‌‌‌‌　　英：cause;法：cause

‌‌‌‌　　因果性 (causality)的概念构成了贯穿在拉康全部著作中的一道重要线索。它首先出现在有关精神病的原因问题的语境之下，这是拉康博士论文中的一则核心关切 (Lacan, 1932)。拉康在1946年又重新返回了这一问题，疯癫的原因在此时变成了所有精神因果性的真正本质。在1946年的这篇文章里，他重申了自己早前的观点，认为需要一种特殊的精神原因来解释精神病：然而，他同样质疑了根据与物质概念的一种简单对立来界定“精神”的可能性，而这则导致他在I955年摒弃了“心理发生”(psychogenesis)的过分简单化概念 (S3,7).

‌‌‌‌　　在1950年代，拉康着手探讨因果性的真正概念本身，并且认为它应当被定位于象征界与实在界之间的边界：它意味着“象征链与实在界之间的某种媒介”(S2,192)。他指出，因果性的概念虽然是支撑所有科学的基础，但其本身却是一种非科学的概念：“原因的概念本身…是被建立在某种原始赌注的基础之上的”（S2,192).

‌‌‌‌　　在1962一1963年度的研讨班上，拉康指出，因果性的真正意义应当在焦虑的现象中来寻找，因为焦虑是怀疑的原因。于是，他便将此一观念联系于对象小a (OBJET PETTT A)的概念，后者现在被定义为欲望的“原因”(cause), 而非欲望所趋向的对象

‌‌‌‌　　在1964年，拉康用亚里士多德的原因类型学来说明象征界与实在界之间的差异 (见：偶然[CHANCE]).

‌‌‌‌　　在其1965一1966年度的研讨班上，拉康又重新返回了因果性的主题，他在那里根据巫术、宗教、科学与精神分析同作为原因的真理之间的关系而在它们之间做出了区分 (见：Lacan, 1965a).

‌‌‌‌　　拉康同样玩味了这一术语的歧义性，因为除了“引起某种结果的原因”之外，该词还具有“人们为之而奋斗的、人们所捍卫的事业”的意思。拉康显然是把他自己看作在为“弗洛伊德事业”（te Freudian cause: 他把这个名词赋予了自己在I980年建立的学派）而战斗，尽管只有当人们认识到无意识的原因始终是“一种丧失的原因”(a lost cause)的时候，这场战斗才可能取得胜利。

‌‌‌‌　　(cause) The concept of causality forms an important thread that runs throughout Lacan'sentire ceuvre. It first appears in the context of the question of the cause of psychosis, which is a central concern of Lacan's doctoral thesis (Lacan, 1932). Lacan returns to thisquestion in 1946, where the cause of madness becomes the very essence of all psychicalcausality. In the 1946 paper he reiterates his earlier view that a specifically psychicalcause is needed to explain psychosis; however, he also questions the possibility ofdefining psychical'in terms of a simple opposition to the concept of matter, and thisleads him, in 1955, to dispense with the simplistic notion of'psychogenesis' (S3,7).

‌‌‌‌　　In the 1950s Lacan begins to address the very concept of causality itself, arguing thatit is to be situated on the border between the symbolic and the real; it implies 'amediation between the chain of symbols and the real' (S2,192). He argues that theconcept of causality, which underpins all science, is itself a non-scientific concept;'thevery notion of cause... Is established on the basis of an original wager' (S2,192).

‌‌‌‌　　In the seminar of 1962-3, Lacan argues that the true meaning of causality should belooked for in the phenomenon of anxiety, for anxiety is the cause of doubt. He then linksthis with the concept of OB. JET PETIT A, which is now defined as the cause of desire, rather than that towards which desire tends.

‌‌‌‌　　In 1964, Lacan uses Aristotle's typology of causes to illustrate the difference betweenthe symbolic and the real (see CHANCE).

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan retums to the subject of causality in his 1965-6 seminar, where he distinguishesbetween magic, religion, science and psychoanalysis on the basis to their relationship totruth as cause (see Lacan, 1965a).

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan also plays on the ambiguity of the term, since besides being 'that whichprovokes an effect', a cause is also 'that for which one fights, that which one defends'. Lacan clearly sees himself as fighting for 'the Freudian cause' (the name he gave to theschool he founded in 1980), although this fight can only be won when one realises thatthe cause of the unconscious is always 'a lost cause' (S11,128).