Oedipalized Disjunctive Synthesis
Commit incest and you'll be a zombie and a hermaphrodite.AO75:1
The inclusive permutation-bound inscription of the "...or...or...or...or" is opposed by the restrictive, exclusive, and negative "either/or".
Oedipus says to us: either you will internalize the differential functions that rule over the exclusive disjunctions, and thereby "resolve" Oedipus, or you will fall into the neurotic night of imaginary identifications. Either you will follow the lines of the triangle - lines that structure and differentiate the three terms - or you will always bring one term into play as if it were one too many in relation to the other two, and you will reproduce in very sense the dual relations of identification in the undifferentiated. But there is Oedipus on either side.
AO79:0
Disjunctive Synthesis can be used in two ways: immanent and transcendent:
How does Psychoanalysis reinforce the latter? See Paralogisms of psychoanalysis > The Double Bind
Through the double bind its observed that Oedipus has two poles, and it's these poles in which the oedipalized subject oscillates in series, between problem and cure, thing-to-correct and shining-example.
Oedipus says to us:
either you will internalize the differential functions that rule over the exclusive disjunctions, and thereby "resolve" Oedipus,
One pole characterized by imaginary figures that lend themselves to a process of identification,
When tending towards this pole, Oedipus is minimal
Or you will always bring one term into play as if it were one too many in relation to the other two, and you will reproduce in every sense the dual-relations of identification in the undifferentiated.
AO79:0
and a second pole characterized by symbolic functions that lend themselves to a process of differentiation
AO82:1
When tending towards this pole, Oedipus is maximal
Here Oedipus encounters its two extremes, its minimum and maximum, depending on whether it is regarded as tending toward an undifferentiated value of its variable images, or towards the force of differentiation of its symbolic functions. "When one draws nearer to the material imagination, the differential function diminishes, one tends towards equivalences; when one draws nearer to the formative elements, the differential function increases, one tends towards distinctive valences"
It will hardly come as a surprise to learn that Oedipus as a structure is the Christian Trinity, whereas Oedipus as a crisis is a familial trinity insufficiently structured by faith: always the two poles in inverse proportion, Oedipus forever!
AO82:1
Facing this double-bind, it seems then that the difference (in nature) is not between [the Neurotic and the Normal::the Imaginary and the Symbolic] – Instead, it's one between the machinic and the structural whole of [Oedipus::Symbolic+Imaginary]
In the attempts by Lacan and his Disciples to distance from Mommy-Daddy-Me, when viewed temporally, reveals the common foundation of segregation
