relation with time.

 In the PP2 group the cause of suffering of the members is their intensity.  With the entry into the PP2, the relation with the World will pass more and more by the objects, but the object acts like a magnifying glass that reinforces, concentrates and increases the libido flow.

 In PP1, the intensity is diluted by all kinds of successions caused by the multiple facets of the environment, there is no concentration, everything comes and goes. On the other hand, in the PP2 the object dominates and with it the intensity follows a course of intensification, organization, consolidation.

The PP2 generates the mechanism of retention and that strongly concentrates the libido. If the search for intensity of experiencing in the PP1 remains diluted, in the PP2 it becomes instead a research for the power of intensity, a persistent intensity that is constantly within the range of the subject thanks to his/her imaginary, it is the triumph of narcissism. 

 Likewise, in PP3, that what make people suffer is the actual time, the present).

 To live in the present and in a world of objects is to experience the actual time, the present (temporalité) more intensively, accentuated by the prism of the object. The factory´s timetable means to start every day the same hour, right on the minute, with the penalty to become nervous if one arrives too late. The factory is the object that  reinforces the experience of the actual time beyond the fluid nature of time.

The subjects in PP4 avoid this effect of the magnifying glass caused by the relation with the omnipresent objects during the whole day; they are more fluid in their relation to time. Their time is not as pressurized by a series objects, “which await their turn”.  The temporal object, is like a child that has just been born and who imposes a demanding observance of time; it is the queue to the supermarket counter where one has “no time”, i.e. another object imposes its time on us, as for example an appointment we cannot miss.  If intensity marks as much both the PP1 and the PP2, the PP2 undergo much stronger the impact of it, because they advance (transitent) primarily by the object. If the present characterizes as well the PP3 and the PP4, the reign of the object in PP3 gives them a focused temporal power that leads to a temporal plus value  (surenchère), which has nothing to do with the steady succession of evolutionary time. 

In PP2, this higher plus value of the power of intensity can be explained starting from the concept of the retention of the libido. By mans of the objects, the subject channels the libido towards internal high temperatures, structured around rigid axes, which support the narcissistic vault of the subject. In this bubble of space-time specific to the subject in PP2, the peaceful water of the continuity of time (moderation, temperance, lower intensity on the long term) cannot spread out on the fire of their All might. Their desire “to live intensively” ends up burning their soul, but they will continue only to listen to themselves and to continue their insatiable search with the means that remain to them.  In addition to the constant overheating of the intensity of their experience, the relation to the retracted time causes a tough feeling of impermanency. To calm this feeling that their passage leaves no trace, they turn to an adoration of specific time periods, to music, to places, to specific people, etc. These adorations reflect to them an image of stability and pseudo-permanence. In the same way, they wish implicitly that such adoration is dedicated to them, for the same reason, to testify to a will of permanence. The “statue of oneself” replaces the “natural” subject in the temporality of the World. But that does not hold, because the more they feel impermanent, the more they increase the intensity of their experiences, the more they rigidify their life, the more they pervert/divert the relation with time. It is a vicious circle, a typical logical loop of the stabilized PP2 whose discomfort oozes, like the ransom to be paid for the devoration of time in orgies of insatiable intensities and (insoupçonnables). 

The concept of the object is essential to understand the PP2 and the PP3. If in the PP2, the privileged object is oneself, in the PP3, it is the reverse. The others, meaning a group, or community, is the object that exerts its power over oneself. It is necessary to yield to the schedules, to the education, the rules, good manners, and to the moral and  become an object among others in the service of the Community object.

The positions in the PP3 are legalist-realistic-adaptive. If we return to our history of the couple, his partner’s parents receive the young man, there he is presented regarding engagement and marriage: the temporal aspect takes precedence henceforth over the sensory-sexual (intensoriel) aspect. The deeper ground (causalité) of the exchanges  between the partners has more the quality of a “marriage contract” than that of a “contract of pleasure”, it is the choice of duration instead of that of intensity. If the intensity allows the subject to keep his way of living nder control, the duration obliges him to subject himself to a temporality that largely exceeds his personal “jurisdiction”. 

From PP1 towards the PP2, we observe the inauguration of the narcissistic object that  is the same as oneself, the beautiful image of oneself. From PP2 towards the PP3: we note the primacy of the Community object that is not at all oneself and to which one must subject oneself.  The PP2 and the PP3 function largely through objects, which have the priority over (are more important) than the vector of “To Be”. This means that

“To Have” this object (or to match with its priorities), it is to succeed. To lose it, is to miss one’s blow.

 This is not the case in the PP1 and the PP4 where the object does not occupy a central place, but peripheral. If in the PP1, it is the environment that counts, in the PP4, it are the reigning values and principles, in the meaning of that what transcend the laws and the rules that function in  a “local” setting, somewhat like ethics transcends morals.

In other words the inner judgment concerning what is truth is exerted beyond the jurisdiction of the standards in force in a specific community (in a certain area and in a specific time), “from time immemorial” so to speak. This freedom of the PP1 and the PP4 compared to the object makes them much more suited to tune in with the World, while the PP2 and the PP3 lock the subject in the narrow story which we presented before in connection with the everlasting question of the object.  

Let us take again the four instinctual positions 

PP1:

 To be”, and not the privileged object, is the deeper layer (causalité de soi) of oneself by way of the intensity but in an unspecified way. For example, it means to have fun without making any difference between place, time, or partner, it is to enjoy oneself without seeking a personal stake in this pleasure. One wants just to be with in what is going on, “to be inside”, in the bath. It is the intensity for sake of intensity, and one takes the least possible account of the differences.   

 PP2:

“To have”, is the deeper layer –fundament- (causalité) of the person and is determined by the intensity and mediated by the privileged object that is the same as oneself (the other objects are in the service of the subject). For example, the “contract of pleasure” and mutual valorization is a relation which avoids any form of limitation (castration) by  refusing to be taken up in the historical and evolutionary temporality, i.e. death and of course old age.

 From another point of view, in the PP2, we meet a relation of type retracted time, that is for example expressed by the reaction (hy+) which belongs to this level (hy+) = to choose photographs of the (hy) type according to a proportion in which the sympathetic choices (hy+) dominate the (hy-) antipathetic choices. These are photographs of faces of people presenting in a clear way the hysterical disorders taken during the time when szondi worked.

Thus, the person who got hysteria has a memory problem and does not want to know too much any more what occurred, he represses like one says, and then produces  “intensive reactions”, generally in the form of crises. It is as if the libido ebbed towards the censor and the intensity caused by its prevention and hinders it to run in a homogeneous way during a long time. In addition, the reaction (hy+) is also found in the little child who is extreme glad in front of a mirror while looking at itself: it discovers its own image; it is the specular imago that will found the narcissism of this child, the “me I”. What is intense at that moment is that subject´s time suddenly starts, he was not aware of its existence and now suddenly perceives he exists. Even here one thus finds in this new experience a relation with retracted time and a focus on sensory intensity as the base (causality) of oneself.  This difference - the advent of a selfimage (sense of oneself) - will change everything in the relation with the others. Before, that it did not have importance, now the self image will become dominating in the relation to others. It is the narcissistic object’s domination that from now is essential in the relation with the World. It is it to such a degree that this object has all the qualities of a sphincter: it closes and opens the door according to the approval that emanates from himself (depending on if one corresponds or not with the subject´s image , one is accepted or rejected). The reaction (hy+) translates this need for the visibility of the object = that what one self is: to show oneself, to show a affects, to produce one’s personal cinema or get a one´s crisis like one says.

 In another area, the uprooted (displaced) person who suffers by the situation of being in exile has also a problem in his relation to time, but for other reasons. From then he will have to reconstitute a visibility to alleviate the detachment of his identity from the historical time of his lineage (background). Under these conditions, a skid is possible when the subject is destabilized: then either he shows too much visibility of himself or not enough. Normally our own visibility should not be any more a problem as such, except if the line of time is broken in one way or another, in this case, the need to be seen becomes again an imperative need to be satisfied, a little like the child vis-à-vis his mirror.

 PP3: “To Have”. On this level the subject is an object among the others in the service of the community, it is the base (causality) of oneself determined by historical and evolutionary temporality, but within the framework of the community. In other words via the privileged object which is the community. For example, the marriage contract, the professional contract, the work schedule, regular payments, etc

PP4: “To Be”. On this level one is not a privileged object, the foundation (causality) of oneself is determined in a precisely way by temporality by taking into account of time, but without really taking account of the framework of the community in which we live. That occurs beyond the usual standards, it is to live in time but in another larger time perspective. What occurs today might be interesting, but without true interest, for tomorrow is another day and thus it is since ever. (the night of times). It is the human person as the living memory of the time that passed, passes and will pass.

The idea of time as an ongoing process dominates the PP4, thus the subjects in PP4 experience “processual” events, they feel part of processes which influence them (take care of them) and on which they finally do not control.

In contrast, the scientific community presents the facade of a speech pretending it to have the qualities of the type PP4, seemingly objective and almost ascetic, but actually the question of the object is dominating.

appendic of the connection to the origin, by dictating a trajectory (logos) primarily directed towards the vector “To Have” rather than towards that of “To Be”. A scientist belongs initially to his scientific community, its language, its codes and to no other community, on this depends his legitimacy. It is a kind of sect where a key language dominates that not has to be “corrupted” by an “inappropriate” vocabulary. His alienation from his objects to be measured is permanent, and his speech is decapitated when it is the subject of his statement. “It speaks” scientifically starting from his mouth, it is “objective”. This decapitation of the subject is found again in the relation to the World, in particular by decapitating all the religious myths developt during the progress of humanity. This massacre of the symbolic human capital in the shape of presenting it as an object of anthropological studies, is a new formula of colonialism and is typical of the reign of the object: to fetter continuity in formulas by pretending that only that what can be formulated can exist and that truth is that what can be cut up in pieces. (dépeçable).

Impossible to mentally reach the conscience of an unconditional Unit in all things under these conditions of objectivity (a term which describes well to what we refer) 

Thus here we are with regard to a speech presented like a re-examination beyond the local differences, i.e. pretended to be a speech of the type PP4, but primarily oriented towards an objectiv dynamic. Temporality + privileged relation with the object = PP3. All that this science can exude, it is the wadding in of the consumer society, the cutting-up of the subject and its formulation in objective terms. The absolute power of the obsessional thought applied to the scientific study is only an alternative of the absolute power, a little more perverse than the others because it presents itself like the most  legitimate to the eyes of the community. Thus to justify the progress of science, we enter a society which finally presents progress like a regression. The Nazis did not do better at their time, besides with very scientific means. The famous rationality of the scientist, their evaluation, (pondération) their sense of measurement, in short the moderation of the followers of science only acts within the framework used to satisfy the desire of the absolute power, (pas dans le but= ) . The investment (stake) of scientific thought is free of any castration; it does not have any limit. The scientists have neither God nor Master; they prostitute themselves with all the budgets.  Consider the amazing example of Mgr George Lemaître, astrophysicist and mathematician Walloon (Charleroi 1894 - Leuwen 1966), author of a relativistic model of the Expanding universe (1927) who formulated then the first cosmological theory according to which the Universe, originally very dense, would have started expanding following an explosion (1931). It is he who conceptualized the origin of the universe with the Big Bang. It was a chanoine, a Christian within the church. He perverted (in the meaning of an abduction) completely and scientifically his vocation of faith by gulping downs the divine origin of the World. Where God was reigned, he put his formulas. Thanks to Mgr. Lemaître, we are equipped with a scientific representation of the Origin, i.e. all that is in the Universe can be given a scientific explanation starting from this representation. It should well be understood that there is no representation of a pure universal Origin. The representation of the Origin has ipso facto  a totalitarian quality. By principle, the only way of avoiding that, it is not to represent the Origin. This “Christian” was in the first place a typical scientist, he injected the original dimension of the religion in the heart of science and science has petrified in one blow the religious representations of the World, in other words the essential mysterious representations, which precisely avoided to be filled with something based on our limited understanding. (pour éviter justement d'y mettre quoique ce soit à notre portée). One could not do worse nor betray more clearly the alliance with God. 

 The difference between the imaginary and the symbolic.

The symbolic system, are in fact mental images (that of the father, flag, church, etc) which control other mental images, i.e. those of the imaginary one. These symbolic images systems have more authority on the subject than the other images because they “are connected”. They are connected to the Third, i.e. what represents the reference in the community and which guarantees the respect of the differences. It is thus a significant (with a specific form) which holds its persuasive force by something with an

important meaning (a common background).

It gets the authority and its relay by the figure of the father, not the father himself, but the father as a representative, for the family, (and) all the other people who do not belong to the family but need however to be hold in account. These “connected” aspects of the symbolic images that animate and govern our mental life translate the process of linking to that what exceeds us. The quality and the power of the images which control our spirit will in general depend on the successful function of this process.

It is the temporality which is used as a matrix for these stages of the psyche (PP3 and PP4), because the meaning of time is precisely what connects everything. In any case, the temporal bond is a widespread bond that easily can be registered within the scope of the human understanding. This is not the case of the Tao for example, a “concept” much more difficult to apprehend within the framework of our understanding. The more the subject reaches to a historical and evolutionary sense of time, the more he is connected to himself through all his successive states, and the more he is also connected to what preceded him. As he takes better into account the succession of the various states of consciousnesses through the passing of the hours, of the days, of the months and the years, and even of the generations, he is able to remain (d'une seule pièce) a whole person vis-a-vis his desires which naturally go in all directions.  He who is disconnected from the system of the whole (unit) - not his own in particular, losing the principle of the whole in any case – gets there by cutting out himself yielding to the force of his dissimilar desires in the course of time. To avoid this dispersion or, if it is more serious, these cleavages, the subject “castrates himself” by limiting the force of his desires (and those of the others on him too) thanks to holding a good relation with a stable and constant time. That implies a diversity (panoplie) of images which control the other images, of which in particular a consistent image of the father who

Who is preserved from the risks of everyday life (qui soit préservée des aléas de la vie humaine.) This complicated route of time is in the long run “destiny” shaping and has a price: it is necessary to die one day and not to forget it. Many are those who prefer not to know, even if it means to retract a little more the relation to time. This permanent conscience of our own finitude is precisely what the person who feels  “unhappily to have been born” tries to forget. He does not anymore give himself a choice and then tries an exit towards the neo-originating and then is in the situation of “eigher to move or to go under”. It is the arrangement of the almighty Ego, the absolute in daily life.  Beyond all this architecture, the “wise” subject enters into a temporality that is as well universal as daily, as well elementary as systemic, that of the Tao and of God for example, that of the Transcendental Subject as the memory of the Origin hidden in us: being both the start of life in PP0 and the achieved destiny in PP5.

In this way the identification with the Origin in PP4 is a way and not an end in itself: to be alive, i.e. means shaping our Live through our own actions.  When the passage is made towards the PP3 and PP4, the subject is less and less influenced by the intensity of what is happening from day to day. One says that he is capable of an ascetic behavior (to the contrary of those in PP1 and PP2 who are hungry for sensations, i.e. for intensive body experiences, gustatory, auditiv and visual). This manner of not any more really  depending on the intensity of what happens around him when making a decision is the result of the subject’s greater attention for the link of time. Temporality makes it possible to connect events and to build a unit on a greater range, to hold account of more elements, to be less dispersed as a result of the force of the imagination that must from the on play its ranges in a lower tone.  This “exit” out of the intensity in order to enter historical and evolutionary temporality will be repeated on still another level. It is the “exit” out of the (common, limited ed.) human understanding that is realized when one arrives at the entry in the PP5 - PP0 (they indicate the same thing even if they seem to be separated due to the usual limited degree of development of the viewpoint of the human spirit). What does that want to say? 

The vision in question here is proposed as a hypothesis there where finally one can connect a  link between the human being and something that is not human. By dislodging the narcissism of its central position by the process of castration of the symbolic system, a mental trajectory is sketched whose logical result prevents the human understanding from taking itself a central position in the vital values systems. At the end of this trajectory, it will well be necessary to give the human understanding its place as an element in a system that exceeds it. It is the spiritual castration of the conscience.   Conveyers of the Origin, we are vectors of times who transmit what occurred since the whole beginning. To state this schematically, we are lines traced from the Origin to the present. When a line goes up from far behind, something of the first indetermination is shows up through this subject, that permits to renew the diagrams of thought and to start again the “Play of Creation ” beyond the possible current dead ends. By becoming aware, is to become oneself an original conscience, i.e. ready to transmit the meaning of the Origin, its gift. The principal manner of becoming qualified for this transmission consists in not to falsify the link to the Origin within the framework of the human understanding: “It is necessary to make a hole to be able to pass through”.   Normally, the szondians ought to be “ready” for this vision. Why?  Initially, Leopold Szondi himself was inspired during a dream where he saw the construction of his instinctual system; “it” came to him. He was, by he way, accustomed to reason like an inspired person without dealing too much with the experimental checking of his statements, he largely followed his intuitions. It are his disciples disseminated in the whole world who patiently checked a number of his intuitions by the induced empirical verification method during the frequent use of the test.  Secondly, the test is precise; it is even like a “laser ray” so much its precision is coherent and consistent to decipher psychic complexity. However, if you question the szondians, academics or not, they are absolutely unaware of all the mechanism at work in this test. It is even comic since they arrive with photographs of faces that they show you to make a series of choice, and then afterwards come back with a diagnosis that engages their responsibility as a clinician, teacher, researcher, etc.  Between the photographs of faces and the result that must be interpreted, nada, nichts, no explanation, a great Nothing of Nothing. If that is not a wink of the Transcendental Subject, then they are completely blocked as for the question of the transcendence. Therefore, I say that they are undoubtedly already favorable – to this idea - if they use this test, they really do not have any more the choice, they already made the choice when becoming szondians.  Notice, that without being szondian, C.G. Jung had pushed his theorization towards the synchronicity, i.e. the fact that events happening in reality do not arrive by chance. This is even more daring than the Szondi test, however, between the two, there is this (cette mise à l'index) transfer to the index of the human understanding. Even the Freudian psychoanalysts are unable, completely unable, to account for the mechanisms at work in the human spirit, might this refer to  thinking, dreaming, love, having faith.

There are already many human generations who try “to put in boxes” what does not belong to the area of human understanding but what takes part by “sur-prise”. It is not because one shows it by pointing out in the significant way of the Lacan´s “great Other” that it is seriously taken in account as that what has a meaning (que signifié). It is necessary all the same still to work through the mourning of the narcissistic framework in the relation to the World, narcissistic in the meaning of “anthropomorphic”, in other  “to explain” the World.

 I want to say that the anthropomorphic conceptual base puts the human person like the World´s Subject. Personally, I would say this rather: “Give the World its place and the World will put you on your place”.  This diagram is thus an invitation to be less mentllay retarded in regard to the human prsohuman and seriously take into account this central hole in the fabric of human understanding through which transits the original bottom. Imagine a well if you want an image more current. Concretely, the person who gets back to his  original Adam vision finds at the same time the meaning of Unity in everything things.

It is not obvious, but it is possible to have the presentiment of it. Just like the access to temporality makes it possible to escape from the yoke of intensity, the access to the outside of the human understanding (cf “required”, “truth”, etc) prevents the adversity from having a catch on our conscience. Without any means to clutch the conscience, the adversity slips above, a little as a passer by would cross an army without armor, or as a perfect saber would never leave its sleeve since the combat is interior before even being possible at the outside.

Quid? 

 The essential is to circulate in all the positions, even the most improbables, because the indetermination is the point of view of all the points of view, the headland of which one can attend the spectacle of his own human condition and embrace with a glance the panorama of human finitude. It is a vital position, especially for those, which were trapped by the absolute power, in particular by its most wrongfully made pretexts which legitimated science, the truth and even faith. It is necessary to pay attention so that the goal which one assigns to do not allow that one overlaps the absolute. Many are the speeches which reject the absolute in their goals, but which constantly cherish it in the implemented means. Absolute power is a genius artist that deceives the human spirit through multiple cleavages following our propensity to  patauger ? in vanity. The cleavages are overcome starting from instinctual work, because the impulse is spirit: it can add to itself, see itself and make conclusions, all depends on the point of view on which it founds the report of its own circulation. Its intention is to circulate in an overall continuity that can defuse the damming up and the cleavages caused by the constant recourse to the absolute power.  One of these cleavages is precisely to remove from the impulse its nature of spirit, an instead to transform it in an organic component without aptitude to shape the conscious. On this subject, I quote Jean Mélon: “The Szondi postulate wakes up the memory of a famous aphorism of Hegel: “Trieb ist Geist” (The impulse is spirit).

We are of the opinion that Szondi takes part of the family of ideas developed by Hegel while Freud and psychiatry have at least in common that they implicitly assert the way of thought of Kantian. What will this mean? When he introduced officially the concept of Trieb with Triebe und Triebschicksale (1915), Freud hastens to put it away to the side of the unknowable, at least when considered in comparison with positive science. About drive “en soi” or the drive as an object of science, we do know almost nothing and we will hardly know more of it in the future. It is a (noumène), but as such, one cannot make it calculations with it. On the plan of the phenomena, we are only confronted with the offspring (Abkommlinge) of the drive. Thus let us leave the drive to its “grandiose

indetermination”, let us satisfy ourselves with outlining the concept of it by specifying its determinants (source, object, push, goal), let us specify also quickly and without seeming to touch the possible destinies (reversal in the opposite, orientation towards oneself, repression, sublimation), and let us only interest  us from now on in its significant and measurable demonstrations, thanks to which we can hope to make a good impression in front of the court of science. 

The same bell sound resounds in the dimensions of psychiatry where the question of the origin of the psychoses is indefinitely reported to an X which appears increasingly too remote to be measured exact in the way most scientist believe in. In this context, the one who avows knowledge of this topic gives at best the impression to be a believer and at worst to be illuminated. As all modern science proceeds from Kantian agnosticism, one should not be astonished that “the szondians” are considered to belong to a Gnostic sect, spiritual descendants of Plato-Hegel, vulnerable to the condescending contempt of the sons of Aristotle-Kant. But the believers are not always those who one expects. Moreover the true Kant is not whom the posterity retains most readily, but it is true that after him science became hardened in an arrogant celibacy. Kant succeeded in the mission which he had taken to “to limit Science’s ambitions in order to preserve the prerogative of Faith”, but his heirs generally showed themselves more sectarian, rejecting into the Faith´s “dustbins” all that is not absolutely positive and objectively.  It is this intransigent cleavage between faith and science, or between truth and certainty, which Hegel refuses. This cleavage should be better rather to be overcome and that is the mission, which Hegel assigns to Science. Not that he goes as far as claiming that the thing in “en-soi” is more recognizable than Kant stated, but one should not leave him for that to his imposing indetermination or to his splendid indifference. It is necessary to produce from it the concept (Begriff) by the reconciliation of the “object “en-soi” and “for itself”. The concept is something else than the simple idea or reflection of the object in our thought, it is a working through of the issue (chose) and on the issue that allows us to tear it off from its indifference, and this thing also exists for us. For this reason we say that Szondi is Hégélien and why also we follow him in the eagerness that we invest to present the drive concept as a central concept of psychiatry and, beyond that, of the way man realizes himself. (du fonctionnement de l'homme en tant qu'homme.)