Reading DISPARITIES (7)
“In Zizek’s account the subject is the outcome of the failure of symbolization. This failure concerns not just reference to the object but the object itself. The object can never be its own interpretation, it can never completely be just an object.This is Zizek’s way to avoid both “correlationism” and the sort of meta-correlationism that he is arguing is instituted by OOO.”
“The discourse of OOO, like the discourse of science for Lacan, depends on the foreclusion of the subject. Lacan says “foreclusion” and not subtraction, because the subject can never be fully subtracted. “Subject”, at least at this stage in the argument, is another name for the absence of a foundational level.”
“Zizek does not deny the truth of science, he explicitly recognises the biological and neurological bases of consciousness, but he refuses to consider them as foundational.”
“In his terms they are substance, but not subject:
It is here that we should bear in mind the difference between the Freudian Unconscious and the ‘unconscious’ neurological brain processes: the latter do form the subject’s natural ‘substance’, i.e. subject only exists insofar as it is sustained by its biological substance; however, this substance is not subject.”