‌‌‌‌　　英：school; 法：cole

‌‌‌‌　　当拉康从法国精神分析学会（Societe Francaise de Psychanalyse, 简称SFP)辞职之后，他在1964年又创建了巴黎弗洛伊德学派 (Ecole Freudienne de Paris, 简称EFP), 出于一些明确的理由，他选择将其称为“学派”。这不但是一个精神分析组织首度被称作“学派”而非“协会”(association)或“学会”(society), 而且“学派”一词也凸显了这样一个事实，即巴黎弗洛伊德学派更多是以一家学说为中心的一种精神分析训练手段，而非以一群重要人物为中心的一种制度性秩序。因而，在巴黎弗洛伊德学派的名称中有“学派”一词的使用，便恰好表明了它是旨在建立与以往建立的那些类型截然不同的一种精神分析制度的尝试。拉康竭力想要避免他在国际精神分析协会（NTERNATIONAL PSYCHO-ANALYTICAL ASSOCIATION, 简称PA)中看到的那些以等级制度来管理机构的危险，他也因此指责那些渐渐统治国际精神分析协会的理论性误解，他声称，国际精神分析协会变成了一种教会 (S11,4)。然而，同样需要注意的是，拉康针对国际精神分析协会的这些批评并非是针对精神分析体制本身的一种批评，虽然他对围困所有精神分析体制的那些危险持极具批判性的态度，但是他亲自创建了一个组织的事实，也证明了他认为某种制度性的框架对于精神分析家们而言是必不可少的。因而，拉康虽然像那些拒绝所有体制的分析家们一样持有怀疑的态度，不过他也同样属于那些把体制变成某种教会的人。

‌‌‌‌　　倘若不了解巴黎弗洛伊德学派的历史 (1964一1980)，那么拉康的很多思想便是无法理解的，尤其是拉康有关分析家的训练 (TRAINING)的那些思想。在此一语境下需要注意的是，巴黎弗洛伊德学派并不纯粹是一个训练性的机构，而且它的会员资格也并不局限于分析家/受训者，而是向着任何对于精神分析有兴趣的人所开放的。所有会员均具有同等的投票权，而这意味着巴黎弗洛伊德学派是历史上首个真正民主的精神分析组织

‌‌‌‌　　在巴黎弗洛伊德学派中存在着四种范畴的成员：M.E (Membre de I'Ecole: 学派会员或简单会员)、A.P.(Analyste Practiquant: 执业分析家）、A.M.E.(Analyste Membre de I'Ecole: 学派分析家会员)以及A.E.(Analyste de I'Ecole: 学派分析家)。会员们能够且通常都会同时拥有几个不同的头衔。那些申请学派会员资格的人在被承认为ME. 之前，需要接受一个名叫“铰链”(cardo: 该词意指开门所需的折页)的委员会的面试。

‌‌‌‌　　只有A.ME. 与A.E.才被学派承认为分析家，不过其他会员也不会被禁止去操作分析，而且可以授予自己A.P.的头衔以表明他们是执业分析家。那些被授予A.ME. 头衔的学派会员需要满足一个由资深会员所组成的评审委员会的要求，即他们以一种令人满意的方式对两位病人进行了分析，就此意义而言，AME. 的范畴便类似于其他精神分析学会中的名誉会员。A.E.的头衔则是基于拉康称之为“通过”(PASS)的一种非常不同的程序来授予的。“通过”在1967年被拉康确立为一种检验分析结束的手段，而且构成了巴黎弗洛伊德学派最具独创性的特征。巴黎弗洛伊德学派的另一独创性特征便是提倡在一种名叫卡特尔 (CARTELS)的学习小组中进行研究。

‌‌‌‌　　巴黎弗洛伊德学派的最后几年充斥着有关通过与其他问题的激烈论战 (见：Roudinesco, 1986)。在1980年，拉康解散了巴黎弗洛伊德学派，而在1981年他又创建了一个新的机构以取而代之，即弗洛伊德事业学派 (Ecole de la Cause Freudienne, 简称ECF)。某些原来属于巴黎弗洛伊德学派的成员追随拉康加入了弗洛伊德事业学派，而其他人则留下来成立了各种其他的团体。其中的一些团体至今仍然存在，如同弗洛伊德事业学派一样。

‌‌‌‌　　(ecole) When Lacan founded the Ecole Freudienne de Paris (EFP) in 1964, after hisresignation from the Societe Franchise de Psychanalyse (SPP), he chose to call it aschool'for precise reasons. Not only was it the first time that a psychoanalyticorganisation had been called a 'school'rather than an 'association'or a'society', but theterm 'school'also highlighted the fact that the EFP was more a means of psychoanalyticformation centred around a doctrine than an institutional order centred around a group ofimportant people. Thus the very use of the term 'school'in the name of the EFP indicatedthat it was an attempt to found a very different type of psychoanalytic institution fromthose which had been founded before. Lacan was particularly keen to avoid the dangersof the hierarchy dominating the institution, which he saw in the INTERNATIONALPSYCHO-ANALYTICAL ASSOCIATION (IPA), and which he blamed for thetheoretical misunderstandings which had come to dominate the IPA; the IPA hadbecome, he argued, a kind of church (S11,4). However, it is also important to note that Lacan's criticisms of the IPA do not imply a criticism of the psychoanalytic institution per se; while Lacan is very critical of the dangers that beset all psychoanalyticinstitutions, the fact that he himself founded one is evidence that he thought that somekind of institutional framework was necessary for psychoanalysts. Thus Lacan is just assceptical of those analysts who reject all institutions as he is of those who turn theinstitution into a kind of church.

‌‌‌‌　　Many of Lacan's ideas cannot be understood without some understanding of thehistory of the EFP (1964-80), especially those of Lacan's ideas which relate to theTRAINING of analysts. In this context it is important to note that the EFP was notmerely a training institute, and that membership was not restricted to analysts/trainees, but was open to anyone with an interest in psychoanalysis. All members had equal votingrights, which meant that the EFP was the first truly democratic psychoanalyticorganisation in history.

‌‌‌‌　　There were four categories of members in the EFP:M.E.(Membre de I'Ecole, orsimple member),A.P.(Analyste Practiquant),A.M.E.(Analyste Membre de I'Ecole), and A.E.(Analyste de I'Ecole). Members could, and often did, hold several titlessimultaneously. Those who applied for membership of the school were interviewed by acommittee called the cardo (a word meaning a hinge on which a door tums) before beingadmitted as an M.E.

‌‌‌‌　　Only the A.M.E.and the A.E.were recognised as analysts by the school, althoughother members were not forbidden to conduct analyses, and could award themselves thetitle of A.P.to indicate that they were practising analysts. The title of A.M.E.was grantedto members of the school who satisfied a jury of senior members that they had conductedthe analysis of two patients in a satisfactory manner; in this sense, the category of A.M.E, was similar to that of the titular members of other psychoanalytic societies. The title of A.E, was awarded on the basis of a very different procedure, which Lacan called thePASS. The pass was instituted by Lacan in 1967 as a means of verifying the end ofanalysis, and constitutes the most original feature of the EFP. Another original feature ofthe EFP was the promotion of research in small study groups known as CARTELS.

‌‌‌‌　　The final years of the EFP were dominated by intense controversy over the pass andother issues (see Roudinesco, 1986). In 1980, Lacan dissolved the EFP, and in 1981 hecreated a new institution in its stead, the Ecole de la Cause Freudienne (ECF). Some ofthe original members of the EFP followed Lacan into the ECF, whereas others left to setup a variety of other groups. Some of these groups still exist today, as does the ECF.