Volume 42, 2018
Philosophy and Psychoanalysis
Birth and Deaths of the Freudian Unconscious
Towards a New-born Cogito
After initially attempting to establish a connection between philosophy’s main concern and the psychoanalytic theorization of the unconscious, making a first step towards its view under the Heideggerian perspective of “Destruktion”, -the historical account of being in terms of its own epochs-, we attempt to show that although indeed the unconscious came to support initially the Kantian finite limit, giving a new-born background to new philosophical theories, enriching and expanding crucially what we consider knowledge, leading thus our philosophy to reach its very ownmost challenge, as death’s most primordial study, embracing therefore substantially our human per se condition with new, unprecedented data, in terms of our finite mystery, it failed this goal fundamentally. Its ownmost way of dying, though, -positively or even negatively-, in the course of its brief history, highlighted wholly different paths that need to be now taken, untraced by our old philosophy or even by psychoanalysis, pushing us to an uncharted ground, which doesn’t give newborn contents –in this way of course negating it- to the notion per se of limit, through its return eternally, thematic or non-thematic, or via a sur-reality, or even an expanded ego. Because it’s by now apparent, that this is our only hope out of our current no way out, out of the meta-modern paradigm, which led us into the holocaust of our anarchic difference behind neo-capitalistic crises. But how is it really possible to think about our thought’s limit? Τhe impossible of our thought per se, defining anew the unconscious and making again so timely the Freudian declaration, that our in fact biggest mystery lies in our mysterious conscious? Because it is true indeed that someone or something thinks behind our almighty cogito, thinking there on a hole. But what would this now here signify? A vacuum –to say the least- cogitans? How can our thought per se conceive its own unconceivable? It may be that on the contrary to Hamlet’s most famous monologue, there after all exists an instrument for the unknown. A death’s so called intuition. Herein should now enter the era of our new philosophy. To a new thought of the unconceivable. To a cogito per se on death. Into an entropic conscious.