Pretty much agree with everything he said. We don't construct our histories until we have the proper context through which to do so. Things don't "make sense" until they suddenly do, almost as if by fate. The criticism of contemporary Western sexuality is spot-on, too. Nothing wrong with casual sex, but I think the fear of engaging with another person deeply out of fear of pain or loss is something that we all have to address. Life is not a sterile, clean experience. It's not all pleasure. It's pleasure mixed with quite a lot of pain, and that's not something to turn away from.
This is profound. I hadn't thought about it this way before, but describing what you call 'Western Buddhism' fits perfectly with what I am experiencing. It is as though people are afraid to engage and too lethargic to act. And such an encounter, such an event is taking place in my life right now which puts that all the more in perspective. Thank you, Slavoj, this changes my perspective of the western culture forever.
It seems more like a voiceless alveolar lateral fricative: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolar_lateral_fricative He should learn how to pronounce it correctly. You just need to know how to put your tongue.
@@prisma6799 a poor example associative thinking what does this have to do with what gela bendeliani said? only the word wise? mathematicians think in symbols physicists in objects philosophers in concepts geometers in images jurists in constructs logicians in operators writers in impressions and idiots in words NN Taleb
@@vaneakatok it seems to me that you have totally missed the comical nature of my comment and i apologize for that. I was just mentioning the evident irony behind someone calling Zizek "wise", when he is "generaly opposed", in his own words, to said concept.
What he's essentially saying is that romantic love is dying and that we're going back to "arranged marriages" and introductions. This is because people no longer acknowledge the kinds of encounters that could potentially change their lives - the encounters that spark romantic love. People are oblivious to it. For example, if you had a moment with a stranger - because you dropped something on the street and they picked it up and handed it to you, in the past the two people would talk and perhaps realize a connection - potential romantic interest - this is the door to falling in love - romantic love. Now instead people ignore these moments and hire a matchmaker, or an online dating website, to find them a partner. Mankind went from arranged marriages and "fix-ups" to us discovering romantic love, and we are now headed back to essentially arranged marriages and missing out on the whole notion and pleasure of falling in love versus something that is much more contrived.
U seem smart so plz answer this. Since he referred to the ideology of craving the good without the bad, consumerism, distancing from attachments as Western Buddhism, wut would the opposite be called? Does it already have a name? Cherishing the entire person including the encounter, developing healthy attachments etc. pls help
when you fall in love with someone and she is not seeing you as you see her, the world shatters. Making meaning out of everyday interactions becomes so hard. You almost get a pessimistic outlook on life and your future. The image of her resides in your mind 24/7. even simplest things can remind you of her. You try to avoid everything that is associated with her but it is what maintains her image. She lefts you no room to breathe. even in your sleep you are not safe. Her image constatntly apperar in dreams. The worst thing is that she is unaware of your sufferings. She goes her daily life as if nothing significant happened. You try to contain yourself to not cross any lines that may hurt your personal well being, and her life. However, the coal burns brighter everyday rather than being extinguished by passage of time. This is the love I am going through and nothing is the same and never will be
you gave a person who did not deserve it too much of you. (i understand love as some self sacrifice) for the future i guess the best thing to do is to learn love without attachment and wait for the other person to fall in love before you do. been through same shit thought it was save to love her but she quit in 3 hours. but remember it is energy which is set free you must use it as motivation for positive things as hard as it may be
Mr. Žižek makes a good point about today's society wanting to have pleasures at low costs, low risks and without commitments. It's an ugly thing to think about but one we should take into consideration. Are these pleasures worth anything without the price to pay for it? I like to think everything we get is the fruit of our labor, but as I've seen time and time again that this is not necessarily the case.
i think his point is about aesthetics decaffeinated coffee is just the taste of coffee non-alcoholic beverages are just the taste of beverages and love without the fall is similarly just the aesthetics of love
I think expectation plays a lot into this idea of subverting The Event. You might want someone perfect and be given many examples of what a perfect person is through movies, advertisements, and social media, - yet you still want to experience romance and sex. You create a new definition of love that allows you to experience it without committing to someone you believe is less than perfect. This new definition does not contain your own fulfillment as a goal, or sacrifice as a consequence, there are no events. It is an inbetween space. You can hold off the event of love so long as you believe that it cannot make itself perfect, but that it must made to be perfect through careful planning and by selecting the perfect mate. With so much apparent choice of perfection, falling in love with the wrong person, an ugly person, an imperfect person, is quite a scary concept.
I think this is a well constructed Point of View from Slavoj. I personally have not been in love ( just a single crush) but I have heard from my dad of his first meeting with my mum which was an event that led to today.
This is taken almost word for word from Badiou's In Praise of Love for anyone interested in reading more. I hope (and I'm sure) Zizek gives Badiou more credit in his book on Event than in this video.
I honestly don't know what love means at all. I don't know how to separate it from lust/limerance/infatuation. I recently experienced one of these 'encounters' and developed a relationship from it. Before the relationship properly started, I wouldn't say I was thinking my whole life was leading up to this point, but I started imagining my future with this person, with the idea that she was my KIND of person. Maybe it's because I have in my mind that she's NOT the only one of her kind, that there are a bunch of people like her out there, however rare, and I just found one of them. The relationship ended due to distance issues, and I don't know if it matters to me. I feel like I could be happy without anyone, or comforted in the assumption that there are other people like her out there somewhere, just undiscovered as of yet. So I question this guy when he says people are AFRAID of experiencing that event. I think the event only exists if your brain places full importance on it. The fact I believe there are others, and am happy to be alone, means my 'event' will never be so important and life-changing. It's all perspective isn't it?
i think he's speaking of society in general.. not each specific individual.. since your and your ex did not decide to close the distance gap.. your lives were not significantly changed so it would probably fail zizek's definition of an event.. but two things.. ( please don't take it personally i'm just postulating ) 1. maybe you were scared of the relationship (event) so you didn't move close to fix the problem and change your life and/or 2. you may be willing to move for your next relationship.. which would qualify it as an event
***** I'll just clarify, by distance issues I meant that I moved back to my home country. We originally met in China and I was infatuated with her for 6months before we started dating. We dated for 6 months and then that was the end of my time in China. I've watched a lot of friends around me continuing relationships they made while in China. Koreans dating Norwegians, Russians dating French. They all seemed to so easily make the decision to continue dating their counter-parts, after returning to their respective countries, but I so easily let it go. I would say for my friends THEY had encountered an event which changed their lives and made them consider to the point that they are continuing long distance relationships. I thought I had encountered the exact same thing, even more so, yet I did not make the decision to continue and drastically alter my future. I don't know - The whole 'event' thing is lost on me now
Feel free to disregard if this is no longer relevent- Perhaps your "perspective," as you call it, which reassures you that there are other people out there for you, is in fact another "encounter," which followed after the original encounter. (The original encounter being you falling in love with your ex.) By this I mean that oftentimes for other people, their life story is changed by the encounter, but the story is not finished. The progression of love is not completed, or actualized fully, or however you would say it. And maybe then your experience is an example of the opposite thing. Your relationship happened, and that was that. I don't mean to say that your relationship was transactional in nature, but I do mean to suggest the possibility that your relationship actually ended, whereas many other relationships only end superficially. They do not end internally for the people involved. Your relationship could still retroactively have changed its own causes, as Zizek argues falling in love does. It could have done this if your life story was again changed afterwards by your newfound event/perspective/realization that there are other people for you. It may not seem like it to you now, because the causes (which were once the effect) have again been changed by yet another effect. OR perhaps it is not a question of "are there more of that kind of people out there?" but rather a question of "Who am I when I am falling in love with the person, and am I the same person when I am not falling in love with that person?" No matter who the person is or how many of their kind there are, what makes this an encounter is not only that the story of your life changes. It also must be that your "self" changes along with the story. In either of these possibilities, neither of which I am insisting upon, it ultimately get into the murky territory of talking about the "self" or "soul." Because the differentiation, or importance, of one encounter compared to the many other encounters in a person's life is dependent on how we see the through-line of that person's being. And to see that consistent thread in a person's life, we would need all of that person's encounters laid out as if they were on a map before our eyes. This type of interpretation of collected personal events might have its own independent perspective, free from the perspectives of each new event in our lives -- an unperturbed, thoughtful reflection. Not that it is useful to think of every love-related question in terms of the self. Nonetheless, I think Zizek's point survives in the reality of differing perspectives.
@@dylanharnettmarshall9700 I appreciate the comment and am amazed to return here after 6 years. I think its just been too long since I wrote this to offer anything meaningful as a follow up. Strangely, I have started dating someone recently and comparisons to the ex mentioned in my previous comments and my willingness to discontinue/complete the relationship due to distance issues is something I am reflecting on again. It's all very messy but I might return to this video again soon to see if it offers me some new ideas.
@@dylanharnettmarshall9700 "I think Zizek's point survives in the reality of differing perspectives." - After watching again, and thinking about how natural and automatic that experience of 'falling' in love is, I think I can agree that perspectives on love wouldn't preclude the ability to experience 'falling' - although, it might moderate the strength of the fall. e.g., a buddhist monk might be able to distance themself from the sensation of 'falling', but inevitably they are still encountering the experience. In terms of my sense of self, I think now, more than ever, I am afraid of anything that might impact on the 'self' that I know. I've spent the last 4 years completing a degree and setting myself up for a specific outcome in terms of career and lifestyle. Routine and structure have allowed me to maintain this 'self', and now I feel very invested in me remaining the way I am. If I change, I might also change my attitude toward my field and career, then all of my past efforts will seem meaningless or misguided. Love and falling in love definitely feels like it is most capable of destroying/altering that self-image. And for that reason, it probably explains why I am hesitant to allow the fall to happen. With the person I'm currently dating, sometimes I think I'd rather get to know her AFTER I have settled into my career and found a place for myself to live. Otherwise it feels like a constant threat to me and my history.
He's telling us what he has observed over time as a rational thinking person. And all of you Superficial Twats coming down on him because of his accent or his demeanor will probably never get just what it is he is trying to say. We are losing something in pursuit of or modern lives, something wondrous and magical. The serendipity of the chance encounter or the miraculous change in perception toward someone we already may know and the resulting alteration of the self-awareness of our own timeline. Where the events of our lives take on new and deeper meaning in the context of this new reality. How many opportunities do we get to, retroactively add richness and vibrance to a canvass we have already painted? Not many! I for one would like to thank him for this illuminating discussion. Thank You!
Although I understand where Zizek would feel that we are less capable of handling random encounters, I still feel like people wish to "fall in love", but perhaps, at a distance. Technology is changing the way we interact with each other, but I don't think it's changing our desires and values by that much. We're still trying to find ways to interact with each other better over technology with things like Skype or the Oculus Rift.
I'm reaching up and reaching out, I'm reaching for the random or what ever will bewilder me. And following our will and wind we may just go where no one's been. We'll ride the spiral to the end and may just go where no one's been. Spiral out. Keep going
Lol at all people bashing this great man. This is a very interesting point of view! I agree, even though I think that having one night stands without love can be profitable too.
I was actually surprised how Slavoj's take on being afraid of falling in love wasn't too bad a take. I like his earnestness even though might not always like what his take on things.
Love replaces long memories with a kind of magic. All affections need the past: love creates, as if by magic, a past with which it surrounds us. It gives us, so to speak, the consciousness of having lived for years with a being who was once almost a stranger to us. Love is only a bright spot, and yet it seems to take over time. It did not exist a few days ago, soon it will not exist anymore; but, as long as it exists, it spreads its light on the time that preceded it, as well as on the one that will follow it. Adolphe by Benjamin Constant (translated from french by deep L)
Western Buddhism. Never heard it being referred to as that, but damn that was genius. Sad part is, I think society continues to head in that direction, and with all that Internet around you, I don't see any hope of things changing for the better. We're all starting to turn into Robots. I guess that's what we all wanted all along, eh?
Yeah, that part of the video was really interesting to me as well. I used to be a subscriber to that sort of ideal, but around half a year ago I realized that I'm going to miss out on a lot of what life has to offer if I keep everything and everyone at arm's length from me until I'm sure it's safe to go in. I do think there's some value in the mindset of Western Buddhism as it were, but I'll defer to Oscar Wilde for what I think the real answer is. “Everything in moderation, including moderation.”
Oh for fuck's sake. You're using RUclips to post a comment on an online video discussing existentialism. You have the sum of human knowledge available at your fingertips. You can literally watch any TV channel in the world when you punch in a few numbers you've read off of your credit card, which is a moulded hydrocarbon extracted from beneath the ground. Stop with this 'we're turning into Robots' crap. If you honestly believe it, then you can always go off into the Himalayas and live out your life as a Buddhist priest without the 'burdens' of technology, which has done nothing but accelerate human development across all facets of society. All of history dictates that things can only get better. We are on the verge(40 odd years or so) of the technological singularity. In a 100 years or so, it's entirely possible that we'll be able to directly manipulate the weather. We are constructing missions to colonise other planets. We are deciphering the secrets of the stars through Mathematics and Physics. We are being unified as a race through the Arts. The world is amazing. The world will be awesome.
Hotshot2k4 lol ... when someone says to me "everything in moderation" I can't help but think - a little pedophilia but not to much - little drunk driving is ok but only in moderation???
***** "...including moderation" though, meaning that there's a time and place for moderation, and things like murder and pedophilia are not that time. Similarly, caring about your SO isn't something you should do in moderation.
It is a complicated thing to fall in love in this profound way and then wonder if the person is real. Especially if they want you to change and change. If they seem unwilling to accept the fact that just like them, you have a full range of human emotions. Is that love? A little fear seems reasonable under these conditions. Still, it is worth waiting to find out. Because if it is real, it is something rare and valuable.
This guy has really had me thinking and pondering on his ideas since I discovered him on this channel about 24 hours ago. I don’t agree with all he says nor do I particularly enjoy his peculiarities.. all of that is irrelevant to the occasional statement that he makes that grabs my attention.
It's weird. For the most part, I agree with him, especially what he said about wanting "love" without the fall. But in one of the other videos in this series, he thinks that criticism of online dating sites, that they are not spontaneous but "constructed" is bull, because we're never spontaneous, but always play a role. Sorta contradicting.
I don´t see this "western buddhism" as a bad thing on itself. It will be more fullfilling for individuals in a non-capitalist or in a much less capitalistic situation where people will have it easier meeting each other working less hours with more subsistence security and less commercialized public and affinity group meeting places
What the hell makes people think this guy is on crack? His accent? No. He has an accent because he's from Slovenia. His looks? He's got a beard and moustache, so what? His mannerisms? Again, so what? If you've ever seen MythBusters, you'll know that Adam Savage moves his arms around in a similar fashion when he talks, and he's not on crack. His subject matter? He's a philosopher, of course he's going to say stuff like that. That doesn't make it "wrong", and in fact his talking points are all very valid. You people say he's on crack, but that argument has no basis. Stop roasting the guy just because he's a thinker.
Someone clearly knows nothing about crack. It's the way he sniffs and keeps grabbing his nose every so often. It isn't drugs though. It's just a nervous tic.
The west is the salvation and the death of Buddhism. What predominates is watered-down mindfulness and yoga training, serving no purpose deeper than helping upper middle class white collar workers stay on the grind with a clear head, but there are also highly skilled teachers and motivated practitioners in the real Dharma scene far in advance of what you normally find in the East. In other words, the percentage of lay 'buddhists' who are serious practitioners with a good grasp of the teachings is much higher in the west than the east, where most 'buddhists' do not meditate at all and have warped conceptions of buddhist teaching, though most of the best teachers are still found in the east. I suspect Zizek is making more of a rhetorical gesture than a serious point about western buddhism but I thought I'd throw that out there. Real buddhadharma practice could not be further in its effects from being 'perfectly amenable to superficial consumerism'.
+Dr. Cavalier I'm not agree. It fits perfectly with the nowadays consumerist life. Don't get engaged in life, emotions or suffer avoiding. That sort of things even when it's only about "bad feelings" (hate this term) as other "ways to escape" to put it like that presented in buddhism are precisely what help/aloud you to being absorb by the consumerism. Other thing is that all that philosophy way in the past and in other context and social-ideological environment wasn't like that or at least wasnt created because of that. However also your argument is the classical fundamentalist response "it's all because we're not doing it enough", that's pretty funny cause Zizek got a lot of material talking about that ahahah
ONLY those who think WITH THEIR ASS accuse Zizek of "madness". Only those who fester in ignorance and who have unwavering faith in "legitimate" ideas, who are cowards before their very reality being torn apart, attack Zizek without actually addressing the content of his points.
I take issue with his statement that today we want the good thing without the bad. I think that that's been a part of western culture for a long, long time.
Nemo Cassum On a superficial level, this is something that has been a part of every culture since the beginning of time. But that's not what Zizek is talking about. He's talking about the unique manifestation of it today, the distinct character it takes and finally - "it" as a wider ideological pathology. Essentially, the argument is in retrospect to the 1960's counter-culture - before then, we wren't living in a permissive society and there wasn't even a good or bad to choose from (for example, sex was simply taboo). Zizek comes to the concluison that today, we incorporate hedonism, along with psuedo-left politics by destroying that about them which offends the reproduction of the existing order - moreso, that which strips them of their essence to begin with.
This guy should win an award for stating the bloody obvious for the first part where he talks about predecesors. Second part, he's somewhat wrong; people who go trough dating agencies don't necessarily fall in love (although I'm sure there are exceptions) because they're are settling for whatever they can get. Because otherwise people fall in love because they feel like they got something that was massively out of their reach, i.e. someone way more confident, intelligent, physically attractive etc. Also, love the way he uses complete factoids to rationalise his theories.
He did not explain anything really.. Everything he said was just a simple, pointless observation.. The way he speaks makes you think that you did not, and could not have come to the same realization like him... Thats the whole point. He takes his credentials and authority and makes you think how only he realizes the things he speaks of here. Basically its all pretentious bullshit that anyone with half a brain understood once they hit the age of reason..
Liberate Vos Ex Inferis Wow I totally agree, just read the comment I posted 10 seconds ago before seeing yours: "Zizek is so over rated... just because he has a funny accent, a very serious beardy philosopher face and some breathing problems, doesnt make him a genius. He keeps talking on and on to pretend what he's saying is high level but it's fucking commonplace statments that could fit in 1 minute. He's just doing his own psychotherapy by philosophing in front of people i think."
I do appreciate the idea behind what he brings but he does not appear to be healthy or in a good state of mind to be sharing ideas about improving someone eldest quality of life.
BathroomTile Please elaborate on: 1) The layers of idiocy involved in saying "trolololol"/ the etymology of trololol. 2) How trolololol is cancerous. 3) Where I made an argument. 4) How using a poorly conceived term, or any other term but badly, results in an invalid argument.
BathroomTile "[it] makes your argument invalid". What he said wasn't even an argument, it was ad hominem attack. He said nothing to refute any of Zizek's claims.
I enjoyed his talk. Was distracted by the constant nose touching I think that's a sign of some sort of drug use via the nose. I'm not saying this to belittle anything he said just funny to notice. Possibly cocaine.
So....does he always speak fast and just happened to have a runny nose, because if not then this is likely the first time big-think has posted a video where the speaker has been snorting cocaine.
Pretty much agree with everything he said. We don't construct our histories until we have the proper context through which to do so. Things don't "make sense" until they suddenly do, almost as if by fate.
The criticism of contemporary Western sexuality is spot-on, too. Nothing wrong with casual sex, but I think the fear of engaging with another person deeply out of fear of pain or loss is something that we all have to address. Life is not a sterile, clean experience. It's not all pleasure. It's pleasure mixed with quite a lot of pain, and that's not something to turn away from.
This is profound. I hadn't thought about it this way before, but describing what you call 'Western Buddhism' fits perfectly with what I am experiencing. It is as though people are afraid to engage and too lethargic to act. And such an encounter, such an event is taking place in my life right now which puts that all the more in perspective.
Thank you, Slavoj, this changes my perspective of the western culture forever.
Existentialist Dasein which one is it? he doesn't usually rely too much on Nietzsche…
I spent a week learning to pronounce Ich in German and this guys does it every 3 seconds...... amazing.
Not really, you use your tongue and the roof of your mouth. He using his tongue and the side of his cheek
It seems more like a voiceless alveolar lateral fricative: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolar_lateral_fricative
He should learn how to pronounce it correctly. You just need to know how to put your tongue.
I laughed way too hard at that!
Ok Smartass
Javier is right, you've got your phonemes mixed up.
Genius. Would love to meet this man one day.
So many comments about his manners. “When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger.” - Confucius
LOVE THIS QUOTE!!! Thank you :-)
"I'm generally opposed to wisdom"- Slavo Zizek
@@prisma6799 a poor example associative thinking
what does this have to do with what gela bendeliani said? only the word wise?
mathematicians think in symbols
physicists in objects
philosophers in concepts
geometers in images
jurists in constructs
logicians in operators
writers in impressions
and idiots in words
NN Taleb
@@vaneakatok it seems to me that you have totally missed the comical nature of my comment and i apologize for that. I was just mentioning the evident irony behind someone calling Zizek "wise", when he is "generaly opposed", in his own words, to said concept.
god I had a girlfriend like this that would always engage in something else when I showed her something or I tried to tell her anything
What he's essentially saying is that romantic love is dying and that we're going back to "arranged marriages" and introductions. This is because people no longer acknowledge the kinds of encounters that could potentially change their lives - the encounters that spark romantic love. People are oblivious to it. For example, if you had a moment with a stranger - because you dropped something on the street and they picked it up and handed it to you, in the past the two people would talk and perhaps realize a connection - potential romantic interest - this is the door to falling in love - romantic love. Now instead people ignore these moments and hire a matchmaker, or an online dating website, to find them a partner. Mankind went from arranged marriages and "fix-ups" to us discovering romantic love, and we are now headed back to essentially arranged marriages and missing out on the whole notion and pleasure of falling in love versus something that is much more contrived.
Excellent summary
U seem smart so plz answer this. Since he referred to the ideology of craving the good without the bad, consumerism, distancing from attachments as Western Buddhism, wut would the opposite be called? Does it already have a name? Cherishing the entire person including the encounter, developing healthy attachments etc. pls help
@@jermainedoig4618 craving the good along with the bad.
@@jermainedoig4618 amor fati
when you fall in love with someone and she is not seeing you as you see her, the world shatters. Making meaning out of everyday interactions becomes so hard. You almost get a pessimistic outlook on life and your future. The image of her resides in your mind 24/7. even simplest things can remind you of her. You try to avoid everything that is associated with her but it is what maintains her image. She lefts you no room to breathe. even in your sleep you are not safe. Her image constatntly apperar in dreams. The worst thing is that she is unaware of your sufferings. She goes her daily life as if nothing significant happened. You try to contain yourself to not cross any lines that may hurt your personal well being, and her life. However, the coal burns brighter everyday rather than being extinguished by passage of time. This is the love I am going through and nothing is the same and never will be
Thank you for writing this - ive been feeling the way you described for the last 9 months. I hope you’re doing better
you gave a person who did not deserve it too much of you. (i understand love as some self sacrifice)
for the future i guess the best thing to do is to learn love without attachment and wait for the other person to fall in love before you do.
been through same shit thought it was save to love her but she quit in 3 hours.
but remember it is energy which is set free you must use it as motivation for positive things as hard as it may be
Mr. Žižek makes a good point about today's society wanting to have pleasures at low costs, low risks and without commitments. It's an ugly thing to think about but one we should take into consideration. Are these pleasures worth anything without the price to pay for it? I like to think everything we get is the fruit of our labor, but as I've seen time and time again that this is not necessarily the case.
"Low risks?" "Without commitments?" Slavoj sounds more socially conservative in this case, than rather a true revolutionary socialist.
i think his point is about aesthetics
decaffeinated coffee is just the taste of coffee
non-alcoholic beverages are just the taste of beverages
and love without the fall is similarly just the aesthetics of love
I love watching this guy talk.
Absolutely brilliant.. This is why I love bigthink, gives me food for thought
Certainly the greatest philosopher nose.
I think expectation plays a lot into this idea of subverting The Event. You might want someone perfect and be given many examples of what a perfect person is through movies, advertisements, and social media, - yet you still want to experience romance and sex. You create a new definition of love that allows you to experience it without committing to someone you believe is less than perfect. This new definition does not contain your own fulfillment as a goal, or sacrifice as a consequence, there are no events. It is an inbetween space. You can hold off the event of love so long as you believe that it cannot make itself perfect, but that it must made to be perfect through careful planning and by selecting the perfect mate. With so much apparent choice of perfection, falling in love with the wrong person, an ugly person, an imperfect person, is quite a scary concept.
I think this is a well constructed Point of View from Slavoj. I personally have not been in love ( just a single crush) but I have heard from my dad of his first meeting with my mum which was an event that led to today.
This is taken almost word for word from Badiou's In Praise of Love for anyone interested in reading more. I hope (and I'm sure) Zizek gives Badiou more credit in his book on Event than in this video.
This guys gotta voice over a pixar or disney charecter
communist daffy duck maybe?
So after all there exist people who walk into a Zizek video with Disney in their mind. Savage world, indeed.
actually makes sense since he makes tie ins to kung fu panda and that sort of thing
Yeah. Got it! Event is an encounter, which retroactively creates its own causes.
I honestly don't know what love means at all. I don't know how to separate it from lust/limerance/infatuation. I recently experienced one of these 'encounters' and developed a relationship from it. Before the relationship properly started, I wouldn't say I was thinking my whole life was leading up to this point, but I started imagining my future with this person, with the idea that she was my KIND of person. Maybe it's because I have in my mind that she's NOT the only one of her kind, that there are a bunch of people like her out there, however rare, and I just found one of them.
The relationship ended due to distance issues, and I don't know if it matters to me. I feel like I could be happy without anyone, or comforted in the assumption that there are other people like her out there somewhere, just undiscovered as of yet.
So I question this guy when he says people are AFRAID of experiencing that event. I think the event only exists if your brain places full importance on it. The fact I believe there are others, and am happy to be alone, means my 'event' will never be so important and life-changing. It's all perspective isn't it?
i think he's speaking of society in general.. not each specific individual..
since your and your ex did not decide to close the distance gap.. your lives were not significantly changed so it would probably fail zizek's definition of an event..
but two things.. ( please don't take it personally i'm just postulating )
1. maybe you were scared of the relationship (event) so you didn't move close to fix the problem and change your life and/or
2. you may be willing to move for your next relationship.. which would qualify it as an event
*****
I'll just clarify, by distance issues I meant that I moved back to my home country. We originally met in China and I was infatuated with her for 6months before we started dating. We dated for 6 months and then that was the end of my time in China.
I've watched a lot of friends around me continuing relationships they made while in China. Koreans dating Norwegians, Russians dating French. They all seemed to so easily make the decision to continue dating their counter-parts, after returning to their respective countries, but I so easily let it go.
I would say for my friends THEY had encountered an event which changed their lives and made them consider to the point that they are continuing long distance relationships. I thought I had encountered the exact same thing, even more so, yet I did not make the decision to continue and drastically alter my future.
I don't know - The whole 'event' thing is lost on me now
Feel free to disregard if this is no longer relevent-
Perhaps your "perspective," as you call it, which reassures you that there are other people out there for you, is in fact another "encounter," which followed after the original encounter. (The original encounter being you falling in love with your ex.) By this I mean that oftentimes for other people, their life story is changed by the encounter, but the story is not finished. The progression of love is not completed, or actualized fully, or however you would say it. And maybe then your experience is an example of the opposite thing. Your relationship happened, and that was that. I don't mean to say that your relationship was transactional in nature, but I do mean to suggest the possibility that your relationship actually ended, whereas many other relationships only end superficially. They do not end internally for the people involved. Your relationship could still retroactively have changed its own causes, as Zizek argues falling in love does. It could have done this if your life story was again changed afterwards by your newfound event/perspective/realization that there are other people for you. It may not seem like it to you now, because the causes (which were once the effect) have again been changed by yet another effect.
OR perhaps it is not a question of "are there more of that kind of people out there?" but rather a question of "Who am I when I am falling in love with the person, and am I the same person when I am not falling in love with that person?" No matter who the person is or how many of their kind there are, what makes this an encounter is not only that the story of your life changes. It also must be that your "self" changes along with the story.
In either of these possibilities, neither of which I am insisting upon, it ultimately get into the murky territory of talking about the "self" or "soul." Because the differentiation, or importance, of one encounter compared to the many other encounters in a person's life is dependent on how we see the through-line of that person's being. And to see that consistent thread in a person's life, we would need all of that person's encounters laid out as if they were on a map before our eyes. This type of interpretation of collected personal events might have its own independent perspective, free from the perspectives of each new event in our lives -- an unperturbed, thoughtful reflection.
Not that it is useful to think of every love-related question in terms of the self. Nonetheless, I think Zizek's point survives in the reality of differing perspectives.
@@dylanharnettmarshall9700 I appreciate the comment and am amazed to return here after 6 years. I think its just been too long since I wrote this to offer anything meaningful as a follow up.
Strangely, I have started dating someone recently and comparisons to the ex mentioned in my previous comments and my willingness to discontinue/complete the relationship due to distance issues is something I am reflecting on again. It's all very messy but I might return to this video again soon to see if it offers me some new ideas.
@@dylanharnettmarshall9700 "I think Zizek's point survives in the reality of differing perspectives." - After watching again, and thinking about how natural and automatic that experience of 'falling' in love is, I think I can agree that perspectives on love wouldn't preclude the ability to experience 'falling' - although, it might moderate the strength of the fall. e.g., a buddhist monk might be able to distance themself from the sensation of 'falling', but inevitably they are still encountering the experience.
In terms of my sense of self, I think now, more than ever, I am afraid of anything that might impact on the 'self' that I know. I've spent the last 4 years completing a degree and setting myself up for a specific outcome in terms of career and lifestyle. Routine and structure have allowed me to maintain this 'self', and now I feel very invested in me remaining the way I am. If I change, I might also change my attitude toward my field and career, then all of my past efforts will seem meaningless or misguided. Love and falling in love definitely feels like it is most capable of destroying/altering that self-image. And for that reason, it probably explains why I am hesitant to allow the fall to happen. With the person I'm currently dating, sometimes I think I'd rather get to know her AFTER I have settled into my career and found a place for myself to live. Otherwise it feels like a constant threat to me and my history.
He's telling us what he has observed over time as a rational thinking person.
And all of you Superficial Twats coming down on him because of his accent or his demeanor will probably never get just what it is he is trying to say. We are losing something in pursuit of or modern lives, something wondrous and magical. The serendipity of the chance encounter or the miraculous change in perception toward someone we already may know and the resulting alteration of the self-awareness of our own timeline. Where the events of our lives take on new and deeper meaning in the context of this new reality. How many opportunities do we get to, retroactively add richness and vibrance to a canvass we have already painted? Not many! I for one would like to thank him for this illuminating discussion. Thank You!
Although I understand where Zizek would feel that we are less capable of handling random encounters, I still feel like people wish to "fall in love", but perhaps, at a distance. Technology is changing the way we interact with each other, but I don't think it's changing our desires and values by that much. We're still trying to find ways to interact with each other better over technology with things like Skype or the Oculus Rift.
I'm reaching up and reaching out,
I'm reaching for the random or what ever will bewilder me.
And following our will and wind we may just go where no one's been.
We'll ride the spiral to the end and may just go where no one's been.
Spiral out. Keep going
In Basque you say "Maitemindua", where maite means love and mindu means hurt. Hurt by Love, more explicit than falling.
Oh my god! This man is really a beast who spoke perfectly upon the subject!
i want a 5 seconds video with him saying "i'm sensing a sensible assassin is selling scissors "
Lol at all people bashing this great man. This is a very interesting point of view! I agree, even though I think that having one night stands without love can be profitable too.
I see more comments about the way this guy is in the video rather than the substance of the video lol
I love this guy.
I see you put subtitles on. Nice.
He's not wrong. I wish he was my teacher when i was at school.
I was actually surprised how Slavoj's take on being afraid of falling in love wasn't too bad a take. I like his earnestness even though might not always like what his take on things.
wow this was a real perspective changer
Love replaces long memories with a kind of magic. All affections need the past: love creates, as if by magic, a past with which it surrounds us. It gives us, so to speak, the consciousness of having lived for years with a being who was once almost a stranger to us. Love is only a bright spot, and yet it seems to take over time. It did not exist a few days ago, soon it will not exist anymore; but, as long as it exists, it spreads its light on the time that preceded it, as well as on the one that will follow it.
Adolphe by Benjamin Constant (translated from french by deep L)
I am amazed he is actually wearing a collared shirt.
Wish i could to listen to a conversation between Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson. Love these guys.
you got your wish
LOOOOOL
Western Buddhism. Never heard it being referred to as that, but damn that was genius. Sad part is, I think society continues to head in that direction, and with all that Internet around you, I don't see any hope of things changing for the better. We're all starting to turn into Robots. I guess that's what we all wanted all along, eh?
Yeah, that part of the video was really interesting to me as well. I used to be a subscriber to that sort of ideal, but around half a year ago I realized that I'm going to miss out on a lot of what life has to offer if I keep everything and everyone at arm's length from me until I'm sure it's safe to go in. I do think there's some value in the mindset of Western Buddhism as it were, but I'll defer to Oscar Wilde for what I think the real answer is. “Everything in moderation, including moderation.”
Yes; at least what I wanted
Oh for fuck's sake.
You're using RUclips to post a comment on an online video discussing existentialism. You have the sum of human knowledge available at your fingertips. You can literally watch any TV channel in the world when you punch in a few numbers you've read off of your credit card, which is a moulded hydrocarbon extracted from beneath the ground.
Stop with this 'we're turning into Robots' crap. If you honestly believe it, then you can always go off into the Himalayas and live out your life as a Buddhist priest without the 'burdens' of technology, which has done nothing but accelerate human development across all facets of society.
All of history dictates that things can only get better. We are on the verge(40 odd years or so) of the technological singularity. In a 100 years or so, it's entirely possible that we'll be able to directly manipulate the weather. We are constructing missions to colonise other planets. We are deciphering the secrets of the stars through Mathematics and Physics. We are being unified as a race through the Arts.
The world is amazing. The world will be awesome.
Hotshot2k4 lol ... when someone says to me "everything in moderation" I can't help but think - a little pedophilia but not to much - little drunk driving is ok but only in moderation???
***** "...including moderation" though, meaning that there's a time and place for moderation, and things like murder and pedophilia are not that time. Similarly, caring about your SO isn't something you should do in moderation.
It is a complicated thing to fall in love in this profound way and then wonder if the person is real. Especially if they want you to change and change. If they seem unwilling to accept the fact that just like them, you have a full range of human emotions. Is that love? A little fear seems reasonable under these conditions. Still, it is worth waiting to find out. Because if it is real, it is something rare and valuable.
very interesting!
I've fallen in love with Slavoj Zizek.
This guy has really had me thinking and pondering on his ideas since I discovered him on this channel about 24 hours ago. I don’t agree with all he says nor do I particularly enjoy his peculiarities.. all of that is irrelevant to the occasional statement that he makes that grabs my attention.
Zizek does not have a cocaine problem contrary to many of the comments. It's simply a nervous tick.
Excellent
Pretty good video, i liked everything he said, unfortunately had to pause the video and read the transcript as i couldn't stop laughing
We do not live in a simulation, but we want to.
Brilliant
Is it me or this man has a slight accent?
Perhaps Canadian.
I was thinking Australian.
he's slovenian so more like russian
Vedran Tutic clap clap you got the joke...
R.A.F. Nah, it's just you
As always when watching Zizek:
Subtitles, please.
It's weird. For the most part, I agree with him, especially what he said about wanting "love" without the fall. But in one of the other videos in this series, he thinks that criticism of online dating sites, that they are not spontaneous but "constructed" is bull, because we're never spontaneous, but always play a role. Sorta contradicting.
spontaneousness is not the focus of this video, though.
0:09 what's the name of the book... Anyone knows?!
I LLOVE THIS GUY!
I love Slavoj Žižek ^^
Contingent : subject to chance.
synonymes: chance, accidental, fortuitous, possible, unforeseeable, unpredictable
i love this guys romantic views
Is this why I shouldn't use Grindr?
2:52 Wut, "not all like French"'? In French we say "tomber amoureux", which is literally "to fall enamored" uh
I think he meant it like this
“English and other languages like French, but not all the other languages”
Is this different from Badiou’s conception of the Event?
I don´t see this "western buddhism" as a bad thing on itself. It will be more fullfilling for individuals in a non-capitalist or in a much less capitalistic situation where people will have it easier meeting each other working less hours with more subsistence security and less commercialized public and affinity group meeting places
Sylvester - Sufferin Succotash
Falling in love leads to falling out of love.
What the hell makes people think this guy is on crack?
His accent? No. He has an accent because he's from Slovenia.
His looks? He's got a beard and moustache, so what?
His mannerisms? Again, so what? If you've ever seen MythBusters, you'll know that Adam Savage moves his arms around in a similar fashion when he talks, and he's not on crack.
His subject matter? He's a philosopher, of course he's going to say stuff like that. That doesn't make it "wrong", and in fact his talking points are all very valid.
You people say he's on crack, but that argument has no basis. Stop roasting the guy just because he's a thinker.
Someone clearly knows nothing about crack. It's the way he sniffs and keeps grabbing his nose every so often. It isn't drugs though. It's just a nervous tic.
listen and open your mind.
nose wipe,,,,,,I'M IN LOVE WITH THE COCO
watch?v=6vYnas6q3Sg
baking soda i got baking soda!
bro said love is disappearing 10 years ago
The west is the salvation and the death of Buddhism. What predominates is watered-down mindfulness and yoga training, serving no purpose deeper than helping upper middle class white collar workers stay on the grind with a clear head, but there are also highly skilled teachers and motivated practitioners in the real Dharma scene far in advance of what you normally find in the East.
In other words, the percentage of lay 'buddhists' who are serious practitioners with a good grasp of the teachings is much higher in the west than the east, where most 'buddhists' do not meditate at all and have warped conceptions of buddhist teaching, though most of the best teachers are still found in the east.
I suspect Zizek is making more of a rhetorical gesture than a serious point about western buddhism but I thought I'd throw that out there. Real buddhadharma practice could not be further in its effects from being 'perfectly amenable to superficial consumerism'.
+Dr. Cavalier I'm not agree. It fits perfectly with the nowadays consumerist life.
Don't get engaged in life, emotions or suffer avoiding. That sort of things even when it's only about "bad feelings" (hate this term) as other "ways to escape" to put it like that presented in buddhism are precisely what help/aloud you to being absorb by the consumerism.
Other thing is that all that philosophy way in the past and in other context and social-ideological environment wasn't like that or at least wasnt created because of that.
However also your argument is the classical fundamentalist response "it's all because we're not doing it enough", that's pretty funny cause Zizek got a lot of material talking about that ahahah
That guy looks a lot like the old guy acted in Intersteller
Fucking brilliant. Anyone interested in having their mind blown should watch his movie "A perverts guide to ideology".
Who on earth would want a beer without alcohol?
4:31
"These hoes ain't loyal" fits perfectly into what this guy is saying.
I met my girlfriend at homeless shelter. She was eating scraps off of other people's trays.
"You drink with friends, you go to bla bla"
✨✨✨
ONLY those who think WITH THEIR ASS accuse Zizek of "madness". Only those who fester in ignorance and who have unwavering faith in "legitimate" ideas, who are cowards before their very reality being torn apart, attack Zizek without actually addressing the content of his points.
I take issue with his statement that today we want the good thing without the bad. I think that that's been a part of western culture for a long, long time.
Nemo Cassum On a superficial level, this is something that has been a part of every culture since the beginning of time.
But that's not what Zizek is talking about. He's talking about the unique manifestation of it today, the distinct character it takes and finally - "it" as a wider ideological pathology. Essentially, the argument is in retrospect to the 1960's counter-culture - before then, we wren't living in a permissive society and there wasn't even a good or bad to choose from (for example, sex was simply taboo).
Zizek comes to the concluison that today, we incorporate hedonism, along with psuedo-left politics by destroying that about them which offends the reproduction of the existing order - moreso, that which strips them of their essence to begin with.
@@HTCEVOSONGS I think that Ancient Greeks were opposite. They valued the life struggle.
Rareee @4:01
Fall over, blah blah. Meet the love of your life. It really is that easy.
This guy should win an award for stating the bloody obvious for the first part where he talks about predecesors.
Second part, he's somewhat wrong; people who go trough dating agencies don't necessarily fall in love (although I'm sure there are exceptions) because they're are settling for whatever they can get. Because otherwise people fall in love because they feel like they got something that was massively out of their reach, i.e. someone way more confident, intelligent, physically attractive etc.
Also, love the way he uses complete factoids to rationalise his theories.
I couldn't make any sense of what hes trying to say/explain...
He did not explain anything really.. Everything he said was just a simple, pointless observation.. The way he speaks makes you think that you did not, and could not have come to the same realization like him...
Thats the whole point. He takes his credentials and authority and makes you think how only he realizes the things he speaks of here.
Basically its all pretentious bullshit that anyone with half a brain understood once they hit the age of reason..
Liberate Vos Ex Inferis Wow I totally agree, just read the comment I posted 10 seconds ago before seeing yours:
"Zizek is so over rated... just because he has a funny accent, a very serious beardy philosopher face and some breathing problems, doesnt make him a genius. He keeps talking on and on to pretend what he's saying is high level but it's fucking commonplace statments that could fit in 1 minute. He's just doing his own psychotherapy by philosophing in front of people i think."
We often see our past life as merely leading upto a soulmate but only after the encounter...
Ive been listening all of my life sad stories,so...
At 00:22 he pronounces a flawless [s] in "span", so his speech impediment is not due to a physical handicap.
Why does he sound like an italian?
He's Slovenian.
Because he's Australian.
Science killed love, not dating sights etc
this is hard to listen to
I do appreciate the idea behind what he brings but he does not appear to be healthy or in a good state of mind to be sharing ideas about improving someone eldest quality of life.
Anime contributes to Western Buddhism
Renowned philosopher trolololol.
Renowned for his insanity maybe :P
Just the use of the disgusting, cancerous "trolololol" and all the layers of overall idiocy it entails, makes your argument invalid.
BathroomTile Please elaborate on:
1) The layers of idiocy involved in saying "trolololol"/ the etymology of trololol.
2) How trolololol is cancerous.
3) Where I made an argument.
4) How using a poorly conceived term, or any other term but badly, results in an invalid argument.
BathroomTile "[it] makes your argument invalid". What he said wasn't even an argument, it was ad hominem attack. He said nothing to refute any of Zizek's claims.
Daniel Guenther But his ad hominem attack was spot on, fat fuck.
MrJeanBaguette spot on to what?
>meme philosophers
Westen buddism= superficial consumerism.
Welp
I enjoyed his talk. Was distracted by the constant nose touching I think that's a sign of some sort of drug use via the nose. I'm not saying this to belittle anything he said just funny to notice. Possibly cocaine.
So....does he always speak fast and just happened to have a runny nose, because if not then this is likely the first time big-think has posted a video where the speaker has been snorting cocaine.
This man has a job, apparently...
Philosophy doesn't provide dental insurance!... that sound is because his molars are gone on one side maybe both!
Too much of cocain or speed dude, easy, you can say all that slower..
Call me shallow.... But I can't watch a video about sex/love with this dude in it...
Western Buddhism...
And why do I subscribe to Big Think ... this type of crap makes me wonder and I'm see more and more of it here ... good grief ...
It's really hard to listen to this guy because of how he speaks. Kind of weird.
Zack Peach Such an American response. Only Americans are so judgmental about natural traits that are beyond people's control.
LOL
lmao
(Sniff)
That accent. Lol
women doesnt require single event they need multiple layer of qualities inside one object. so zizek is only thinkin from a perspective of a man.
Gerl or boy blah blah