4. Fourth Lecture: The Significance of Desubjectivization
I wrote this lecture many years ago while refining and systematizing the conceptual model of Evolutionary Truth. At its core, it is an explanation of the different levels of subjectivity. I draw on examples of subjectivity levels from various authors, connecting them to the model of Evolutionary Truth. While each of these perspectives incorporates some form of primordial subconscious element, none directly overlaps with the model, making the connections relatively straightforward.
In this lecture, we will analyze different levels of subjectivity, focusing on the primal identity associated with the Evolutionary Truth in Subject S0. This analysis highlights the need for a fundamental shift in how we approach subjectivity — a willingness to abandon it and (re)discover the essence of existence through that process. Such a transformation allows us to reconfigure our approach to experiencing reality, a topic we will explore in greater detail throughout the subsequent lectures.
Let us begin with a straightforward example that illustrates the common approach to subjectivity in individuals. For many, the existence of a transcendent subject (split by something primordial) that analyzes one’s true self — Subject S1 — holds little significance and is often taken for granted. Consider a young man in his late twenties (though any age could suffice) who aspires to own a small penthouse apartment in a prestigious neighborhood. This aspiration becomes a goal that shapes his decisions and influences his life choices over several years. Upon achieving this goal, however, he finds himself in a situation where he must work to cover monthly mortgage payments, effectively deferring the ultimate aim of owning the apartment debt-free far into the future.
Given that such a pivotal step represents a significant moment in one’s life, let us examine how this connects to an individual’s subjectivity across different levels (S1, S2, S3). At the S1 level, many aspects of this goal — purchasing the apartment — are only partially and consciously recognized. For the young man, the apartment symbolizes an achievement or serves as a means to fill an internal void that would otherwise cause discomfort. He feels that his true self deserves this reward and, simultaneously, that owning the apartment alleviates a deeper sense of inner uncertainty. At this level, the man engages in an internal dialogue with his true self, where he may rationally acknowledge the impracticality of the purchase (limitations such as raising a family in the space, emotional overinvestment, and other valid concerns reluctantly surface in his mind).
However, the pressing need to resolve his internal unease overrides these reservations. To reconcile this tension, he constructs elaborate rationalizations to justify the purchase, allowing him to present it as a logical decision despite its emotional and irrational underpinnings.
Moving to the S2 level, we encounter the emotional energy that drives the process forward. The young man or a woman envisions himself in the apartment — entering, leaving, and experiencing the pride of pressing the elevator's top button, all while imagining the significance he gains. This mental collage of anticipated experiences, shaped by how he believes others perceive him, exerts a powerful influence on his present self. For Lacan, this is connected to the "big Other," the symbolic order of language and culture that defines the individual. Through this lens, the young man fantasizes about the future experience of ownership (S2), which in turn begins to shape his true self (S1). In this way, cultural and ideological influences enter his identity, subtly becoming part of his self-concept and helping him make sense of the world.
From a Jungian perspective, the S2 Subject reflects the persona, a mask that allows individuals to navigate the cultural and social environments they perceive as appropriate for their true selves. A similar idea is present in existential philosophy: Kierkegaard described this process as "leveling," where individuals conform to collective ideologies and lose their uniqueness. Heidegger referred to das Man, the collective expectations that shape behavior and identity. However, when examining the S2 level, it is crucial not to undermine the individual's agency, as existential approaches sometimes do. Psychologically, the more aware we are of these mechanisms, the more control we can exert over them.
At the S3 level, a different perspective emerges. As Lacan famously noted, "the big Other does not exist" — it is merely an empty signifier. Few people in the neighborhood or on social media genuinely pay attention to the young man's project, and most are indifferent to his aspirations. His perception of how others view him is largely a construct of his imagination, carrying far less weight in the so-called objective world. Across levels S1 to S3, the subject’s desires are always shaped by the desires of others — or, more accurately, by their interpretation of what the "big Other" desires. Because these desires are never concrete or fully formed, they can never be truly satisfied.
This dynamic is evident in motivational group settings, where participants publicly declare goals they believe will gain the approval or admiration of others. Hearing increasingly ambitious aspirations from peers often leads to a game-like competition, where individuals derive pleasure from presenting loftier goals. However, these goals are frequently unattainable, and most are abandoned as people discover simpler ways to satisfy their underlying drives.
Most individuals operate primarily within the subjectivity levels of S1 to S3, constantly shifting their focus to a new goal in the hope of alleviating their inner lack. Once one goal is achieved, it is replaced by another, perpetuating a cycle that persists throughout life. Occasionally, significant moments of doubt arise — especially when achieving a long-term goal is followed by a profound sense of emptiness. Yet collective ideological pressures typically redirect individuals back into the pursuit of another similar objective. This endless cycle of replacing unattainable desires, what Lacan calls objet petit a, enslaves individuals who do not consciously resist it. They remain trapped, striving to guess and fulfill the perceived desires of others, even when those others may be unlikable or indifferent. In this sense, the "big Other" becomes a source of profound suffering. Sartre encapsulated this idea aptly when he remarked, "hell is other people," highlighting how we often seek approval and acceptance by anticipating the thoughts and judgments of others.
Next, we turn to the source of these drives and desires: the primordial level of subjectivity, S0. Understanding this level involves delving into the very foundation of existence itself. Initially, it may be difficult to conceive of something more fundamental than self-consciousness. We might accept that self-consciousness marks the beginning of our awareness of being, yet beneath it lies something deeper — an underlying basis of existence that precedes our understanding of ourselves. Heidegger described this as Dasein existing as "the null basis of nullity," capturing the fundamental structure of being in the world. This existence resides in the space between nothingness (das Nichts) and one’s most primordial sense of self. It represents a form of negation—something that once existed but is now simultaneously preserved and concealed.
Combining Lacan's concept of the split subject, psychoanalytical drives (from Freud and Jung), and Heidegger's idea of nothingness as the foundation of being, we arrive at the conclusion that the primordial Subject S0 comprises two dimensions: a part that we can recognize and a part tied to the source of our drives. The latter is elusive and resists full conceptualization.
Anxiety and the Leve
s of Subjectivity
When examining the origins of anxiety, we uncover the functions and limitations of the other levels of subjectivity. From a psychoanalytical perspective, anxiety is closely tied to lack, which arises from loss. Understanding the null basis of this loss offers insight into how the fantasy of counterbalancing it—through the goals associated with S1-S3—serves to temporarily suppress the sense of lack.
Freud posited that anxiety stems from losing an actual object, such as the mother during infancy. This absence creates a void that generates anxiety. Lacan, however, radicalized this idea, suggesting that anxiety is not caused by losing the object itself but by the potential loss of desire for the object. Lacan argues that we fear obtaining the object of our desire because doing so would end the process of desiring altogether. Thus, in both frameworks, we are perpetually caught in a cycle of desire: the object we long for remains perpetually out of reach. This explains the endless pursuit of unattainable satisfaction and the subsequent relapse into anxiety when such attempts inevitably fall short of eliminating the underlying lack.
Anxiety in the Existential Perspective
From the existential perspective, we arrive at a similar understanding of anxiety, albeit through slightly different mechanisms. Heidegger asserts that anxiety (Angst) is an intrinsic aspect of human existence. As Dasein, our very essence is defined by a concern for understanding our being. This care structure compels us to confront the essence of our existence. Heidegger’s approach provides a valuable framework for comprehending the mechanics of true desubjectivization.
Eliminating the lower levels of subjectivity (S1-S3) may, however, intensify anxiety, as it forces us to confront the primordial Subject S0. Importantly, the experience of "missing" subjectivity at this level does not equate to the positive desubjectivization we pursue in this context. One may reach a form of false desubjectivization by immersing oneself in mundane activities or distractions to escape deeper thought. Heidegger described this as fallenness or being lost in the world—a forgetfulness of one’s authentic being. Such inauthenticity does not constitute true desubjectivization but instead represents an avoidance of the deeper engagement with S0. Authentic desubjectivization, on the other hand, involves embracing the essence of S0 and engaging with the primordial truth of one’s existence.
Embracing Anxiety and Moving Toward S0
Once we recognize the influence of the primordial Subject S0 and the inherent nothingness that fuels anxiety, what practical steps can we take to cope? Kierkegaard and other existentialists emphasize the necessity of accepting anxiety as an inevitable part of human existence. Psychological and therapeutic approaches that downplay the importance of lower levels of subjectivity (S1-S3) can be useful, but care must be taken not to reduce individuals to passive bystanders. Understanding the mechanics of all levels of subjectivity should not lead to the destruction of S1-S3, but rather to a shift in focus toward S0 as the foundational level.
The Tao Te Ching and other Eastern philosophies offer valuable insights into this process, promoting humility and minimalism. However, such approaches often lack practical tools for addressing the therapeutic challenges of existence. While these philosophies advocate for reducing the self and subjectivity, they may inadvertently encourage passivity. Schopenhauer, for instance, acknowledged the drives tied to the primordial Subject S0 but ultimately viewed the self as an illusion. While this perspective holds merit in certain respects, it often fails to account for the constructive potential of engaging with S0 after dismantling S1-S3. Schopenhauer’s philosophy sometimes lacks optimism about the capacity to harness primordial drives productively after this process.
Active Nihilism and Revolutionary Transformation
A more effective approach lies in Nietzsche’s concept of active nihilism, which emphasizes the importance of creating new meanings and values after deconstructing the lower levels of subjectivity. Without this active engagement, one risks descending into helplessness, self-destruction, or dependence on external validation. As Nietzsche, Žižek, Peterson, and others have observed, it is dangerous to destroy any structure—whether social order or personal beliefs — without a vision for replacing it. Meaningful change must be both revolutionary and transformative, requiring a clear plan to rebuild concepts and understandings.
In this context, our aim is to confront the primordial subjectivity of our being and the Evolutionary Truth it embodies. The process of deconstructing S1-S3 is not an end in itself but a means of redirecting our focus toward S0. This foundational level of subjectivity is far from empty; on the contrary, it is rich with truths that are integral to understanding our existence.
Conclusion
In the lectures that follow, we will delve deeper into the nature of S0 and the truths it contains. By exploring this primordial level of subjectivity, we can better understand how to engage with our drives and desires in a way that is both transformative and rooted in the essence of being.
