Peter Sloterdijk in conversation with Slavoj Žižek, Indigo festival 2023
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Organized and produced by Muzej in galerije mesta Ljubljane.
Co-organized and co-produced by steirischer herbst.
/ festivalindigo
--
Homepage petersloterdij...
Facebook / psloterdijk
X x.com/Sloterdi...
Instagram / peter.sloterdijk
Soundcloud / petersloterdijk
I think this is one of the very few times I have actually seen Zizek let anyone else speak
Sloterdijk King
Then you don't know Zizek.
I bet you have never read a book from Zizek
@@YM-cw8so 😂 I wrote my masters thesis on Zizek's work so..
@@jeremypfrost haha damn he wasn't even talking to you
The most interesting and rich conversation I heard in a long time, honestly.
Sloterdijk is a great one
Truly! What a treat!
"Truth is more important than life."
YEEES !!! I LOVE PETER AND ZIZEK IS JUST TOO FUNNY
Lmfao 😂
lolz
I wish there was more of Peter Sloterdijk on RUclips, in English.
I've been using the Language Reactor add-on on Chrome. It's not perfect, but it worked for Sloterdijk's other videos.
Much like Goethe, the English-speaking world struggles to appreciate Sloterdijk.
This debate is like dream come true.
Being a Zizek fan, I think Sloterdijk had the greatest insights here.
What a phenomenal conversation. More, please! 👏👏👏
I love that Zizek always pleads for more time to speak and interact with people. You know that he is there for the discussions and the talks. Besides, I had not heart much of or about Mr. Sloterdijk yet. I interested to read him and hear more of him now.
Thanks for the upload Mr. Sloterdijk.
This is so good They actually talked
"The only distintive about the West in regard to colonialism is that the West developed the tools to fight it": Z finally said it.
16:08 the fact that she misunderstood Sloterdijk’s literal words so crucially makes me wonder what else she misheard 😅
😂
all 2 hours, her presence is disturbing. i wish she wasn't there
I like to believe Zizek’s using this as a means of screening, so to speak, his moderator.
[Cue deprecating Stalinist joke]
Sie in der Mitte,ich hätte meine Häkelsachen mitgenommen,das ist so goldig und das Gespräch wunderbar.Thank you.Super Niveau.Philosophie must stay.
power couple
It is good to be native German speaker, i could never learn this hell of a language to a point where I would be able to enjoy this massive literature and philosophy entirely
thank you for this recording
It's been so long since I read nietzsche that it really felt like the clouds parting hearing the idea that it is a point of modesty to propose a hypothesis.
2 most important contemporary continental philosophers.
Well there is also Giorgo Agamben
show phallus pls (nohomo)
Badiou will outlast both of them. they are children
@@cola3173 Badiou xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Agamben completely embarrassed himself during the pandemic
Great conversation
crossover of the century
Me like Sloterdijk's giggling from time to time.
But not only this. His idea of _a civilisation of culture_ is both at the same time : Intriguingly seductive, but a dead horse at same time. The moment we try to apply the process needed in this case to be started we undoubtedly will meet the full force of resistance of culture and traditions themselves.
*Eher geht ein Kamel durch ein Nadelöhr*
You communicate your points only through images instead of languages that abstracts and than specifies. This way you won´t be able to harvest a lot of value from those two thinkers, but that doesn´t lie in the quality of their expression but in your way of reception.
@@svenwort2055 _value_ always is the mind of the beholder. Now be so kind and tell me : these pictures used, they didn't arrive at you ? Not that I would care whether or not. Simple curiosity about a man seemingly with a main focus on wordz.
@@farrider3339 You state "Intriguingly seductive, but a dead horse at same time", ok, to be philosophical, this is a sensual expression of a surface level look, wich has its interesting point, but you don´t specify why this is the way it appears to you, so you don´t at least express any self reflection with it and don´t try to explain wich arguments do this to you and why. It´s just stated very broad with no specified context, wich may be fine for art, but not for theroretical discussion.
Next.
Wich process? How do you imagine the process of "thinking" (my assumption) of Sloterdijk being applied, again, how (?), "...will meet the full force of resistance of culture and traditions ..." ok, distinguishing between culture and traditions seems prett wrong unless maybe specified and what is this resistance process you are so sure about?
It´s a lot of variables that actually don´t state a clear argumentation, because of the openness of these words.
Naturally people are affected by images and I´m not even saying you may not have a point, but it´s not really understandable over a very surface asthetic level.
I don´t write to dominate you personally, if you can take sth away from what I´m saying it would be the best situiation, pls don´t feel insulted. If you´d like to rewrite your comment with some of those elements, that I´ve mentionend, I will read it and would be a little happy for it, but we will probably still disagree.
4:58 start
Yes, I thought this was quite interesting, although they didn't talk much with each other. Still both philosophers shed one or the other beam of light on some of the phenomena we're witnessing or have witnessed. Great event! Also kudos to the Goethe institute and it's representative. Most recently it was reported that the German government intends to close down some of the world wide Goethe institutes (Bordeaux, Curitiba, Genoa, Lille, Osaka, Rotterdam, Trieste, Turin, Washington D.C.), allegedly or maybe even actually out of financial considerations. What a shame! Now, regarding the discussion section I was unpleasantly surprised that almost all of the questions came from native American speakers. The Slovenian students should speak up also, instead of being so shy; it does not matter that much when you struggle a bit with the language, dear friends!
what is zizzek views on john dewey educational philosphy? can anyone tell me
Donde es esto? Gracias.
The message: leave your miserable and little world of percepción, and incorporate reality to it…. Make room for contraintuitive world….
vim pelo alexandre linck que falou que tinha esse “programa da hebe” com zizek e sloterdijk
Wow, this was great!
Truth is a modern cosmology of counter intuition
Counterintuition.
Even though it seems counterintuitive.
until that's the intuitive notion
@@KommentarSpaltenKrieger Compound nouns and adjectives are perfectly natural for German speakers, but writers of English nowadays don't even think of putting in a hyphen. Which drives me crazy...
I don't feel the need to defend the Slavoj's US case. Just because they're deciding what others decided first, and arrange after, social movements to argument the decisions as they've been initiated by the citizenship, it doesn't make you democratic and yes, the end groups of the populous never had and will never have access to the exercise of power.
He disagrees with the mistifying truth, maybe that was a key to unlock his statement. He's always cunning like that, a psychologist. I appreciate him mostly for that, I can visualise his intentions, which seem too raw to not wear make-up.
I don't agree with Sloterdyijk's sedimentarian approach, a Nietzschean type of fundamental romantism, but I do appreciate his case. You see, like most things, Truth is a journey, not a destination. You can't anchor yourself in a precise, made of dense matter future and pull your entire weight towards it. You need to sail like a Portuguese towards it and make sure that others can also see the stars you're guided by, and not point only towards the barrels with supplies. Truth looks more like sincerity because truth is the main slave of relevance. A common direction is important but more importantly, a commonly agreed relevance is empiric. That's how I would describe Peter's Truth that is more important than Life. You wanted to look for truth in the past? Yes, I would try self-scepticism without the poetry of the circumstantial present. Conviction is not a good thing if you're interested in the absolutist rhetoric that you should be followed instead of making yourself understood, yet, immaterial conviction is necessary.
I would dare to say that modernism was never achieved, yet, most people already want to slaughter it. The reductionist side of syncretism dillutes the memory to the point of utter delusion and molests the sceptical method by translating it into eternal leftism. They refute the entire collection of ideas and policies for purely individualistic purposes. What is worse, they're fundamentalising the being and directs the ideological fundamentalism with the attitude that nobody else in the past ever doubted anything at all. For example, I do want to defend myself from the fatality of the identity politics. It is odious to contemplate at the fact that disagreeing becomes illegal again with the disgusting scent of some sort of neo-humanism that tends to protect multiculturalism and kills the human interest. Therefore, it is true that pure behaviourism is the only proposed education by the inherited Victorians, the only proposed virtue being virtuality. Like, the Americans go to the comedy store to laugh, not to get amused. I do fear a pandemic of psycopathical projection, they're not aware sympathy is just that and the lack of empathy.
Hello, can someone translate this video to spanish please?
, thanks
36:10 the counter-transendence of renouncing the immersion into the world of phenomena
40:00 Dasein = lebensvelt re-immersion of thinking into reality
Yes, I also noted that point. Very interesting strand to pursue. Do you happen to know in which book Sloterdijk has written about this?
Great 👍
the last joke was perfect
Finally a publication on this channel which isn't decades old. I shall listen very carefully whether he has recovered from being a nwo tool of sorts _(even if that be a misunderstanding, but just like with Nietzsche, that is all they want: forms of expression with a 90% likelihood of being misunderstood in favor of their agenda; addendum after finishing the video: he didn't really say much, so hard to tell)_ and how much of his formulative genius is lost when speaking english _(a lot !)_ . I hope this woman isn't going to interrupt much _(after finishing the video I was very pleasantly surprised by her in filling the role !)_ . If this swedish law she mentions becomes the norm everywhere, people like these two might consider holding a dialogue over a coffee table instead of on a stage.
37:10 - 44:05 This Gottfried Benn's categorization of people into monks and criminals is an extremely helpful sweeping generalization which relieves one, much more than without it, of wanting to convince others of _any_ truth. _Any_ conversation should start with some innocent sounding test questions to determine to which camp the other one roughly belongs. If he is a "criminal" there is no point in talking about _anything_ below the superficiality threshold.
show phallus (nohomo)
...Yikes.
finally
Meine Lieblingsphilosophen😍😊 Hat Zizek wieder eine Sonnenbrille auf? Leider etwas weit weg die Kamera. :) "Everything is Ideology"
the moderator reminds me too much of my postgrad advisor
Why the hell are al l interesting Videos in damn audio shape
Ein Prachtstück an tiefgreifendem Gedankenwalzer.
Herr Slotterdjek zusammen mit dem entrücktesten Denker hat es so wonnevoll gefunden. Inspirierende Schönheit.
1:12:00
Sloty ist unmöglich zu verstehn auf deutsch……haha!
Great start with the first question. Sloterdijk: "What if God himself turns out to be our most persistent lie?" Žižek: "what?" MODERATOR: "What if God turns a more persistent liar? Time to reply!!" at 16:08 wtf
sorry, but I don't think you were really able to engage in a conversation, although it would be difficult indeed for that to happen; Zizek is rarelly clear about his own thinking when speaking in this kind of context...
Questions 1:24:04
So you're tellin me that you ain't G.K Chesterton?!
incredible conversation. i'm sorry for the next thing being the only thing i give a f+ck to write here, but it is really itching in my brain: that mediator is so out of her element. during all the first 1 hour and 20 min, it's so cringy to notice her. most of her laugh responses are so absolutely obvious to her unconfortability with the things being said, which in my opinion is entirely because she is much more close (in the sense of running from truth) to those specific ecologists zizek mentions and despises than to these two respectable human beings talking about things
yeah and it doesnt get any better the rest of the video. her presence is really disturbing. next time maybe get someone else, or don't get anyone at all, i think it would be better to not have anyone at all.
I'm from Germany and I have to admit that Sloterdijk and the German philosophical talks shows never catched my interest. Too dry, too academic. My adult ADD didnt help either I suppose. Zizek on the other hand was and still is an engaging and interesting orator and thinker of our modern age, hence why I like him.
11:16
What is it lately about these immensely incompetent interviewers?
49:45 zizek's dirty joke
The police sirens 😂
Wieso leuchtet Sloterdijk?
ist seine natürliche Ausstrahlung
Samma hat der Peter die Socken vergessen?
Yes, it seemed to me like the beginning of a so called barefoot discussion (with everyone barefoot). That was what I thought when I saw it, and I didn't think it was bad.
31:05 "There were no white people who went to Africa kidnapping their slaves".
This is false. Europeans absolutely engaged in slave raiding.
"Why this focus?"
Because the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade was uniquely horrific. Not only were millions starved or drowned across the Middle Passage, but slaves on American plantations were cut off from their own languages and traditions and could not marry, unlike domestic slaves in Africa, for example.
"The West was the only civilization which systematically developed a movement to abolish slavery."
Sorry, also false. Ancient China attempted to abolish slavery at least twice, during both the Qin and Xin dynasties. And many societies, like the Inca, never had slavery.
Comrade Žižek has been reading too much Douglas Murray.
If you are charitable you can say Zizek went so far in countering current thought he began to agree with it, if you are not, he is just getting old.
You left out the Arabs
Everything going on in the world and transphobia is Zizek’s biggest concern. Such a boomer
Is that what this is about?
Sloterdijk praat soos n ou man, ek hou van hom.
Ja, hij heeft een nederlandse naam, maar hij is helemaal duits. Tog mooi dat je van hem houdt!
28:56 this joke 😂
"I'm trying to impute you a secret communism-if you can imagine."
Ah yes, I can imagine. Lol
Not a great idea though by Žižek, to lump fascism with Chinese Confucianism, in my opinion.
die zwei großen grauen prädikativierer treffen sich auf einer bühne - schön, danke dafür!
if perception is a seduction, i'll just keep seducing ... the ontologist in me would rather offer to think about the term distortion instead.
further more yes, there is no matter of things, but most certainly material things...
Всё существующее лживо. Разоблачение этой лживости (правдивость) снимает смыслы один за другим и не даёт нам их понимания, но приближает шаг за шагом к истине, подлинным лицом которой является смерть. Но смерть не содержит в себе смыслов. Смысл и истина соотносятся друг с другом как жизнь и смерть.
Поэтому не стоит удивляться тому, что люди выбирают смысл вместо истины.
Lets be real. Sloderdijk won this.
not really
Is this supposed to be an inside joke on this debate?😅
Yes, he did. Those saying they talked past each other seem to have missed the entirety of Sloterdijk's point on distance.
……. boring to view it as a fight.
won... the conversation?
Die Philosophie ist tot!!
Wenn du das sagst!
Das selbst ist eine philosophische Aussage.
Ich Stimme Ihnen zu aber trotzdem
Yes the west did and does many horrible think.
This is not philosophy, this is the asylum of vanity. This is a monologue of two men who are totally disconnected from each other and totally immersed in playing a wise clown.
exactly that is philosophy
Who is a philosopher today then?
Joe Rogan,Jordan Peterson,Bruce Lee,Tupac Shakur,Robert Green,Jason Statham,Andrew Tate.
@@nika-zq9ph lmao I hope you are NOT serious, some of those are the worst people. Tate is a misogynist and sex slave trader, Jordy is a right wing grifter that supports capitalism
@@nika-zq9phwhat the fuck are you even doing
It is slightly sad to see that two eminent thinkers mistake the expression of an emotional need for recognition beyond a mere understanding why by a trans person for an intellectual habit. But then they are old.
Wrong, so wrong. It’s beyond this “expression of an emotional need for recognition” that these two thinkers are DARING to explore trans-ness that makes their work so important and invaluable to the trans community and the world.
Then I must have misunderstood what they were saying. Because I thought it is a chance to grasp and cope with the many possible layers of being in the world. To explore that. But then again. I might not have.
Is this philosophy?
yes
What is philosophy? I like your question, actually.
well, what isn't
HaHaHa Misses Baerbock as anchorwoman
Hannah Arendt ihr Englisch war Schlechter,aber sie kontaktierte dies auch.Wenn man einen gewissen Bekanntheitsgrad hat,sollte man darauf Beharren auch die Muttersprache in Diskussionen zum Besten zu geben.
Gesundheit
Ah no, this was good enough. No worries.
they might be really brilliant, but they suck at making their thoughts clear and coherent
Thats what their books are for
I totally disagree on that.
6:11 neo-what-ic ??
I'm going with : neo-spartanic.
@@trombone7 thanks, i can kinda hear it. that makes sense in context too.