The video is very clickable without being baity, the pace is near-ideal, the philosophy jokes are hermetic enough so that I can have a slightly narcissistic and elitist joy of being 'into the joke', but not so much that it becomes subtextually pretensious. I wish you success, and, if I had money, I'd give you some.
Thank you so much, Wool! Ballard is such an interesting author, and I absolutely adore "Crash"! My hope is to approach on the channel to philosophers who use Ballard a lot in their works (like the CCRU and similar theory-fictionists). Ballard has been the inspiration of many great people, and going that way would be so cool, and also so time-consuming!
Thank you, and I'm so glad to hear that! In the description there's a book called "Reading Seminar XI", and if you have that with you while reading Lacan, you're golden! I really hope you'll explore them, and go beyond the gaze, because they're so fascinating, all three of them!
Lacan is good if you read it with a guide. The guy himself was delusional if you ask me, wannabe Freudian psycho-analyst. Sartre is good but dense, it is much easier to read his wife's texts and actually get his point because they basically wrote about the same thing. Or read Nausea, that's a really fun book and it's much better than any essay Sartre ever wrote. Either that OR you could read Foucault, a much more accessible, academic approach to what Sartre was trying to get to. So I'd rather suggest you read Freud, Simone de Beauvoir and Michel Foucault if you wanna get Lacan and Sartre.
Wonderful analysis, man... Simply brilliant It was high time one took Zizek's own works seriously and not just get him to debate about something which constitutes a very diminutive part of his body of work Keep up
How might homelessness work as another example? Walking past a homeless person when entering a store feels very salient here-the objective violence of eviction and criminalization; the discomfort and self-awareness of being noticed by the homeless person, and the impulse to not even look at them and just keep our heads down; the fantasy that everything’s okay in the world until we confront homelessness in our daily lives, and the stories and justifications we concoct to assuage our guilt about all of it, i.e. “they’re lazy, they’re addicts, they chose to be homeless,” etc.
I really liked the topic you chose to illustrate the ideas, it made the whole pleasingly succinct and complete. I had no familiarity with the topics, but the way you portrayed the thoughts were helpful; smooth transitions between ideas plus amusing graphics. Keep up the good work!
Thank you so, so much, Rodrigo! I've experimented with a few different ways of presenting philosophy, but I like this way so I think I'll stick with it!
I wonder how much of the ideas of Lacan, Sartre, and Žižek are paying homage to the scene in Plato's Republic 4.439e-440a retelling the story of Leontius taking in the spectacle of the politically executed and Leontius feeling shame as an excess of θυμός? It would seem that the spectacle reveals more readily to Leontius himself [and Socrates' interlocutors] a greater social structure in the form of a justice system which allows individuals to take their fill of the process of what happens when one wishes to harm a city's structure to the necessary end of killing defecting political opponents. Perhaps the fact that Leontius cannot keep his eyes away from the death and decay is a both a bleak reminder of one's mortality and a powerful affirmation of one's own declaration as Subject; something like "This object that is dead wholly reminds me and cements my supremacy as Subject being wholly alive" (phenomenologically speaking)? When you spoke about Sartre's idea of 'staying in control of one's own existential shame', it especially reminded me of this section of Plato. I wonder if you see a connection as well? I am less comfortable with Lacan's and Žižek's work so I'm not sure if I can make this connection so easily. You've done an excellent job synthesizing this information, I'm looking forward to exploring the ideas myself. Keep up the good work!
First of all, thank you so much for your kind words! I'm happy I may inspire you to explore these things, that's really an amazing result of doing these! On Plato generally, I think you strike a chord. However, the passage you're speaking of, the one involving Leontius, seems to remind me of Julia Kristeva's idea of the abject. She's a fellow psychoanalyst, bordering perhaps a bit more on the postmodern than Lacan did. I urge you to check her out as there's definitely some overlap. And going further, people draw parallels between Lacan's screen and Plato's allegory of the cave all the time. Lacan explains in Seminar XI, on a particularly challenging passage on the "line and the light", how we don't really see the thing-in-itself (he doesn't use that phrasing, he kept denying any connection to Kant), but rather an image of the object. If we look at a painting, we'd be staring with our eyes (the geometral point) toward an object, but we wouldn't see the object, we'd see the image of it plastered to the screen. He goes on to saying that the object is at the same place as the point of light, allowing us to view the image. It is a quite dense section, and I suggest a reader's guide, but well worth the time!
Wow months of looking at Lacan memes, and I don't think I've actually begun to understand him until this video. I love that it's so concise and straight to the point. Please keeping making these kinds of vids!
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you saying this! Gotta start a new thing in the new year and then gotta start doing the next bigger video! Again, thank you!
I've followed your twitter for a while, but this is my first time watching your videos. They're phenomenal. I'm truly in awe. The level of information you manage to fit in is just supreme - may I ask how you edit them?
Thank you so much for the kind words and the support, Katie! And the selection and inclusion of information is always a struggle--I tend to want to fit in too much, which means I have to be even more vigilant in killing my darlings! Regarding editing: do you mean the software, or the thoughts that go into it?
@@SimonObirek You excel at killing your darlings and leaving what is there unprunable. Regarding editing: I was originally talking about the software you use, but I'd love to hear about the thought too. Thank you for such a kind reply!
@@katherine7802 It's so difficult to phrase my thank yous in a way I'm happy with them; I always seem to think they come across as being so trite and trivial. But in all honesty, thank you so much for these comments! Regarding editing, I use Adobe Premiere Pro. I used to edit in Lightworks' free version, but that was horrible. It got the job done, but it was horrible. The thought of this video is Fisher's idea of hauntology; I wanted the video's aesthetics to mourn the lost futures as much as the music of an artist like Burial does. The text is reminiscent of Barbara Kruger's art whose bold, red-and-white style was relentlessly copied and appropriated by the clothing company Supreme. The aesthetics of this video lament the coming of capitalist realism as much as the actual content does, if I may sound a bit hylomorphic.
@@katherine7802 Oh, just realised this was the video on the gaze! Guess this was just a first dip into giving my videos some more thought; this one having a bit more of a comedic slant than many others I do. My bad, thought you commented on the Fisher video.
Hey man your design and content is so good! Really happy someone is out here doing stuff like this. Only think I would suggest is to get a better microphone (unless that is your style) With the design and content you have and high quality audio your channel would be top top notch.
@Simon Øbirek not sure why I hadn't seen more of your videos, they're fantastic, but it seems you've stopped and you should DEFINITELY start back. There is a space for more of this philosophy on here more than ever, coexisting with the dire necessity of more good 'creators' of critical theory content.
@@SimonObirek It's just a bit different to how it is usually pronounced. At least it felt like that to me. Maybe I'm just too used to the pronounication you will find on most talks, lectures and so on and so on with Zizek :D Make no mistake, I thoroughly enjoyed your video!
Thank you! And I was just perplexed because I try to pronounce the names the best I can. It weirds me out whenever a person just completely butchers the name of philosophers, so I try to keep that in mind! But I will look his pronunciation up again if/when he crops up in another video!
Lol I like to watch car crashes but I wouldn't say all that about myself. Nahh - I'm fine, I just think car crashes have an element of surprise and irony. So im fine with watching car crashes so long as supposedly everyone involved was fine. On RUclips there's plenty of compilations - unfortunately there's also literal death compilations for some reason but the main channels showing car crashes have that thing where they're like everyone was fine. For me, I'm not enjoying people's day being ruined, I find humour in stupid behaviour and the visually exciting consequence. It's not about the impact on the people, it's about the literal crash itself. A large metal object being mishapen after hitting another object. Or sometimes it's cool to see a car somehow launch into the air or spin.
Please, i know your Chanel is about philosophy, but can you explain in any vídeo how do you edit, wich program, and how do you makes those cuts with sounds. I have wacth your vídeo about capitalisim and i will like to know how hoy write with those red background. Sorry if my writing is not crear, i am spanish
Isn't there a genetic disposition to watch the dangerous and destructive to learn from and about it - both to obtain its power and avoid its consequences which in the end furthers one's survival? And that the evidence of looking directly is a fear of the punishing gase related to what you said in this video?
@Timothy Lee Except that giraffes did get their long necks from natural selection. This has been a long discussed matter and there simply isn't any point for giraffes to grow their necks so long because there is vegetation lower as well. So it was probably an aesthetic feature preferred by the females and thus became a developing trait. And I agree with Bat Bite: car crashes fascinate us because there is a relation to death and we are imprinted to learn from others' mistakes. It's part of our "survival brain" and people who witness car crashes actually are more alert while driving than the ones who don't, it's not that hard to use science as a foundation for philosophical thought. Some people just wish not to because then they can make up their own fairytales and get sad when they're all burnt up and left with the bricks of reality. THAT is what Sartre's about.
Sartre likes to look at two car crashes at once
The video is very clickable without being baity, the pace is near-ideal, the philosophy jokes are hermetic enough so that I can have a slightly narcissistic and elitist joy of being 'into the joke', but not so much that it becomes subtextually pretensious.
I wish you success, and, if I had money, I'd give you some.
Fun Fact: Albert Camus liked watching car crashes so much, he died in one!
Fucking hell, mate. Absolutely barbaric. I love it.
Luuk Willems this comment is passionately absurd
@Luuk Willems he was out of coffee that day.
should have had the coffee without cream or coffee without milk instead of the coffee without coffee
brutal
Very informative video, I'm only a beginner in Philosophy so this was fascinating
Makes me think a lot of Cronenberg's or Ballard's Crash, I'll have to experience those while keeping this in mind
Thank you so much, Wool!
Ballard is such an interesting author, and I absolutely adore "Crash"! My hope is to approach on the channel to philosophers who use Ballard a lot in their works (like the CCRU and similar theory-fictionists). Ballard has been the inspiration of many great people, and going that way would be so cool, and also so time-consuming!
Wow I was actually able to follow that! Makes me feel like I could possibly read those authors without being hopelessly lost.
Thank you, and I'm so glad to hear that! In the description there's a book called "Reading Seminar XI", and if you have that with you while reading Lacan, you're golden! I really hope you'll explore them, and go beyond the gaze, because they're so fascinating, all three of them!
@@SimonObirek I did start on the Dolezal article and it's going really well. Thanks again!
Lacan is good if you read it with a guide. The guy himself was delusional if you ask me, wannabe Freudian psycho-analyst. Sartre is good but dense, it is much easier to read his wife's texts and actually get his point because they basically wrote about the same thing. Or read Nausea, that's a really fun book and it's much better than any essay Sartre ever wrote. Either that OR you could read Foucault, a much more accessible, academic approach to what Sartre was trying to get to. So I'd rather suggest you read Freud, Simone de Beauvoir and Michel Foucault if you wanna get Lacan and Sartre.
Wonderful analysis, man... Simply brilliant
It was high time one took Zizek's own works seriously and not just get him to debate about something which constitutes a very diminutive part of his body of work
Keep up
How might homelessness work as another example? Walking past a homeless person when entering a store feels very salient here-the objective violence of eviction and criminalization; the discomfort and self-awareness of being noticed by the homeless person, and the impulse to not even look at them and just keep our heads down; the fantasy that everything’s okay in the world until we confront homelessness in our daily lives, and the stories and justifications we concoct to assuage our guilt about all of it, i.e. “they’re lazy, they’re addicts, they chose to be homeless,” etc.
I think that is a great example. It came to my mind as well.
I really liked the topic you chose to illustrate the ideas, it made the whole pleasingly succinct and complete. I had no familiarity with the topics, but the way you portrayed the thoughts were helpful; smooth transitions between ideas plus amusing graphics. Keep up the good work!
Thank you so, so much, Rodrigo! I've experimented with a few different ways of presenting philosophy, but I like this way so I think I'll stick with it!
I wonder how much of the ideas of Lacan, Sartre, and Žižek are paying homage to the scene in Plato's Republic 4.439e-440a retelling the story of Leontius taking in the spectacle of the politically executed and Leontius feeling shame as an excess of θυμός? It would seem that the spectacle reveals more readily to Leontius himself [and Socrates' interlocutors] a greater social structure in the form of a justice system which allows individuals to take their fill of the process of what happens when one wishes to harm a city's structure to the necessary end of killing defecting political opponents. Perhaps the fact that Leontius cannot keep his eyes away from the death and decay is a both a bleak reminder of one's mortality and a powerful affirmation of one's own declaration as Subject; something like "This object that is dead wholly reminds me and cements my supremacy as Subject being wholly alive" (phenomenologically speaking)? When you spoke about Sartre's idea of 'staying in control of one's own existential shame', it especially reminded me of this section of Plato. I wonder if you see a connection as well? I am less comfortable with Lacan's and Žižek's work so I'm not sure if I can make this connection so easily.
You've done an excellent job synthesizing this information, I'm looking forward to exploring the ideas myself. Keep up the good work!
First of all, thank you so much for your kind words! I'm happy I may inspire you to explore these things, that's really an amazing result of doing these!
On Plato generally, I think you strike a chord. However, the passage you're speaking of, the one involving Leontius, seems to remind me of Julia Kristeva's idea of the abject. She's a fellow psychoanalyst, bordering perhaps a bit more on the postmodern than Lacan did. I urge you to check her out as there's definitely some overlap.
And going further, people draw parallels between Lacan's screen and Plato's allegory of the cave all the time. Lacan explains in Seminar XI, on a particularly challenging passage on the "line and the light", how we don't really see the thing-in-itself (he doesn't use that phrasing, he kept denying any connection to Kant), but rather an image of the object. If we look at a painting, we'd be staring with our eyes (the geometral point) toward an object, but we wouldn't see the object, we'd see the image of it plastered to the screen. He goes on to saying that the object is at the same place as the point of light, allowing us to view the image. It is a quite dense section, and I suggest a reader's guide, but well worth the time!
this is such a great channel, im glad i found it
Thank you so much!
I'm absolutely grateful to for this channel. Thank you!
Excellent exposition of the ontological look/gaze!
I can't figure out why the views are so low. This video was very well done. Thanks for making it!
I just discovered this guy. Maybe the algorithm may start to favor his videos more in the first year of covid.
Wow months of looking at Lacan memes, and I don't think I've actually begun to understand him until this video. I love that it's so concise and straight to the point. Please keeping making these kinds of vids!
Another Great video dude - and a crazy step up in quality from the last one. I'm so excited for your channel!
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you saying this! Gotta start a new thing in the new year and then gotta start doing the next bigger video! Again, thank you!
Great vid dude
Thank you so much, Miguel!
I've followed your twitter for a while, but this is my first time watching your videos. They're phenomenal. I'm truly in awe. The level of information you manage to fit in is just supreme - may I ask how you edit them?
Thank you so much for the kind words and the support, Katie! And the selection and inclusion of information is always a struggle--I tend to want to fit in too much, which means I have to be even more vigilant in killing my darlings!
Regarding editing: do you mean the software, or the thoughts that go into it?
@@SimonObirek You excel at killing your darlings and leaving what is there unprunable. Regarding editing: I was originally talking about the software you use, but I'd love to hear about the thought too. Thank you for such a kind reply!
@@katherine7802 It's so difficult to phrase my thank yous in a way I'm happy with them; I always seem to think they come across as being so trite and trivial. But in all honesty, thank you so much for these comments!
Regarding editing, I use Adobe Premiere Pro. I used to edit in Lightworks' free version, but that was horrible. It got the job done, but it was horrible.
The thought of this video is Fisher's idea of hauntology; I wanted the video's aesthetics to mourn the lost futures as much as the music of an artist like Burial does. The text is reminiscent of Barbara Kruger's art whose bold, red-and-white style was relentlessly copied and appropriated by the clothing company Supreme. The aesthetics of this video lament the coming of capitalist realism as much as the actual content does, if I may sound a bit hylomorphic.
@@katherine7802 Oh, just realised this was the video on the gaze! Guess this was just a first dip into giving my videos some more thought; this one having a bit more of a comedic slant than many others I do. My bad, thought you commented on the Fisher video.
Hey man your design and content is so good! Really happy someone is out here doing stuff like this. Only think I would suggest is to get a better microphone (unless that is your style) With the design and content you have and high quality audio your channel would be top top notch.
@Simon Øbirek not sure why I hadn't seen more of your videos, they're fantastic, but it seems you've stopped and you should DEFINITELY start back. There is a space for more of this philosophy on here more than ever, coexisting with the dire necessity of more good 'creators' of critical theory content.
* "..has separated itself off as organ." Wait! he said organs! Isn't this like.. Deleuze, you know?! *
'Cheers' is better than 'thanks'. Objectively.
- From, UK
Well worth waiting for! The way you pronounce Zizek is quite funny though haha :D
Thank you so much for the kind words, Mark! But hey, what's wrong with the way I pronounce Zizek? I thought I did well here! :(
@@SimonObirek It's just a bit different to how it is usually pronounced. At least it felt like that to me. Maybe I'm just too used to the pronounication you will find on most talks, lectures and so on and so on with Zizek :D Make no mistake, I thoroughly enjoyed your video!
@@SimonObirek i don't know the "correct" way, but I've heard most people say zheezhek, not shishek
Thank you! And I was just perplexed because I try to pronounce the names the best I can. It weirds me out whenever a person just completely butchers the name of philosophers, so I try to keep that in mind! But I will look his pronunciation up again if/when he crops up in another video!
The enemy has only images and illusions behind which he hides his true motives. Destroy the image and you will break the enemy.
Fascinating stuff...thanks!
Why aren't You making more videos?
come see the violence inherent in the system!
That was a fantastic video
Lol I like to watch car crashes but I wouldn't say all that about myself. Nahh - I'm fine, I just think car crashes have an element of surprise and irony. So im fine with watching car crashes so long as supposedly everyone involved was fine. On RUclips there's plenty of compilations - unfortunately there's also literal death compilations for some reason but the main channels showing car crashes have that thing where they're like everyone was fine. For me, I'm not enjoying people's day being ruined, I find humour in stupid behaviour and the visually exciting consequence. It's not about the impact on the people, it's about the literal crash itself. A large metal object being mishapen after hitting another object. Or sometimes it's cool to see a car somehow launch into the air or spin.
car crashes are informative. an easy way to watch something go powerfully wrong.
How have you not seen "Crash" by David cronenberg?
That movie... I had wiped it from my memory
Have you views on Zizek changed? Have you moved over to Deleuzian turf?
Please, i know your Chanel is about philosophy, but can you explain in any vídeo how do you edit, wich program, and how do you makes those cuts with sounds. I have wacth your vídeo about capitalisim and i will like to know how hoy write with those red background. Sorry if my writing is not crear, i am spanish
Is this related to Crash (1973), the novel?
Wondered the same
Have you seen "crash" by David Cronenberg ?
Unintentionally or otherwise I feel this perfectly explains a lot of peoples' attitudes towards vegans
Camus: and I took that personally
i don't get it. Can someone explain it to me?
first video and subscribed
Isn't there a genetic disposition to watch the dangerous and destructive to learn from and about it - both to obtain its power and avoid its consequences which in the end furthers one's survival? And that the evidence of looking directly is a fear of the punishing gase related to what you said in this video?
@Timothy Lee Except that giraffes did get their long necks from natural selection. This has been a long discussed matter and there simply isn't any point for giraffes to grow their necks so long because there is vegetation lower as well. So it was probably an aesthetic feature preferred by the females and thus became a developing trait.
And I agree with Bat Bite: car crashes fascinate us because there is a relation to death and we are imprinted to learn from others' mistakes. It's part of our "survival brain" and people who witness car crashes actually are more alert while driving than the ones who don't, it's not that hard to use science as a foundation for philosophical thought. Some people just wish not to because then they can make up their own fairytales and get sad when they're all burnt up and left with the bricks of reality. THAT is what Sartre's about.
--or we could build railways and not prioritize cars in urban design etc--
Mall rules ?
nice
What? No Camus? 😉
WOW.
I like to watch Evangelical RUclips channels that show the devastation of tornadoes, earthquakes, inundations and the such...
Living is meaningless.
Meaning is a construction, not inherent to living.
@@MrNimbus420 meaning is to life was wetness is to fish
pronopunce ž like you pronounce j in Jacques. You're pronouncing it like "Šisek" t. Croat