paranoia

[Bill Burns]

Tony writes:

>The basic problem from which these sprout i think, is that knowledge and
>communication are paranoid activities. Paranoia seems to be necessary drive
>in the formation of any identity and the basis for any "worldview" for the
>simple reason of our (linguistic? biologic?) constitution. there is "I" and
>there is "Other" - you are I because there is Other. 

Hmmm. This seems to equate "paranoid" with "narcissistic," and I saw these
as two, quite distinct states (although they could certainly be simply two
different ranges on the same scale). Everyone passes through a narcissistic
stage, but that doesn't mean that everyone develops a paranoid delusion. Or
am I way out in left field here? 

>
>Lacan's notion of paranoid knowledge and the paranoid nature of the ego is
>significant for it is both the basis for any kind of intersubjective
>relation, between I's and Others, as well as the possible site for real
>psychosis.
>

How is "paranoia" any different with "solipsism," given this definition?
My understanding is that paranoia is, in some sense, pathological--perhaps
organic--whereas narcissism and solipsism have more to do with how a person
chooses to face experience. 

Clarification, sill voos platt?

--
*Bill Burns           wdburns at micron.net*
*---------------------------------------*
* Your advertisement could appear here! *