Levi on transference

An excellent post on the topic HERE by the former Lacanian analyst.

A good sample:

“This is why arguing with disciples of a particular philosopher can be so frustrating. They tend to operate at the level of the transferential text, not the concrete text. And the axiom of the transferential text is that it is never lacking or incomplete.”

Levi’s post deals with transference as something occurring between people. But there’s another sense, a very OOO sense, in which we also relate to objects themselves as having a certain something despite what their surface qualities are telling us at any given moment.

This is the basic insight of Husserl, who (I repeat) has been prematurely sidestepped by more recent trends in continental philosophy. I fully understand why this happened, of course. Husserl can be pedantic and his disciples can at times be impossible bores. But his primary insights haven’t been assimilated yet, and that’s why the lesson needs to be repeated until learned. Husserl’s idealism is a small part of the Husserl story.