54 The values of presence (in person), of proximity, plenitude, and consistency form the system of authenticity in the analytic dialogue, in opposition to the "discourse of the one." For example: "What does Freud tell us here in effect? He uncovers for us a phenomenon that structures every revelation of the truth in dialogue. There is the fundamental difficulty that the subject encounters in what he has to say; the most common one being what Freud demonstrated in repression, to wit, the kind of discordance between the signified and the signifier, determined by every censorship of social origin."
This discordance due to repression perhaps will necessitate a correction of Saussurian semiology, but somewhere this is not irreducible, therefore essential. For the time of a detour or of a turning away: a provision. The development that immediately follows: "In this case the truth can always be communicated between the lines. Which is to say that whoever wishes to make it understood can always recur to the technique indicated by the identity of the truth with the symbols that reveal it, that is, to achieve one's ends by deliberately introducing into a text the discordances that correspond cryptographically to those imposed by censorship.
"The true subject, that is, the subject of the unconscious, does not proceed otherwise than through the language of its symptoms, which is not sufficiently deciphered by the analyst if he does not come to address himself to it in more and more consistent fashion, for the always renewed satisfaction of our experience. In effect, this is what has been recognized in the phenomenon of the transference.
"What the subject who speaks says, however empty his discourse, takes its effect from the approximation that is realized in his discourse from the speech into which he could fully convert the truth that his symptoms express . . . we have used the image that the speech of the subject fluctuates toward the presence of the auditor.
(Footnote: "Here will be recognized the formula which we have used to introduce what is in question since the beginnings of our instruction. The subject, as we said, begins analysis by speaking of himself without really speaking to you, or by speaking to you without speaking to you about himself. When he is able to speak to you about himself, the analysis is over.")
"This presence, which is the purest relation of which the subject is capable in regard to a Being, and which is all the more vividly felt as such in that this Being is less qualified for the subject, this presence which is for an instant rendered to the extremity of the veils which cover and elide it in common discourse to that extent that it is constituted as the discourse of the one precisely to this end, this presence is marked in discourse by a suspensive scansion often connoted by a moment of anxiety, as I have shown you in an example from my own experience." Ecrits (F), pp. 372-73 (Introduction au commentaire de Jean Hyppolite sur la "Verneinung'' de Freud ).
Of course, this is what "Freud tells us": "The purest relation," "presence," is in relation to a "Being," and it is felt all the more "vividly" in that this "Being" (this subject-being) is "less qualified," that is, obviously, more indeterminate. The presence of Being is all the more pure in that the ontic determination is less. This takes place only for a privileged "instant," beyond the "one," and in a state of "anxiety." The indeterminateness of Being (here of the subject-being-psychoanalyst), unveils nothingness, (non-being in totality), as the truth of presence. What "Freud tells us" very literally would be What Is Metaphysics ?