“The other person’s face is a curious source of inspiration for a person who speaks. A single glance which indicates that a half‐expressed thought is already understood, bestows on us the other half of the formulation.” – Kleist on the effect of the psychoanalyst in analysis


“since the possession of qualities assumes a certain pleasure in their reality, we can see how a man who cannot summon up a sense even in relation to himself may suddenly, one day, come to see himself as a man without qualities.” – Musil on pleasure as basis for identifications

To pass freely through open doors, it is necessary to respect the fact that they have solid frames. This principle, by which the old professor had always lived, is simply a requisite of the sense of reality. But if there is a sense of reality, and no one will doubt that it has its justification for existing, then there must also be something we can call a sense of possibility.

Whoever has it does not say, for instance: Here this or that has happened, will happen, must happen; but he invents: Here this or that might, could, or ought to happen. If he is told that something is the way it is, he will think: Well, it could probably just as well be otherwise. So the sense of possibility could be defined outright as the ability to conceive of everything there might be just as well, and to attach no more importance to what is than to what is not. – ROBERT MUSIL

“”Man thinks with his object” ..insofar as man does not know that he thinks with his object.” – ..Man thinks with his object ..only insofar as he does not know ..what position he inhabits with regard to this object. Man thinks with his object ..only insofar as he does not know ..what this object means. ..Psychoanalysis offers a mode of figuring the subject and it (non)relation to the object through lack, displacement, and (stupid) repetition. ..Psychoanalysis ..may povide new ..understandings of the object with a properly non-correlationist model of subjectivity. http://ift.tt/1vgnQdU

“the most fundamental way we experience what ‘really counts as effectively existing’, is always already presupposed in our judgements of what ‘really exists’. This transcendental level was very nicely indicated by Kuhn himself when, in his Structure of Scientific Revolutions, he claimed that the shift in a scientific paradigm is more than a mere shift in our (external) perspective on/ perception of reality, but nonetheless less than our effectively ‘creating’ another new reality. For that reason, the standard distinction between the social or psychological contingent conditions of a scientific invention and its objective truth-value falls short here: the very distinction between the (empirical, contingent socio-psychological) genesis of a certain scientific formation and its objective truth-value, independent of the conditions of this genesis, already presupposes a set of distinctions (e.g. between genesis and truth-value) that are by no means self-evident” – zizek