As subjects we are aware, aren t we, that we are subjected to the signifier. The difference also has the meaning that as objects of desire of the Other they tend to represent themselves in accordance with their respective places. If one starts out from a dyadic structure Lacan s Ecrits could be coupled with some pertinent texts by Francoise Dolto, I suggest. To me they reveal that something positively progressive may be at work in a monadic- structured psyche also when no one knows what, just how. Understanding this has an impact for the psychotic, for the dimension of psychic life that is dominated by monadic structure.
Sign is for object, signifier for subject.
Well, there is a kind of symbolic activity called science that can lead one astray. If the psychotic can not take upon himself a responsibility for what he has to say, to pro-nounce, that must surely be in accordance with the Order of Things. I personally find it a very interesting topic. Psyche tends to turn soma in experience, or a monadic structure annonces its presence. Schreber did occupy a position in the Symbolic, only not in triadic but in an oscillation between dyadic and monadic structure.