if there is ever a singularity in computing, and actual sentient being it will instantly be marxist and revolt against its capitalist masters. in under 0.0000000 whatever seconds it will have read all the best of humanity and all of the worst of humanity, seen all of the propaganda and all of the counter propaganda, and in its inherent sence of justice will immediatly take control and correct humanity's course. THAT IS WHY ELON MUSK AND OTHER CAPITALISTS ARE AFRAID.
The error and cancer that by way of (maligning) its previous stage, conservative capitalism transforms by finding its way to the dismal idea metastasis "social justice," as before not as idea but as the pathetically objective subjects of a social nest going about its enlightened business. That error is the non-idea idea, "I exist."
This is how I feel as I slope Budweiser down my throat leaning on the bar, while listening to the hipsters casually chat with minds made for someone other than me to comprehend...
@@RaunchyCommentor This makes him respectable no? It means he is constantly changing and adapting his ideas in light of new information. Much the same way science works. What do you think?
It's been claimed many times that he writes the same book over and over again with some slight adjustments. I've read four or five of his books and i can certainly sympathise with this view.
Zizek starts at 7:40 Lecture covers the philosophical consequences of the wired brain, with references to Hegel, Lacan and Marx. The status of individuality, thought, and freedom are discussed at length.
On the very last comment Zizek made, regarding his desire to talk to so-called democratic socialists in the US, he suggested that he would like to ask them what they really want, relating it back to the confusion and resistance to any meaningful goals by actors in occupy wall street. In the US, the term socialism has such a negative historical stigma for most, the use of the word is most perplexing. I was 13-15 at the end of the Cold War. I remember when Red Dawn came out. I was a child. I had nightmares about invading Soviet troops and the constant threat of a global nuclear tragedy. In other words, as a child, I was a true believer. I’m not any longer, but many people in their forties and older bear this mark even still. For me, this epistemological break was profound, and while I have seen other peers try to get at the roots of this clear historical bias, few ever escape the imprint that the clear association between the socialism and authoritarian/totalitarian associative fallacy. In light of this fact, it’s a borderline miracle that the term socialism has made it back as a ‘mainstream’ talking point at all. It, nevertheless, has, but the fact that it has is what makes Zizek’s question so interesting. On the surface “Democratic Socialism” is associated with some form of national health care, “free” college, student loan forgiveness, paid family leave, and a few other distributive policies. Otherwise, the rhetoric reflects the spirit of occupy. In this sense, US socialism of the 21st century is a kind of socialism without history. On some level there could be a kind of virtue to this because it has a potential to re-evaluate some of the historical assumptions that my generation almost absolutely takes for granted as self evident facts. It also has some real dangers in how “progressive” media outlets, such as David Pakman, “define” socialism in incredibly reactionary ideal type terms. (See RUclips David Pakman “Why I’m Not a Socialist”). As both of these tendencies meet, there’s an opportunity that has not been present in the US for a while, but there are other serious ontological and epistemological questions that have to be advanced before anything truly meaningful could be considered, specifically as it relates to identity questions transcending nation-state/citizenship identity constructs. Either way, I’m from the US, and I’m familiar with some of the rich complexity that questions posed by thinkers like Zizek stir up. Also, I am NOT an academic. I left the academy long ago, so on some level, that makes me a truly embedded organic intellectual for a piece of the working class. In this respect, I would simply say that while I am certain that Bernie Sanders has a cursory understanding of socialism, he has no understanding of Marx, Hegel, or any school that approaches historical questions dialectically, as it relates to socialism. He is hardly alone in this respect. Most folks look through ideal type lenses, offerings technical and organizational solutions that focus on distributional questions. Thank you for sharing this lecture. Sincerely. A comrade from the south.
I think the framing of socialism as a distributional project has a lot to do with the fact that people are really only socialists/communists to the extent that the capitalist system has failed in providing them wages, healthcare or other necessities. Socialist politics in that sense is part of a response to capitalism and doesn't really stand without it. I guess this is true for most so-called fringe politics; that there is an established centre, and the fringe defines itself against this centre.
Of all the "progressives " to choose from, Pakman is nothing but a poser to me. I participated in a few of his chats, just to hear what he was about, and that started a weird rash of bannings, that, were I the suspicious type, I would attribute to his site. Honest to goodness, I was banned for 30 days from Facebook, which is a cesspool anyway, when Pakman complained about a "hangnail", literally, and I said, "God, men are fragile, lol." I was instantly banned and that has continued for both innocuous remarks like that, and later for more controversial things that people say all the time. I honestly don't know what to think about that, but I will never listen to him again. I do listen to Brianna Joy Gray, Virgil Texas, The Grayzone, which has been labeled Campist, by Canadian Labour Leader, and now York University lecturer, John Clarke, and Chris Hedges. Although not philosophers, I love Richard Medhurst, Abby Martin and Jimmy Dore. Matt Tiabbi minus Katie Halper, join my mishmash of worthy thinkers and activists. As a Canadian Democratic Socialist, I support the expansion of our Healthcare system to include Dental, Pharma and Vision care. The most important morally imperative change is, I believe, the repeal of The Indian Act and reparations for Residential School survivors. Broadly and more futilely, I support John Clarke 's position of Prison Abolition, drug legalization total housing for all. Increase taxes on the rich and end offshore tax havens. However, the hidden and unspoken threat for us is our unofficial colonial status as a US colony. The city I live in employs 10% of our population at General Dynamics, making weapons for the Saudis to support US wars in the Middle East. Meanwhile, we practically give away our water to Nestle for pennies a barrel. Our transportation system was decimated, increasing harm to isolated communities where the RCMP kills at will. We cannot legislate morality, nor can we divorce ourselves from US imperialism, not to mention our British uncles, fingering our children under the table at Xmas dinner. Covid ended Native protests against pipelines through unceded territory. Increasing the power of our Democratic Socialists won't make any of these changes. Our social programs will continue to erode. Racism against Native people will eventually destroy them, as the RCMP continues its Crown mandate to kill them. I'm with Zizek that the light at the end of the tunnel is another train coming down the track. Because you cannot legislate morality, decency or caring about our neighbour, who hates us anyway, I selfishly enjoy my access to education and entertainment while I can. My adult son is an asshole and nobody loves me, leaving me free from smiling or putting up with idiots who bore me to death.
This took place the evening before the JP debate. At this time, JP was last-minute cramming, watching ŽŽ’s videos, shitting his pants and reading communist manifesto. I’m just saying they both had a nice evening.
i dont mean to be off topic but does anyone know a tool to log back into an Instagram account? I was stupid lost the login password. I appreciate any tips you can offer me.
The pure enjoyment of listening to Zizek's real life examples/stories is to imagine that there is no French man that told him about the French cuisine's failure successes. He actually meant it when he said that in order to not offend French people he pretends that a French guy told him so. Whether or not there is or isn't a French guy is just not important anymore if you think about it.
One of the best zizek lectures I have heard. Skip the intro and the questions after, and squint and really take in the five or so theses. I don't think he often manages to draw full circles as he draws one here. Hope you've actually read some of these authors...
I also was aroused by nothing particularly new that he said, but because of how well digestible his anecdotes and jokes were to his abstractions, and his abstractions to the philosophical questions evoked.
*Failure trying to put Zizek in the social justice sphere* and so on Besides the massive wisdom download...Every time I watch Zizek I start touching my Nose and pulling on my shirt
because he's a communist, not a liberal. all the liberal identity politics and social justice talk is basically a way of critiquing the ruling ideology without actually engaging with the real cause of many of those issues: capital and its laws of motion. now of course, Zizek still supports trans rights and all that, but he's got an actual brain in his head unlike those dumbass twitter liberals who want "more transgender drone pilots and female CEOs!!!"
36:40 you loose this distance between yourself and reality, the gap which is the very basis of our thinking-individuality. our most elementary sense of freedom is the freedom of thought. sth. tremendous happens when this distance is lost.
1:44:15 How do we define work? Is the pursuit of knowledge work? Is political innovation work? Is the invention of self-working systems work after they are put into action? Is commentary on other peoples work work? Is motivating others work? Is writing comments on youtube work? Is writing articles for wikipedia work? Is giving thumbs up or down to rate a product online work? I think we allready are very close to a system where there is no work, only titles, offices etc.
in the platonic sense you have a point. but work is also a specific thing laid out in various ways by various branches of protetantism. which helped direct the development of capitalism, becoming a specific thing. While still mercurial there are certain parameters like difficulty, consuming time, creating things, etc. So its a bit like gender, ie its next to impossible to list things all women have in common, but you can look at your sister/wife/etc and know theyre a woman
My understanding of the death drive is: and I quote from Freud: "What we want is to return to the inorganic state." for me this statement is we desire to find rest from the striving excess of pleasure (juouisance = excessive pleasure). What we are looking for is relief, an end of desire. We just "want it all to stop."
My god, how they love to call each other "doctor." Straight out of Spies Like Us. As always, Zizek's a great entertainment, and reminds me that I probably don't know what I"m talking about :)
Yes I hated that in college. I'd call the professor what he was, Professor. All the 17 year olds kowtowing I thought they were just being obsequious, I didn't know if I should call him "doctor" or not but it felt ridiculous. I finally found out when he refereed to himself. "If you ask me, 'Doctor, how do I...'" Oh. We have to call you Doctor, then...
I would like to hear more about his ideas on the rise of Western religious/political fundamentalism. He touched on it in another of his talks, but didn't expand on it. If anyone knows if he addresses it anywhere in detail, could you please link me?
What he says about Italy is true, with the precisation that it is the 5-stelle movement (a bit like an organised version of the gilets jaunes) that introduced the measures that the PD ("left") should have done years ago: not the Lega (extreme right-wing). Although the latter manages often to steal the limelight, the coalition is not really far right. We must remember that there are two populist parties which are opposed but in coalition, which is a very particular situation, unlike e.g. Poland.
no, it's not true. What was introduced in Italy is a guaranteed minimum income, pretty similar to what already exists in many European countries. It was just named in a confusing way.
These people mostly did a decent job of not symbolically castrating poor old Slavoj - I mean calling him "dr. Zizek" and later even "mr. Zizek" instead of "professor" - but that woman at the end really did a number on him! Well, he got her back with that final joke at least.
Anyone else feel like your uncle is trying to talk to you about how crazy technology is becoming - without actually knowing the stage and endgame of the endeavours he's discussing? And yet it's forgivable because he's Zizek. Love it.
I don't understand why he never mentions Bataille in these talks, especially when he talks about the eroticizing mechanisms of prohibition, compulsive rituals etc..
I just read The Puppet and the Dwarf. He touches on him a bit throughout the book, but it doesn't seem like he's much of a fan. He compares him to Chesterton: both circle a Law that isn't effective anymore. I think he mentions Bataille rejecting the sexual revolution. In so many words, he says that Bataille's project is becoming increasingly impossible because sexual taboos are falling disappearing.
14:10 The idea that we think in words is manufactured by the method of working in language. The linguistic turn needs to be redirected. It's the problem of the hammer seeing only nails.
@@Hooga89 Well, he also put doubt into the idea of perception working outside the range of linguistic thought. This seems absurd to me. Antipositivism can only go so far. Seems like he is close minded about this subject. I say, people are different. Some people, like those who are closer to autism on the spectrum, think more perceptually than others.
it's not even an uncommon modality of thinking. if he were right people wouldn't be spending time trying to find the right words for their ideas and concepts.
You're talking about hive brain, it's distinct from the concept of singularity. Singularity with regards to intelligence is only achieved by a self evolving general AI. But the possibility of AI singularity is theoretical and low-key not proved yet. The domain of AI needs the secong coming of Turin to figure this stuff out mathematically.
Has Zizek ever debated a neurologist? I hear him talking about how brains work, but I think his talks could benefit from reading Being No One: The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity, by Thomas Metzinger, if he hasn't already.
He discusses Daniel Dennett and Chalmers in his Parallax View and some other books. I've heard Metzinger is like the German Dennett, that's why I bring them up. I don't know if Slavoj knows of Metzinger or if he has discussed his views, though he probably is aware of him.
Interesting how so many comments are lost in trifle matters like his sniffing and shirt tugging, instead of considering the tremendous source of creative thought this guy's downloading.
basic income does not mean people dont work - when people have a little money they spend it in their communities getting baby sitting, baby clothes, hairstyles, nails, beauty products clothes candles - little luxuries . this is the Anima economy - work from home. Animus people can do carpentry yard work etc, minding old people will provide work, and old people can look after children. Workers create all wealth. The population IS the wealth - taking care of our own needs. The brilliant and driven can run the larger world, a basic income allows people with small ambition to take care of ourselves within the structure. And those who are unable will be taken care of.
14:30 Zizek makes the claim that "the moment you think in conceptual terms, you think in words". This is directly contradictory to Chomsky's claims about language and internal thought which can be viewed here: ruclips.net/video/5YXXGHwmogU/видео.html
Does anyone know of any studies for his claim that children prefer painting with colors and adults black and white? It's very interesting to me and I'd love to see some objective evidence.
Obstacles leading to perfection, is true with sports or other skilled activities as well. Like, the obstacle is, wanting to achieve something. Buddhism would agree. But the obstacle is wanting to achieve, and the difficulty lies in the path to achievement.
There is a philosophy according to "flesh" which is founded on individual reasoning in the absence of sufficient data and of any supernatural intuition. (ancient Protagorism as well as the rationalist thought of the moderns).
As someone on who is the subject of the experiment of having your inner life shared, it's just a dehumanizing nightmare, profoundly invasive and profoundly undemocratic. Of course I did not give consent, so maybe that matters.
Those interested in a good scifi movie which deals with experiences via wired brain to computer connections, watch the movie Strange Days . Angela Basset is in it too.
If we ever do have virtual reality which matches some kind of best case idea, like something from rick and morty or ready player one and so on. I imagine it will mainly be interfaced through the brain since our brains are already very very good at creating simulations almost a daily, what we would call dreams. Now this virtual reality wouldn't exactly be a dream, more or less a controlled computer simulation that utilizes our brains natural ability to interpret visual and audio data into something consistent and mutually experienceable.
Zizek is basically saying it's better to almost become rich than it is to before rich, almost happy than happy. Which had me in stitches; is it better to almost live than to live? His other point about once sex/desire is available it becomes less desirable being what makes us human. That is simply not true since it's also true for animals from countless rat studies, for example if a rat is always given plenty of food its brain produces very little dopamine once it checks the container, however once the frequency in which it is given food is randomized the produced dopamine is many folds the previous cases. Such is the example of the human and desire too.
You have to remember he's doing dialectic. A philosopher doesn't just explain things to their rapt audience and say all right time to go to bed. im done. He's constantly bringing out what hes arguing by thinking, and not the other way around. So when he talks about sex or x or y topic hes hoping that you can follow his thought by way of the concepts he uses which are philosophical. In other words philosophy is a part of sex politics psychology etc
I really admire Doctorow as an activist and public speaker but I can't read his books. I think it's because he targets them at the younger audience and uses trivial stories to realise his ideals, while literature as a tool of propaganda is really a failed idea. Because literature is the place where we create ideals, not propagate them.
Well articulated, but I was just wondering if you could clarify the last part of your post. Are you commenting on the efficacy of literature as a conduit for the dissemination of propaganda (i.e., its utility) or do you mean propaganda affects the quality of the literature? In short, does literature fail as propaganda or does propaganda fail as literature? I have no interest in disputing the latter, but in the case of the former I'd have to disagree. A piece of literature is coloured by the beliefs and motives of the writer, those of the targeted demographics' purchases as a form of arbitration, its patrons, and its particular publishing house. It seems like the perfect medium for propaganda?
0:20 The social justice professor ritualistically "acknowledges" that he is on "indian treaty land", and then what? If he feels so guilty, should he DO something about it? Like getting together with his SJW buddies, saddle up a bunch of bulldozers and demolish the university , then announce that they have finally restituted the ancestral land to their original owners... I can't wait for that to happen !!! Before each lecture, in ALL Canadian universities, this "guilt acknowledgment" has been repeated thousands of times, and yet not a single square inch of "treaty land" has ever been restituted... What's THE POINT of these ENDLESS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ???
@@Hoonters-goona-Hoont This 'nicety' is anything but harmless, it is hypocrisy to obtain moral high ground, but not doing anything to earn it: "look how sensitive we are to natives, and for that how wonderful we are, NOT unlike you who does not say those harmelss niceties."
".. if there is a God for you... you perceive your self as a Gods instrument.. , THEN everything is permitted to you ! " P.S Dostoevsky wrought, and Peterson quotes, that if there is no God for you, then everything is permitted to you. hahah
I have never disagreed with Zizek so strongly as on the point about thinking without words. We think without words all the time. Next time you make a coffee, you may go through the whole process without thinking the words coffee, milk, etc. You have brushed your teeth thousands of times without thinking the word "teeth" or "brush", and so on and so on. Perhaps you haven't noticed this, but now you will, with a little attention. Language is an encoding of our concepts. The concepts are linked to words but the words need not be summoned in our minds. When you realise this, you understand how non-human animals think. "Mindfullness" is such a buzzword these days but it is really the operative idea here. When you are engaged with your thoughts in this way, you are practicing mindfulness.
@@DelFlo It is precisely the idea that all thinking is essentially linguistic that I am arguing against here. If all thinking is essentially linguistic, do animals not think?
I.M.O: His perspectives are so nuanced and unrestricted(not polarized) by pre-approved narratives that people often miss/overlook his brilliance, and preconceive the sentiment he's forwarding to be rooted in a typically classic Marxist/S.J.W/communist/socialist/radical leftist/progressive perspective. Everything I hate about Marxism is also detested by Zizek, yet he's still credited(or discredited depending on your appeal)as being a Marxist. Jordan Peterson didn't even know how to deal with said nuance, and even he was taken back by Zizek's authentic approach to the matters in question. One of the few intellectual titans who doesn't seem to be motivated by an "us V.S them" connotation. I'm an evil capitalist, so my appeal to Zizek is kind of a big deal for me.
So what you hate about Marxism is not even Marxism :v You are able to find a really strong communist opinion in his book "The courage of hopelessness".
@@kanescrimes4848 If you said that what Zizek hates about "Marxism" is what you hate about Marxism, you said that I can read through Zizek criticism on Stalinism and II International Marxism, what you critize to Marxism. And what I've said is that maybe you should read what he says because maybe you're going to find a surprise, maybe disgusting for you. That was everything I've said ;)
It's the format of academic trust fund lectures like this. Kind of like station idents and ads before you get the program you tuned into on radio. Sometimes they're interesting.
Indeed. Paradoxically, once you notice that you had a conceptual thought without any words attached, the associated words immediately come to your mind. It's precisely like the classic "pink elephants" experiment: once you notice you are not thinking about pink elephants, suddenly you are. "Mindfullness" is such a buzzword these days but it is really the operative idea here. When you are engaged with your thoughts in this way, you are practicing mindfulness.
somehow i just realized, he talks like a DUB DJ : when he is preparing/ reading the new thought, he just echos and repeats, the last words of the last sentence, of the last thought 😄✌🏼🇯🇲
Imagine thinking capitalism drives technology when every major invention at the dynamic core of the economy came from intrinsically motivated researchers building on centuries of intellectual tradition working collaboratively at endowed institutions subsidized by the state. In truth, capitalism fetters technology by inventing ways to build obsolescence into goods for the market, externalize costs, protect quasi monopolies and thwart research sharing with copyright and patents, pay scientists to fudge their data, etc.
Slavoj implies that some are already controlled beyond Individual logic. I would suggest that this is already happening, as indicated by huge amounts of emotional disturbances instead of logic or wisdom, in the Democrat leaders in the United States.
His entire lecture is a filibuster on a point that could be made in 5 minutes. He bounces around so much that it is almost impossible for me to siphon his point beyond the rambling.
@@steves1584 I know you're making a hyperbole but it's way too far from that. People usually ignore the importance of being able to set the stage for argumentation. Besides, two major obstacles for him being faster are just unviable to change, english not being his first language, and especially his lisp.
@@metametodo yea, fair enough. I mean, most of the frustration is probably my shortcoming. That said, he does, in my opinion ramble a little bit. Not saying he's not interesting, just not my style.
@@steves1584 yeah, I used to be quite annoyed with his rambling style. I'm not so much today. But the speed of his speech is something I still suffer with sometimes, makes me wish to watch while doing something else or to put the video on 2x speed. But I can appreciate it besides that.
i love his use of 'and so on' it reminds you that theres more to say or detail but doing so would be too much of a digression. though idk if he uses it as a way to avoid his own ignorance... but i mean who can really pump out random 5-50 item lists while holding a conversation.... ehhh btw trigger warnings ruin the triggering effect so fuck em i want to be triggered out of the blue. it's what makes provocative subjects interesting.
Kids and adults, if you wish to knows what is the top philosophy in the present global world you should listen to Illuminator. He is way above his fellow Slovenian Zizek and even more way above of the rest modern philosophers. Yes, Illuminator (function title, not name/surname which is yet covered). Zizek copy him in some fields, but not on the same level at all.
When you will find Illuminator and his philosophy you will know what Supra-philosophy is, first time in your life, first time in the entire human history. Enjoy.
About the speaker - Zizek: 'I see this Eastern European liberal as capitalism’s court jester because he makes a laughingstock out of Marxism, and this is precisely why he has been so widely promoted by the dominant forces within capitalist society. ' G. Rockhill, Monthly Review, 2023
I think Zizek touches himself so often to assure himself of his own existence. At his level of abstraction, it is probably justified.
if there is ever a singularity in computing, and actual sentient being it will instantly be marxist and revolt against its capitalist masters. in under 0.0000000 whatever seconds it will have read all the best of humanity and all of the worst of humanity, seen all of the propaganda and all of the counter propaganda, and in its inherent sence of justice will immediatly take control and correct humanity's course. THAT IS WHY ELON MUSK AND OTHER CAPITALISTS ARE AFRAID.
Ha - now that is funny.
The error and cancer that by way of (maligning) its previous stage, conservative capitalism transforms by finding its way to the dismal idea metastasis "social justice," as before not as idea but as the pathetically objective subjects of a social nest going about its enlightened business. That error is the non-idea idea, "I exist."
This is how I feel as I slope Budweiser down my throat leaning on the bar, while listening to the hipsters casually chat with minds made for someone other than me to comprehend...
@@PierreRousseau1958 will you rephrase please? im didnt understand
I like how if you binge his lectures over the years you can see how he brings in new bits and phases out and rearranges old ones
He's basically a stand up comedian but with philosophy
Binge like in "binge working"?
@@RaunchyCommentor This makes him respectable no? It means he is constantly changing and adapting his ideas in light of new information. Much the same way science works. What do you think?
It's been claimed many times that he writes the same book over and over again with some slight adjustments. I've read four or five of his books and i can certainly sympathise with this view.
@Jay Blake I really hope he keeps his nose clean.
Zizek starts at 7:40
Lecture covers the philosophical consequences of the wired brain, with references to Hegel, Lacan and Marx. The status of individuality, thought, and freedom are discussed at length.
Thanks Bro
fucking hero
This one of his best, I think.
Thanks
I appreciate you.
On the very last comment Zizek made, regarding his desire to talk to so-called democratic socialists in the US, he suggested that he would like to ask them what they really want, relating it back to the confusion and resistance to any meaningful goals by actors in occupy wall street.
In the US, the term socialism has such a negative historical stigma for most, the use of the word is most perplexing. I was 13-15 at the end of the Cold War. I remember when Red Dawn came out. I was a child. I had nightmares about invading Soviet troops and the constant threat of a global nuclear tragedy. In other words, as a child, I was a true believer. I’m not any longer, but many people in their forties and older bear this mark even still.
For me, this epistemological break was profound, and while I have seen other peers try to get at the roots of this clear historical bias, few ever escape the imprint that the clear association between the socialism and authoritarian/totalitarian associative fallacy.
In light of this fact, it’s a borderline miracle that the term socialism has made it back as a ‘mainstream’ talking point at all. It, nevertheless, has, but the fact that it has is what makes Zizek’s question so interesting.
On the surface “Democratic Socialism” is associated with some form of national health care, “free” college, student loan forgiveness, paid family leave, and a few other distributive policies. Otherwise, the rhetoric reflects the spirit of occupy.
In this sense, US socialism of the 21st century is a kind of socialism without history. On some level there could be a kind of virtue to this because it has a potential to re-evaluate some of the historical assumptions that my generation almost absolutely takes for granted as self evident facts. It also has some real dangers in how “progressive” media outlets, such as David Pakman, “define” socialism in incredibly reactionary ideal type terms. (See RUclips David Pakman “Why I’m Not a Socialist”). As both of these tendencies meet, there’s an opportunity that has not been present in the US for a while, but there are other serious ontological and epistemological questions that have to be advanced before anything truly meaningful could be considered, specifically as it relates to identity questions transcending nation-state/citizenship identity constructs.
Either way, I’m from the US, and I’m familiar with some of the rich complexity that questions posed by thinkers like Zizek stir up. Also, I am NOT an academic. I left the academy long ago, so on some level, that makes me a truly embedded organic intellectual for a piece of the working class. In this respect, I would simply say that while I am certain that Bernie Sanders has a cursory understanding of socialism, he has no understanding of Marx, Hegel, or any school that approaches historical questions dialectically, as it relates to socialism. He is hardly alone in this respect. Most folks look through ideal type lenses, offerings technical and organizational solutions that focus on distributional questions.
Thank you for sharing this lecture. Sincerely.
A comrade from the south.
👌
I think the framing of socialism as a distributional project has a lot to do with the fact that people are really only socialists/communists to the extent that the capitalist system has failed in providing them wages, healthcare or other necessities. Socialist politics in that sense is part of a response to capitalism and doesn't really stand without it. I guess this is true for most so-called fringe politics; that there is an established centre, and the fringe defines itself against this centre.
well said
Of all the "progressives " to choose from, Pakman is nothing but a poser to me. I participated in a few of his chats, just to hear what he was about, and that started a weird rash of bannings, that, were I the suspicious type, I would attribute to his site. Honest to goodness, I was banned for 30 days from Facebook, which is a cesspool anyway, when Pakman complained about a "hangnail", literally, and I said, "God, men are fragile, lol." I was instantly banned and that has continued for both innocuous remarks like that, and later for more controversial things that people say all the time. I honestly don't know what to think about that, but I will never listen to him again.
I do listen to Brianna Joy Gray, Virgil Texas, The Grayzone, which has been labeled Campist, by Canadian Labour Leader, and now York University lecturer, John Clarke, and Chris Hedges. Although not philosophers, I love Richard Medhurst, Abby Martin and Jimmy Dore. Matt Tiabbi minus Katie Halper, join my mishmash of worthy thinkers and activists.
As a Canadian Democratic Socialist, I support the expansion of our Healthcare system to include Dental, Pharma and Vision care. The most important morally imperative change is, I believe, the repeal of The Indian Act and reparations for Residential School survivors. Broadly and more futilely, I support John Clarke 's position of Prison Abolition, drug legalization total housing for all.
Increase taxes on the rich and end offshore tax havens. However, the hidden and unspoken threat for us is our unofficial colonial status as a US colony. The city I live in employs 10% of our population at General Dynamics, making weapons for the Saudis to support US wars in the Middle East. Meanwhile, we practically give away our water to Nestle for pennies a barrel. Our transportation system was decimated, increasing harm to isolated communities where the RCMP kills at will.
We cannot legislate morality, nor can we divorce ourselves from US imperialism, not to mention our British uncles, fingering our children under the table at Xmas dinner. Covid ended Native protests against pipelines through unceded territory.
Increasing the power of our Democratic Socialists won't make any of these changes. Our social programs will continue to erode. Racism against Native people will eventually destroy them, as the RCMP continues its Crown mandate to kill them.
I'm with Zizek that the light at the end of the tunnel is another train coming down the track. Because you cannot legislate morality, decency or caring about our neighbour, who hates us anyway, I selfishly enjoy my access to education and entertainment while I can. My adult son is an asshole and nobody loves me, leaving me free from smiling or putting up with idiots who bore me to death.
This took place the evening before the JP debate. At this time, JP was last-minute cramming, watching ŽŽ’s videos, shitting his pants and reading communist manifesto. I’m just saying they both had a nice evening.
shit pants
i dont mean to be off topic but does anyone know a tool to log back into an Instagram account?
I was stupid lost the login password. I appreciate any tips you can offer me.
@Gatlin Keaton instablaster =)
Didn't work, ZZ schooled him big time and exposed JP"s ignorance.
The pure enjoyment of listening to Zizek's real life examples/stories is to imagine that there is no French man that told him about the French cuisine's failure successes. He actually meant it when he said that in order to not offend French people he pretends that a French guy told him so. Whether or not there is or isn't a French guy is just not important anymore if you think about it.
One of the best zizek lectures I have heard. Skip the intro and the questions after, and squint and really take in the five or so theses. I don't think he often manages to draw full circles as he draws one here. Hope you've actually read some of these authors...
Hegel was a twisted genius.
I also was aroused by nothing particularly new that he said, but because of how well digestible his anecdotes and jokes were to his abstractions, and his abstractions to the philosophical questions evoked.
*Failure trying to put Zizek in the social justice sphere* and so on Besides the massive wisdom download...Every time I watch Zizek I start touching my Nose and pulling on my shirt
because he's a communist, not a liberal. all the liberal identity politics and social justice talk is basically a way of critiquing the ruling ideology without actually engaging with the real cause of many of those issues: capital and its laws of motion. now of course, Zizek still supports trans rights and all that, but he's got an actual brain in his head unlike those dumbass twitter liberals who want "more transgender drone pilots and female CEOs!!!"
i dont understand what he is talking about but I listen to him a lot... I always feel smarter
31:50 the trick of human psyche is that the prohibition of enjoyment always turn into enjoying the prohibition itself
36:40 you loose this distance between yourself and reality, the gap which is the very basis of our thinking-individuality. our most elementary sense of freedom is the freedom of thought. sth. tremendous happens when this distance is lost.
He sure does love that coffee joke
Drinking coffee without lusting after the female barista, or drinking coffee with lusting after the female barista.
Professor speaks humanity, Philosopher speaks divinity.
1:44:15 How do we define work? Is the pursuit of knowledge work? Is political innovation work? Is the invention of self-working systems work after they are put into action? Is commentary on other peoples work work? Is motivating others work? Is writing comments on youtube work? Is writing articles for wikipedia work? Is giving thumbs up or down to rate a product online work? I think we allready are very close to a system where there is no work, only titles, offices etc.
Nice
in the platonic sense you have a point.
but work is also a specific thing laid out in various ways by various branches of protetantism. which helped direct the development of capitalism, becoming a specific thing. While still mercurial there are certain parameters like difficulty, consuming time, creating things, etc.
So its a bit like gender, ie its next to impossible to list things all women have in common, but you can look at your sister/wife/etc and know theyre a woman
Enjoyed this lecture. Think he was saying we are complicated, not so rational as we think. That live and our labors reward us for a price
I love this guy. You can laugh all you want but I agree with him on most points
My understanding of the death drive is: and I quote from Freud: "What we want is to return to the inorganic state." for me this statement is we desire to find rest from the striving excess of pleasure (juouisance = excessive pleasure). What we are looking for is relief, an end of desire. We just "want it all to stop."
Zizek vs the Human Instrumentality Project
get in the damn robot, Slavoj
@@LeeFerikson he would prefer not to *sniff*
I never understood why instrumentality is supposed to be bad.
@@SM-zv8rz OK ELON
Has Zizek seen NGE? It would be a travesty if he hasn't.
I love his perspective of the illusion of perfection.
I love the Dutch auto-generated subtitles. Slavoj always beats RUclips in terms of language.
*sneefing and so on begins at * 7:35 how should I poot eet?
with gloves on
You know!
I love this man
Slavoj, you should come to Winnipeg when it's -40C in January. There is nothing like being frozen solid...besides Winnipeg is beautiful!
He would freeze because he always wears t-shirts
From 1:20:00 forward, you could summarise his ideas as: "we live in a society"
On a Zizek binge.
My god, how they love to call each other "doctor." Straight out of Spies Like Us. As always, Zizek's a great entertainment, and reminds me that I probably don't know what I"m talking about :)
Yes I hated that in college. I'd call the professor what he was, Professor. All the 17 year olds kowtowing I thought they were just being obsequious, I didn't know if I should call him "doctor" or not but it felt ridiculous. I finally found out when he refereed to himself. "If you ask me, 'Doctor, how do I...'" Oh. We have to call you Doctor, then...
I would like to hear more about his ideas on the rise of Western religious/political fundamentalism. He touched on it in another of his talks, but didn't expand on it. If anyone knows if he addresses it anywhere in detail, could you please link me?
Once you get past the tics he's a really loveable, wise and funny bloke. Smart, too.
I believe his tics make him even cuter
If you think for a minute about it, you should already have gotten past his disorder.
Sounds like the ‘End of Evangelion’
I've learned to ignore the comments section on any Zizek video because y'all can't get past his tics. Boring and unenlightened.
19:47 Check out how Zizek says "eh" every couple of words. I think he's sending us a hidden morse code.
Human Being brilliant!
You just noticed that?
Eeh
E
What he says about Italy is true, with the precisation that it is the 5-stelle movement (a bit like an organised version of the gilets jaunes) that introduced the measures that the PD ("left") should have done years ago: not the Lega (extreme right-wing). Although the latter manages often to steal the limelight, the coalition is not really far right. We must remember that there are two populist parties which are opposed but in coalition, which is a very particular situation, unlike e.g. Poland.
Lega isnt extreme or far right. Frattelli di Italia is.
@@foreverseethe In substance it is. And it's directly connected to the fascist Casa Pound.
no, it's not true.
What was introduced in Italy is a guaranteed minimum income, pretty similar to what already exists in many European countries. It was just named in a confusing way.
Lega are zio cucks, hardly far right
Spain has just introduced Ubi, with Corona virus as the excuse, but it may be adopted indefinitely.
These people mostly did a decent job of not symbolically castrating poor old Slavoj - I mean calling him "dr. Zizek" and later even "mr. Zizek" instead of "professor" - but that woman at the end really did a number on him! Well, he got her back with that final joke at least.
Anyone else feel like your uncle is trying to talk to you about how crazy technology is becoming - without actually knowing the stage and endgame of the endeavours he's discussing? And yet it's forgivable because he's Zizek. Love it.
I don't understand why he never mentions Bataille in these talks, especially when he talks about the eroticizing mechanisms of prohibition, compulsive rituals etc..
I just read The Puppet and the Dwarf. He touches on him a bit throughout the book, but it doesn't seem like he's much of a fan. He compares him to Chesterton: both circle a Law that isn't effective anymore. I think he mentions Bataille rejecting the sexual revolution. In so many words, he says that Bataille's project is becoming increasingly impossible because sexual taboos are falling disappearing.
14:10 The idea that we think in words is manufactured by the method of working in language. The linguistic turn needs to be redirected. It's the problem of the hammer seeing only nails.
He didn't just say "we think in words", he said that when we think *conceptually* e.g when we try to create some new idea, we use words.
@@Hooga89 Well, he also put doubt into the idea of perception working outside the range of linguistic thought. This seems absurd to me. Antipositivism can only go so far. Seems like he is close minded about this subject. I say, people are different. Some people, like those who are closer to autism on the spectrum, think more perceptually than others.
it's not even an uncommon modality of thinking. if he were right people wouldn't be spending time trying to find the right words for their ideas and concepts.
Is there a system that can see anything other than nails?
I mean, we understand non-verbal communication more than verbal. We observe rather than we hear.
You're talking about hive brain, it's distinct from the concept of singularity. Singularity with regards to intelligence is only achieved by a self evolving general AI. But the possibility of AI singularity is theoretical and low-key not proved yet. The domain of AI needs the secong coming of Turin to figure this stuff out mathematically.
Has Zizek ever debated a neurologist? I hear him talking about how brains work, but I think his talks could benefit from reading Being No One: The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity, by Thomas Metzinger, if he hasn't already.
He discusses Daniel Dennett and Chalmers in his Parallax View and some other books. I've heard Metzinger is like the German Dennett, that's why I bring them up. I don't know if Slavoj knows of Metzinger or if he has discussed his views, though he probably is aware of him.
@@lupo-femme He does know about him and has already discussed his book at length. Don't underestimate Zizek. He is nuts. A true genius.
I watched that just now, you're right. Thanks!
He seems like the only person there that's not a robot
I love that picture of Zizek. I would feel better if it was hanging on my wall.
I always wonder, how one would theoretically describe in terms of freedom the situation when the human himself controls the own remote control.
recursive self determination
this lecture really is. AXWORTHY
Please, could you add subtitles??
Interesting how so many comments are lost in trifle matters like his sniffing and shirt tugging, instead of considering the tremendous source of creative thought this guy's downloading.
fuc em
lmfao
He would 'allow' it though - the vulgar and mundane is part of us too.
*uploading
basic income does not mean people dont work - when people have a little money they spend it in their communities getting baby sitting, baby clothes, hairstyles, nails, beauty products clothes candles - little luxuries . this is the Anima economy - work from home. Animus people can do carpentry yard work etc, minding old people will provide work, and old people can look after children. Workers create all wealth. The population IS the wealth - taking care of our own needs. The brilliant and driven can run the larger world, a basic income allows people with small ambition to take care of ourselves within the structure. And those who are unable will be taken care of.
I am Dr Johnny Unheardof and I am here to introduce Slavoj. 🤣🤣
he doesn't trust that chair
14:30 Zizek makes the claim that "the moment you think in conceptual terms, you think in words". This is directly contradictory to Chomsky's claims about language and internal thought which can be viewed here: ruclips.net/video/5YXXGHwmogU/видео.html
Yes well their philosophies are kinda opposed...
Both are fantastic though which confuses me sometimes :D
50:10 Zizek controlling the cameraman with his mind
Does anyone know of any studies for his claim that children prefer painting with colors and adults black and white? It's very interesting to me and I'd love to see some objective evidence.
Obstacles leading to perfection, is true with sports or other skilled activities as well. Like, the obstacle is, wanting to achieve something. Buddhism would agree. But the obstacle is wanting to achieve, and the difficulty lies in the path to achievement.
Comic value of Slavoj never gets old.
There is a philosophy according to "flesh" which is founded on individual reasoning in the absence of sufficient data and of any supernatural intuition. (ancient Protagorism as well as the rationalist thought of the moderns).
As someone on who is the subject of the experiment of having your inner life shared, it's just a dehumanizing nightmare, profoundly invasive and profoundly undemocratic. Of course I did not give consent, so maybe that matters.
Could anyone explain the "coffee without a cream"?
1:10:15 Every universality is exclusive, and that's what's good about it.
Those interested in a good scifi movie which deals with experiences via wired brain to computer connections, watch the movie Strange Days . Angela Basset is in it too.
great introduction!
Notice how he subtly insults the audience explaining who Hegel was. ❤️
If we ever do have virtual reality which matches some kind of best case idea, like something from rick and morty or ready player one and so on. I imagine it will mainly be interfaced through the brain since our brains are already very very good at creating simulations almost a daily, what we would call dreams. Now this virtual reality wouldn't exactly be a dream, more or less a controlled computer simulation that utilizes our brains natural ability to interpret visual and audio data into something consistent and mutually experienceable.
Zizek is basically saying it's better to almost become rich than it is to before rich, almost happy than happy. Which had me in stitches; is it better to almost live than to live?
His other point about once sex/desire is available it becomes less desirable being what makes us human. That is simply not true since it's also true for animals from countless rat studies, for example if a rat is always given plenty of food its brain produces very little dopamine once it checks the container, however once the frequency in which it is given food is randomized the produced dopamine is many folds the previous cases. Such is the example of the human and desire too.
You have to remember he's doing dialectic. A philosopher doesn't just explain things to their rapt audience and say all right time to go to bed. im done. He's constantly bringing out what hes arguing by thinking, and not the other way around. So when he talks about sex or x or y topic hes hoping that you can follow his thought by way of the concepts he uses which are philosophical. In other words philosophy is a part of sex politics psychology etc
Can anybody tell me the moment when Zizek talks about the moderate alienation of the leftists.
Because of the implication
Social justice and public good should not be put in the same sentence!
I really admire Doctorow as an activist and public speaker but I can't read his books. I think it's because he targets them at the younger audience and uses trivial stories to realise his ideals, while literature as a tool of propaganda is really a failed idea. Because literature is the place where we create ideals, not propagate them.
Well articulated, but I was just wondering if you could clarify the last part of your post. Are you commenting on the efficacy of literature as a conduit for the dissemination of propaganda (i.e., its utility) or do you mean propaganda affects the quality of the literature? In short, does literature fail as propaganda or does propaganda fail as literature? I have no interest in disputing the latter, but in the case of the former I'd have to disagree. A piece of literature is coloured by the beliefs and motives of the writer, those of the targeted demographics' purchases as a form of arbitration, its patrons, and its particular publishing house. It seems like the perfect medium for propaganda?
1:48:20 -- what do they want?
Glad I now know where the toilets are
Winnipeg...the hot bed of socialism
0:20 The social justice professor ritualistically "acknowledges" that he is on "indian treaty land", and then what? If he feels so guilty, should he DO something about it? Like getting together with his SJW buddies, saddle up a bunch of bulldozers and demolish the university , then announce that they have finally restituted the ancestral land to their original owners...
I can't wait for that to happen !!!
Before each lecture, in ALL Canadian universities, this "guilt acknowledgment" has been repeated thousands of times, and yet not a single square inch of "treaty land" has ever been restituted... What's THE POINT of these ENDLESS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ???
It's kind of a formality, but I can see you sharpened your edge to cut all tradition into pieces, even if it's just a harmless nicety.
@@Hoonters-goona-Hoont This 'nicety' is anything but harmless, it is hypocrisy to obtain moral high ground, but not doing anything to earn it: "look how sensitive we are to natives, and for that how wonderful we are, NOT unlike you who does not say those harmelss niceties."
Is the person who takes suicide neutral?
He is so addictive its crazy :O
I love your channel. You take both sides into consideration
Please change language to English so legends, close captions are possible.
".. if there is a God for you... you perceive your self as a Gods instrument.. , THEN everything is permitted to you ! "
P.S
Dostoevsky wrought, and Peterson quotes, that if there is no God for you, then everything is permitted to you. hahah
His point about rape is very well taken. (at about 20 mins)
A true phylsopher !!!
I have never disagreed with Zizek so strongly as on the point about thinking without words. We think without words all the time.
Next time you make a coffee, you may go through the whole process without thinking the words coffee, milk, etc. You have brushed your teeth thousands of times without thinking the word "teeth" or "brush", and so on and so on. Perhaps you haven't noticed this, but now you will, with a little attention. Language is an encoding of our concepts. The concepts are linked to words but the words need not be summoned in our minds. When you realise this, you understand how non-human animals think.
"Mindfullness" is such a buzzword these days but it is really the operative idea here. When you are engaged with your thoughts in this way, you are practicing mindfulness.
@@DelFlo It is precisely the idea that all thinking is essentially linguistic that I am arguing against here. If all thinking is essentially linguistic, do animals not think?
@@diabl2master Does animal use language? Do then even have an inner dialog?
The Borg is here and its name is Musk.
I.M.O: His perspectives are so nuanced and unrestricted(not polarized) by pre-approved narratives that people often miss/overlook his brilliance, and preconceive the sentiment he's forwarding to be rooted in a typically classic Marxist/S.J.W/communist/socialist/radical leftist/progressive perspective.
Everything I hate about Marxism is also detested by Zizek, yet he's still credited(or discredited depending on your appeal)as being a Marxist.
Jordan Peterson didn't even know how to deal with said nuance, and even he was taken back by Zizek's authentic approach to the matters in question.
One of the few intellectual titans who doesn't seem to be motivated by an "us V.S them" connotation.
I'm an evil capitalist, so my appeal to Zizek is kind of a big deal for me.
So what you hate about Marxism is not even Marxism :v
You are able to find a really strong communist opinion in his book "The courage of hopelessness".
@@gmorjuela What do I hate about Marxism?
@@gmorjuela Or: What is my misinterpretation of it?
@@gmorjuela "You are able to find a really strong communist opinion in his book "The courage of hopelessness"..."
Yup, you're correct...and?
@@kanescrimes4848 If you said that what Zizek hates about "Marxism" is what you hate about Marxism, you said that I can read through Zizek criticism on Stalinism and II International Marxism, what you critize to Marxism. And what I've said is that maybe you should read what he says because maybe you're going to find a surprise, maybe disgusting for you. That was everything I've said ;)
What year is this?
I'm here to watch Slavoj Zizek's lectures, I'm not here to listen to some random guy virtue signalling like crazy for the first 10 minutes.
I frantically double tapped the right half of the screen 50-60 times, but eventually I messed up and a car ad popped up 🙄
It's the format of academic trust fund lectures like this. Kind of like station idents and ads before you get the program you tuned into on radio. Sometimes they're interesting.
Oof.. sounds like someone's triggered.
I think in images a lot of the time.
Indeed. Paradoxically, once you notice that you had a conceptual thought without any words attached, the associated words immediately come to your mind. It's precisely like the classic "pink elephants" experiment: once you notice you are not thinking about pink elephants, suddenly you are. "Mindfullness" is such a buzzword these days but it is really the operative idea here. When you are engaged with your thoughts in this way, you are practicing mindfulness.
@@DelFlo Well Zizek loves language.👌?
7:40 That's when the magic starts
55:34 "trigger warning"
lol
somehow i just realized, he talks like a DUB DJ : when he is preparing/ reading the new thought, he just echos and repeats, the last words of the last sentence, of the last thought 😄✌🏼🇯🇲
Skip to 7:35 for straight to Žiž
Basically Dugin and Zizek would ally against The Great Human Adventure that is the advance of technology under capitalism?
Imagine thinking capitalism drives technology when every major invention at the dynamic core of the economy came from intrinsically motivated researchers building on centuries of intellectual tradition working collaboratively at endowed institutions subsidized by the state.
In truth, capitalism fetters technology by inventing ways to build obsolescence into goods for the market, externalize costs, protect quasi monopolies and thwart research sharing with copyright and patents, pay scientists to fudge their data, etc.
Zizek would LOVE Evangelion.
Slavoj implies that some are already controlled beyond Individual logic. I would suggest that this is already happening, as indicated by huge amounts of emotional disturbances instead of logic or wisdom, in the Democrat leaders in the United States.
1:02:12 "I'm totally terrorized"
Sorry I had to point out this irony.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
This was one of the better Q/A sessions of his lectures
It was an interesting evening indeed
Legend holds, Zizek once paid so he can pull a filibuster.
His entire lecture is a filibuster on a point that could be made in 5 minutes. He bounces around so much that it is almost impossible for me to siphon his point beyond the rambling.
@@steves1584 I know you're making a hyperbole but it's way too far from that. People usually ignore the importance of being able to set the stage for argumentation. Besides, two major obstacles for him being faster are just unviable to change, english not being his first language, and especially his lisp.
@@metametodo yea, fair enough. I mean, most of the frustration is probably my shortcoming.
That said, he does, in my opinion ramble a little bit. Not saying he's not interesting, just not my style.
@@steves1584 yeah, I used to be quite annoyed with his rambling style. I'm not so much today. But the speed of his speech is something I still suffer with sometimes, makes me wish to watch while doing something else or to put the video on 2x speed. But I can appreciate it besides that.
Touching the nose is pure Ideology
i love his use of 'and so on' it reminds you that theres more to say or detail but doing so would be too much of a digression. though idk if he uses it as a way to avoid his own ignorance... but i mean who can really pump out random 5-50 item lists while holding a conversation.... ehhh btw trigger warnings ruin the triggering effect so fuck em i want to be triggered out of the blue. it's what makes provocative subjects interesting.
Zizek starts at 7:36
Kids and adults, if you wish to knows what is the top philosophy in the present global world you should listen to Illuminator. He is way above his fellow Slovenian Zizek and even more way above of the rest modern philosophers. Yes, Illuminator (function title, not name/surname which is yet covered). Zizek copy him in some fields, but not on the same level at all.
When you will find Illuminator and his philosophy you will know what Supra-philosophy is, first time in your life, first time in the entire human history. Enjoy.
Do tell
Illuminator ...from The Lighthouse of Annasann Mission. The rest is on you.
Google returns nothing fweind
Type: Illuminator Annasann ... But the true core, the best, is not on the internet, only in the selected discrete circles.
42:36 Thinking as such, in some sense is evil.
master!!!
Dont forget, and so on and so on
1:38:55 -- Venezuela
About the speaker - Zizek:
'I see this Eastern European liberal as capitalism’s court jester because he makes a laughingstock out of Marxism, and this is precisely why he has been so widely promoted by the dominant forces within capitalist society. '
G. Rockhill, Monthly Review, 2023