I have been trying to write a paper because it definitely seems like some parts, Being and TIme and the role of discourse in inauthentic idle talk and the authentic call of conscience might be connected in some way or able to be analyzed through Lacan, but so far I haven't found any scholarship on it. So I wanted to sort of open a discussion on it
Particularly, it seems to me that, unlike idle talk, the call of conscience is understood through a more "primordial mode of discourse", what he calls reticence or hearing and keeping silent. By how he describes it, it seems vaguely similar to Lacan's Real, insofar as it resists any symbolization and lies outside of language.
On pg 318 of B&T, he states,
"The call dispenses with any kind of utterance. It does not put itself into words at all; yet it remains nothing less than obscure and indefinite. Conscience discourses solely and constantly in the mode of keeping silent. In this way, it not only loses none of its perceptibility, but forces the Dasein which has been appealed to and summoned, into the reticence of itself. The fact that what it is in the call has not been formulated into words does not give this phenomenon the indefiniteness of a mysterious voice but merely indicates that our understanding of what is 'called' is not to be tied up with an expectation of anything like a communication."
Although language is described as the articulation of intelligibility and what gives things an "average understanding" of what is said in idle talk or gossip, this is specifically not the case for the call of conscience.
It also seems that although Heiddeger is clear not to make the call of conscience any sort of unconscious that gazes into its psychological conditions, it doesn't seem to make better sense of this caller as "from me but yet from beyond and over me" Pg. 320.
I'm not sure what the call of conscience serves for Being and Time, and am a little dubious as to how this is a pathway for authenticity and for Dasein to become individualized from the "they self" or the Other.
Is there any clear connection between Lacan and Heiddeger here? Is there any understanding of the intentional placement for call of conscience in B&T and why this seemingly important section does not play a significant role in it. It seems like while Lacan would agree in some areas, I presume he would resist in saying that we are able to break through to The Real. Thoughts?