紀要論文

紀要論文

text

大阪大学大学院人間科学研究科紀要. 2026, 52, p. 63-94

日本語

text

2026-03-18

This article is the sixth (Part VI) and the final part of a series. Alloying philosophy, psychoanalysis, and cultural studies, this series articulates the relationship between the essential nature of Western philosophyʼs metaphysical method of dialectics and the structure of memory in human beings. Covering Western philosophers, from ancient to modern, and quoting social, cultural, and psychopathological materials, this series elucidated the nature of memory in the neurotypical (NT), that is, the so-called normal, in the majority of human beings. As a conclusion, the author elucidates that it is “the otherness,” which always and already permeates the normal and stable working of memory, and frames the structure and content of the ego. In other words, the heteronomous nature of memory and imagination of typically developed individuals is depicted. Part I traced the position of the imagination, from Augustine to Descartes, and Part II traced its position in Kant and Heidegger. Part III examined Hegelʼs theory of the imagination with precision. Hegel transformed the Kantian productive imagination into an imagination that made “sign.” Part IV examined what “sign” and “mechanical memory” were in Hegel and discussed the enigma of the synchronized function of “sign-making fantasy.” Part V explored the riddle of “sign-making fantasy” and discussed the theoretical possibility of a “pseudo-synchronic circuit” that synchronized our fantasies, using contemporary linguistics and psychology. This Part VI, by reexamining Jakobsonʼs famous paper on two types of aphasia, equates Hegelʼs “sign” with what Jakobson calls “metonymy.” According to Jakobsonʼs classification, aphasia can be categorized into two distinct types based on the selection-combination axis. Individuals exhibiting “selection” deficits are characterized by pseudometonymical language impairments, while those with “combination” deficits demonstrate pseudometaphorical deficiencies. In the contemporary context, these phenomena can be associated with autism and schizophrenia. From Jakobsonʼs theoretical framework, two impairments in language operation are abstracted: the failure to detect the context presupposed by others and the failure to maintain oneʼs context against othersʼ contexts. Jacobsonʼs work implicitly succeeds in drawing out the nature of language in normal/typical development as a kind of “social metonymy.” This connects with Hegelʼs “sign.” Additionally, the endnote addresses the reversal terminology for metaphor and metonymy between Jakobson and Lacan. The final section discusses Platoʼs attempt, as argued by Lacan, to transform Socrates from a mediator into the first metonym and supreme philosopher. Interestingly, the Atlantis that Plato used as a metaphor resurfaced as a powerful metonym in late 19th-century spiritualism, paving the way for the popularity of ancient civilizations in the late 1960s. As global capitalism spread, people sought to recall the memory of a lost super-civilization – a future that had arrived. Dänikenʼs ancient astronaut theory capitalized on this wave of imagination. However, this is a “blank memory,” resulting from the communicative power of commodities, made possible by a combination of imagination, memory, and empathy. This combination is a product of the imaginative transformation circuit – the “pseudosynchronic circuit” that we extract from Hegelʼs theory of memory throughout this series.

10.18910/104180

104180

ヤーコブソンの「換喩」、ヘーゲルの「記号」、プラトンのアトランティス : 記憶と想像力の政治経済学批判序説〈6〉

野尻, 英一

大阪大学大学院人間科学研究科

日本語

2026-03-18

大阪大学大学院人間科学研究科紀要

52

63

94

https://hdl.handle.net/11094/104180

10.18910/104180

https://doi.org/10.18910/104180