In Lacan’s final reflections on psychoanalysis he drew on the work of St Thomas Aquinas, St Theresa of Avila and spiritual practice. If we examine the ontology of Aquinas’s Act of Being and the existential act of Kierkegaard, we will see not only their relation to each other but also their relationship to the psychoanalytic act, as well as the position of analyst and analysand and their relation to that of saint and mystic. Thus we can develop a “unified field theory” of the psyche as spirit, soul and mind that crosses philosophy, science, theology, and psychoanalysis. The Medieval thought of the Greeks as evidenced in Plato is not devoid of the question of the divine spirits and gods. Likewise the Medieval of those such as Aguinas which speaks constantly of the divine is also a pure and abstract philosophical ontology which need not rely on God as guarantor. The question is not theology or antheological philosophy but rather the absence of a transcendental universal whether scientific, religious or otherwise. Kierkegaard framed his work from the beginning as an existential dynamic and used both the philosophical idea from Plato to Hegel as well as Christian theology to express his point of the temporal ethical existent being-there of the individual act or choice: the particular in its relation to the universal. The existential act of one man being-there is but the human face of Aquinas’s ontology of the Act of Being, where Being-as Being is itself infinite in its becoming: it is less noun than verb.
If set theory allows us to grasp the ontology of Being in pure infinite abstraction and category theory allows us to grasp existent being-there of things in pure finite abstraction, then it is the topological-dialectical method which allows us to be human – to unfold a space-time-matter-energy cartography through human thought-language-discourse-signification. In other words there is a concrete objective, but we as humans – and in fact any part of infinite being – only ever know it through the subjective perspective of gaps, fissures, lacks, and parallaxes. Even more, it is because of these fissures of partiality that Being “becomes”. Let us not mistake this however for another correlationism. One can access the real through the pure matheme or algorithm of pragmatic function, but the dialectic of negation participates in the movement of “Being becoming” by nature of process. This subjective-objective method is the closest we can come to a human knowing of Being and Existence through the becoming of each part, multiple, or (sub)set in a method of co-creative entanglement.