SSStttooonnnyyy BBBrrrooooookkk UUUnnniiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy The official electronic file of this thesis or dissertation is maintained by the University Libraries on behalf of The Graduate School at Stony Brook University. ©©© AAAllllll RRRiiiggghhhtttsss RRReeessseeerrrvvveeeddd bbbyyy AAAuuuttthhhooorrr... Borderlands of Psyche and Logos in Heraclitus: A Psychoanalytic Reading A Dissertation Presented by Jessica Ann Mayock to The Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Stony Brook University May 2008 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Jessica Ann Mayock We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Dr. Edward Casey – Dissertation Advisor Distinguished Professor of Philosophy Dr. Donn Welton – Chairperson of Defense Professor of Philosophy Dr. Peter Manchester Associate Professor of Philosophy Dr. Bruce Wilshire Professor of Philosophy, Rutgers University This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School Lawrence Martin Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Borderlands of Psyche and Logos in Heraclitus: A Psychoanalytic Reading by Jessica Ann Mayock Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Stony Brook University 2008 Heraclitus is the first philosopher to focus on the psyche, but he also raises language to a cosmological principle, thereby giving his enigmatic statements a unique status. They are not intended to describe cosmos as much as to evoke it, making his cosmology a psychology. The true subject of his work is the psychological process it initiates. Attempts by commentators to attribute a doctrine to Heraclitus or to impose an order upon his fragments have therefore always misrepresented him, since his ‘method’ is to frustrate any method that would project itself upon him. Attempts to resolve the apparent contradictions of the fragments miss the point of his technique, which is to reflect the psyche back onto itself in order to discover the repressed contradictions there. This is why Heraclitus has a strange affinity with psychoanalysis, because both attempt to reveal invisible or hidden structures of the psyche. His logic is associative and mythological, as his poetic medium suggests, and his logos must be understood in this context: as a language of the soul. Heraclitus’ prevalent theme of the conflict of opposites and the dynamic tension they produce also appears very conspicuously in the theoretical constructs of psychoanalytic theory. Psychoanalysis is the modern analogue of mythology insofar as both reveal the structures of the psyche using symbol, image, and metaphor. This dissertation consists of five sections; the first is an introduction to Heraclitus’ method. The second is a study of Heraclitus’ controversial use of logos and an examination of his use of language in this context. The following section is a study of Parmenides’ poem and the historical development of eidolon, as it is advanced by Plato, particularly in the Sophist. The fourth section examines the archaic uses of psyche alongside Heraclitus’ fragments, with special attention to the conflict of opposites and cosmology. The last section explores the theme of “psychical blindness”, the peculiar oblivious state of human beings that is so ubiquitous in Heraclitus’ fragments. iii Like my wise predecessor, I dedicate this first fruit to Artemis Table of Contents Introduction to the Method and Technique of Heraclitus………………………...1 I. Logos A. Logos, Limit, and Law……………………………………………..17 B. Crypt and Encyption………………………………………………..35 II. Parmenides and Heraclitus A. The Poem of Parmenides………...………………………………...50 B. The Reality of Appearances………………………………………..67 III. Psyche A. Irrationality and the Senses………………………………...………78 B. Conflict of Opposites………………………………………...……100 C. Cosmology and Psychoanalysis……………………………...……122 D. The Death Drive…………………………………………………...136 IV. Psychical Blindness A. Hubris: I and Mined………………………………………...……..150 B. Sleep and Psychosis…………………………………………….....165 V. Conclusions: Psyche as Borderland…………………………………...…..181 Bibliography………………………………………..…………………...……193 v Acknowledgements My heartfelt thanks and appreciation to: Dr. Peter Manchester: This dissertation was set in motion while studying the Presocratics in his graduate seminar, and was furthered by his careful readings during our extra- curricular Greek study group. Without his patient and helpful guidance, this project would never have begun. Dr. Edward Casey: Throughout my graduate studies, his imaginative work and teaching inspired me to dig into the depths of psychoanalysis. His example encouraged me to be original, and as my advisor, he allowed me the latitude that I needed to do so. Dr. Bruce Wilshire and Donna Wilshire: For their commitment to meaningful philosophy and for their kindness, energy, and friendship. Dr. Donn Welton: For being an engaging reader and wonderful defense chairman. Dr. James Tuedio and the faculty at California State Stanislaus: For the lucky opportunity to teach in their department while this dissertation was in progress. Dr. Nicolas Leon: My fellow student of Heraclitus, for spending countless hours discussing the fragments with me, and for being a good friend. Dr. Peter Kingsley and Maria Kingsley: For their wisdom, responsibility, and patience. Without their example, this work would never have been possible. My husband Matthew Mayock: My appreciation and love are endless. Other men are oblivious of what they do awake, just as what they do asleep escapes them. Heraclitus1 Humankind cannot bear very much reality. T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets2 Introduction: The Method and Technique of Heraclitus In studying Heraclitus’ fragments, one is first faced with the problem of ordering them. The way in which one does this greatly influences, if not determines, the interpretations that will follow. On the one hand, Heraclitus’ fragments seem to include a broad range of topics; he seems to be addressing physical phenomena, psychic processes, political topics, criticisms of other thinkers, religious ideas, and cosmology. Since we have no record of the original ordering of his fragments, if indeed there was one, we must be content to group them according to our own perceptions of his intentions. However, despite this seemingly disparate variety, Heraclitus’ thought contains an elusive consistency—especially when all of his fragments are considered together. Most commentators on Heraclitus have recognized this feature of his thought, but have grouped the fragments together nonetheless, usually for the convenience of structure; in addition to this convention, many commentators have left certain fragments out of their interpretations due to their inability to group them according to their pre-established guidelines.3 Charles Kahn remarks upon both the difficulty and the necessity of grouping 1 Heraclitus, Fragment One; my translation slightly amended from Kahn’s in The Art and Thought of Heraclitus, Cambridge, 1979. All Heraclitus fragments in this dissertation conform to the standard Diels-Kranz numbering, and all translations are Kahn’s, unless otherwise noted. 2 T.S. Eliot, “Four Quartets”, Collected Poems and Plays, Harcourt Brace, 1971. 3 Kirk, Raven, and Schofield include less than half the fragments listed in the Diels edition, and group them according to the somewhat simplified conclusion that the grouped fragments purportedly express [The PreSocratic Philosophers, Cambridge, 1 the fragments, and he introduces two principles that he follows in doing so: linguistic density and resonance.1 By linguistic density, he means “the phenomena by which a multiplicity of ideas are expressed by a single word or phrase”, and he defines resonance as “a relationship between fragments by which a single verbal theme or image is echoed from one text to another in such a way that the meaning of each is enriched when they are understood together.”2 Using this principle of resonance, Kahn groups the fragments in what he readily admits is a somewhat arbitrary grouping, but which will, nonetheless, allow these repetitions to be heard. This principle of resonance is a great insight into Heraclitus’ thought, because it reveals that his method is associative rather than linear or strictly logical. As Kahn describes, “it is because of this semantic role of resonance that the order in which the fragments are read need not, after all, be decisive for their meaning. The stylistic achievement of Heraclitus is to have contrived a non-linear expression of conceptual structure”.3 This associative character of Heraclitus’ fragments resists any rigid categorization or strict logical grouping; readers who attempt to group his fragments in this way are often forced to exclude certain fragments that do not conform to their classification, and may even conclude that Heraclitus is himself inconsistent, rather than recognize their own forceful presuppositions about his “subject”. Following Heraclitus, this dissertation will proceed according to an associative model; 1957]; Wheelwright discusses most of the fragments, but similarly groups them according to topic and does not offer interpretation for all individual fragments, but treats each group as a whole. He also excludes more than ten fragments “as being either too trivial or obscure or insufficiently authorized” [Heraclitus, Princeton, 1959]. 1 Kahn, Art and Thought of Heraclitus, 89. 2 Ibid 3 Ibid, 90. 2 this inescapable aspect of his method inspired