/lit/ - Literature

ideologija

>>19744178
fpbp

>>19744119

a con-man who wants to make a living by throwing in communist tantrums.


I will serve only myself, not the fucking state or the people.

A few different things, his main one is: capitalisim is self-sustaining because it inherintly reinforces itself through the culture it produces

>>19744119
He is being held against his will for decades, trying to communicate his agony through sniffes and nose scratches.

>>19744282
>capitalisim *sniff* is self-sustaining *sniff**sniff* because it inherintly *sniff* reinforces itself through *sniff* the culture it produces *sniff*

>>19744241
Based. Read The Will to Power as well

>>19744119
Kung Fu Panda is stupid.

Idk dude should take a claritin or something

>>19744298
I decoded it, but it turned out to be a recipe for lentil soup. In the same way that two points that know their distance from the target encode both the true target and a pseudo target, one can decode the sniffs in two coherent ways. If we orthogonalise the sniffs we will get the true message. I forgot how to code though, due to my having taken up mining.

>>19744282
What is capitalism?

>>19744119
The "it was not real communism" man, rinse and repeat.

>>19744178
a communist talking about ideology is disingenous

capitalism is *sniff* le bad

Why does everyone on /lit/ hates Zizek? Are you guys so retarded that you can't understand Hegel or Lacan and you end up being filtered by Zizek?

>>19744119
i've never heard this man say anything meaningful or even memorable
he is the living embodiment of a word salad, from which nothing useful can be derived
basically just ignore him and read people who aren't communists (with the exception of adorno's works where he critiques culture)

>>19747251
>i've never heard this man say anything meaningful or even memorable
Maybe you could actually read him and not form your opinion on 30 seconds meme videos from youtube

he is a hack who sold out to the globohomo

He exposed the shallowness of Juden Peterstein.

>>19747279
What's the point of reading him when more meaning comes from a boomer-tier jbp video? Zizek is the definition of mental masturbation

>>19747783
No he didn't, as soon as jbp cucked on the jq when asked about it at a public event that tells you all you need to know.

>>19747220
This

>>19747220
This af

>>19744119
Zizek is a really weird character. I think the best paraphrase he ever gave of himself was when he stated that the only real question left is whether Francis Fukuyama was right when he stated that we'd reached the end of history with our current form of liberal capitalism.

Other than that, there's just a lot of background reading that went into his philosophy (mainly Marx-Hegel-Lacan, but it spans the entire Western tradition). Plus he engages with very difficult questions with no easy solutions.

You know what's interesting is that a lot of the big, easy-to-grasp "points" I think people are looking for in Zizek's work are almost treated as afterthoughts. For instance, Zizek ultimately does agree with Marx's bourgeoisie-proletariat dichotomy. He's on board with a lot of Das Kapital etc etc. But he rarely just comes right out and says it in his interviews, largely because he's trying to build off of those insights. He sort of takes them for granted. His debate with JBP is a pretty good example of this.

>>19744119
He is a big troll

>>19744119
he writes the same book over and over again.

>>19747913
You said nothing of substance.

>>19748452
Yes i did

>>19744119
Psychoanalysis is unfalsifiable schizobabble, and so is much of continental philosophy. Watch his debate with Peterson, just two schizo faggots babbling about how they think happiness works with no arguments to back up their claims

Ideology is trash can

>>19748611
>with no arguments to back up their claims

You'd fit right in lolzers.

Zizek's BIG POINT is that no matter what you do Ideology shapes the way you perceive the world, and you have an ideology whether you know it or not. And most people have no idea they have an ideology and that ideology is neoliberal capitalism.

What he doesn't say is that to deal with the problem you should actively embrace ideology by hammering out your own, or adopting one and being aware of what parts are rational and which aren't.

Also you obey your internalized ideology to satisfy the secret daddy that lives in your head i.e. the Superego i.e. ZEE BIG OTHUR i.e. God i.e. etc.

Incidentally the name Slavoj is derived from the Old Slovene word for "glory".

>>19744119
whatever makes him money

>>19744119
le funny hot dog man

>>19744119
he's a pop philosopher, but i legit think he is a good one to have around. what i like about him (and what people seem to miss constantly) is that he doesn't pretend to have solutions to the worlds' problems as much as his college-aged supporters want him to, and as much as his detractors want him to so that they can tear him down

>>19748805
I should also add that he says ideology is mostly unconscious and revealed by behavior. Your real ideology shines through by how you respond to social pressure and power, not by what you say about it. He likes to make raunchy jokes about the contradictions people have between the two.

I would say that there is a difference in people who are genuine political dissidents. They know their behavior contradicts their vision and don't like it. The resolution to the dilemma is courage in activism.

>>19748894
This

>>19748452
/lit/tards that can only understand shitty literature and get filtered by any thoughtful philosophy

>>19748897
Based pepe

>>19744119
Why are you people making the same thread over and over again?
Read or watch a review of "the sublime object of ideology". That's his main book.
He defines ideology as false acquired consciousness. You understand that it was imposed on you but can't do anything about it.
Zizek proposes that If all ideology is imposed, we shoud just let someone create a new, more useful ideology (whatever that means)

>>19748452
first time in a philosophy thread?

>>19748436
based

>>19747913
>etc etc
You mean and so on and so on

>>19744119
His point is that leftists have no point

>>19748805
>>19748897
Ideology is a set of notions that mould perception into what ought to be seen. Any ideology we internalise will make us embrace the worldly, either normally or through a back door. However, think of a child, is child able at ideology? No. And so a child is free (from multitudes of sticky involvements and mechanisations). Of course, there are other constraints but the point here is one Sloterdijk stresses: an adult (consciousness) is always colonized.
>Incidentally the name Slavoj is derived from the Old Slovene word for "glory".
And 'Zizek' is something close in meaning to goo or mud, the locus of refuse: glorious mud is that which is non-ideological, 'meaningless' aka not enframed; yes, shitposts, filthy and useless but — what is important — potentially vigorous with potentiality. So the name is a subtle meta joke.

>>19749847
If I return to monke, do I escape from ideology? Anprim Zizek when?

>>19748436
based

>>19747220
>>19747847
>>19747913
Zizek is the left’s “pop” philosopher, just like Jordan Peterson is the right’s.
Both are extremely shallow and repetitive and their works have only any kind of relevance due social media and mainstream media. No one in any serious academic circle takes them seriously.

I don't care what you faggots say, Zizek is the only communist I ever liked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiTy5-RC1-4

>>19748436
rehashed chan joke

>>19750106
Cringe

>>19749966
no

His book on Lacan and Hitchcock is great. Also legit think he is a decent writer. Like Charles Taylor or

>>19750126
kill yourself

>>19746702
>a communist
You're retarded.

>>19749966
Monke is implicitly ideological: it is still viewed within the plane of civilizational, only a downgrade version. While child is not; same with a gamer. They do not intersect with ideological fields — there might be attempts at dragging them to ideology yet it is not of them naturally — they are truly autistic in a good sense of the word. Protected by an autogenic 'I'd rather not to' which is a variant of Jolly Wisdom.

Didn't Slavoj admit that communism at least the way it is currently isn't better than communism and they need to figure out the kinks, this doesn't stop him from critiquing capitalism and he should have every right to do so.

>>19750092
It's only pop if you watch his meme videos. I watched a 9 hour lecture on Hegel from him and it was pretty good

>>19750236
When I said "monke" I didn't mean going back to pre-agriculture society but actually changing my DNA and my body to a literal monkey

>>19750415
>communism at least the way it is currently isn't better than communism
Not even wrong

>>19744119
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVBOtxCfan0

>>19750871
He is correct. What shocked me most about the Peterson-Zizek debate was not the Peterson appeared totally ignorant of the relevant texts, this I expected, but just how shallow and lacking in rigor Zizek's arguments were. It was after watching it that I decided to stop wasting my time on any intellectual project that involved psychoanalysis and a Saussurean, and in doing so, the quality of my thinking has improved.
I really don't know how these con artists managed to achieve the status they have. The state of all intellectual endeavors would would only benefit from chasing everyone even remotely involved with continental philosophy out of our academic institutions.

>>19750941
You don't understand the context of the debate. Peterson and his fans were already biased and had wrong preconceptions about leftist concepts, so Zizek showing his big dick debate skills would have fallen flat anyway. Instead his goal was too show Peterson that the left isn't this big scary antagonist and to remove these wrong preconceptions, attracting more people to marxist thought

>>19750092
not disagreeing that both are pop philosophers, but Peterson is basically a somewhat well-spoken charlatan whose entire understanding of philosophy comes from Stephen Hick's Explaining Postmodernism book and probably Wikipedia. Zizek at least actually reads.

Not saying Zizek is brilliant but Peterson by comparison makes him look it

>>19750769
Then pretty based ngl

>>19750950
Even then, he could have made some assertions of substance, but he couldn’t because a worldview the incorporates psychoanalysis is one that lacks rigor and is incapable of of producing more than the decent one liner. Everyone of these “thinkers” is the same in this regard.

>>19751252
I actually want to be frank, I am a fan of Zizek but I didn't watch the Peterson-Zizek debate because the public clapping like crazy in the first minutes made me cringe and I really can't bring myself to watch it, I tried but I can't. I'm only stating my opinion from what I heard from other people

>>19751252
Hence his pop status: it is not about philosophy itself but an attitude behind the speaker and its emotional energy. I can accept that Peterson actually influenced lives in a positive sense, perhaps some even cleaned their rooms.That you and others cannot vibe with his particular message and personality (for better or worse) is another thing.

>>19751309
Zizek seems to be taken seriously by academics in certain fields for at least some of his work. At the very least, I don't think I'd be laughed out of a room if I cited him in in most humanities classes.
Citing Peterson in those same courses probably wouldn't fare as well, and if his academic work has any legitimacy (which I doubt it does, but I feel that way for any work rooted in psychoanalysis) I don't think anyone takes it seriously outside of his niche. As far as his advice goes, It's just hard to take seriously and doesn't really help anyone deal with the issues that arise from modern life. At best, it's the kind of ad vice I might give a friend after a bad breakup, but I wouldn't tell him these things to try and turn his life around.

>>19751434
>It's just hard to take seriously and doesn't really help anyone deal with the issues that arise from modern life.
Maybe you think this, but Peterson's advice has indeed helped people deal with their problems.

>>19751434
>if his academic work has any legitimacy (which I doubt it does
I think Peterson did some decent academic work with his alcoholics studies and some other things. But his public persona is one big grift

we are controlled by capitalist ideology

>>19752483
capitalism commodify all ideologies , ideology itself is inescapable
>Buy ''vegan organic fair trade'' products

Time for the REAL question: are the tics a way to handle a psychotic invasion of jouissance or is he just an obsessive neurotic?

>>19750092
Zizek isn’t a retard like Peterson

>>19750415
>communism at least the way it is currently isn't better than communism

Who was in the right here?

>>19750235
leftists change the definition of whatever word there is

>ZIZEK IS A HEGELIAN!!!!!

ok doofus, being a "hegelian" means that he internalized, acknowledge and believes in the ideas of hegel, which means that he smells like he has an ideology too, he´s a socio-political coward too

>>19744119
late capitalism a neurotic formation of the western mind

>>19751252
because of zizek's lacanian background he's performing a kind of analysis. if what he's saying is unsubstantial it's because the subject he's analyzing is too. it's part of the process of transference

>>19752633
found the leftoid

>>19752733
Zizek got his fame during the occupy movement days, when he stood with the protesters and did public speeches. He's the opposite of a conformist university intellectual, at least to a certain extent.

>>19753219
>when he stood with the protesters and did public speeches

and what he did after? he´s a sellout like every leftist in academia

>>19753047
This is your brain on /pol/

>>19744282
then Marx was totally wrong according to him?

>>19750753
I read a couple of his books. there's nothing of substance there.it's just Hegel quotes, nonsense pop culture example after nonsense pop culture example and some abjectionist example intertwined just to say in the end that some french philosopher named Lacan was right all along

>>19744241
In order to keep your insignificant life you keep on living for others, even though you think you’re not.

If you think you have authority over your life, you are a disingenuous faggot.

>>19753449
>no one else is allowed to be different to me
>My life is completely subservient to others therefore everyone else's is!

>>19748805
Thank you for actually answering the question

>>19753462
You brainless retard. Who do you work for? Yourself?
Who are you? Is your identity self-sufficient, or does it imply your existence inside a society?
Are you in control of your desires? Better yet, are your desires generated by your individuality, or are they manufactured by outside forces, in order to provide people products that satisfy those same desires?
How do you satisfy your needs? Isn’t it through the cooperation of individuals as a unity, also known as the collective?

Braindead retarded.

>>19753504
Yes and myself to all questions, except for the one about food because I cannot own land.

>>19752557
>a capitalism just flew over my house!
Leftists truly are mentally deranged individuals

>>19747220
Yes we Kan, but this Slav is charlatan

>>19750092
>No one in any serious academic circle takes them seriously.

Zizek isn't treated as the end-all-be-all in Lefty circles, but he is definitely treated as a valid contributor for anyone interested in Hegel-Lacan-Marx.

>>19753730
Cant we put some more names in that hyphen cluster? Seems a bit lacking :=/

>>19753577
>Yes and myself to all questions, except for the one about food because I cannot own land.

The missile is ontologically secure always.
It is ontologically secure because it knows its own absence in the other. By subtracting the absence of the other from the other it knows itself. Or, by subtracting the other from the absence of the other it knows itself. For whichever is lesser it obtains a deviance, or fetish, which is indicative of individuation and thus onticly seperate consciousness.

The guidance subsystem used deviance to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is, into a position where it isn’t, and arriving at a position where it wasn’t, it now ejaculates short of possessing objet-petit-a.

Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn’t, and it follows that the position where it was, is now the position where it isn’t in possession of objet-petit-a.

Consequently, it follows, that the deviation which it engaged in is radically insufficient to colonise itself internally and possess knowledge of itself through the other, coitally, and thus to determine what it is. It is in this absence of possession of the self as a radical deficiency that the missile comes to know itself as the absence of itself in its sexual failure.

In the event that the position that it is in is the position that it ought to be in, and desired to be in, the position that it now desires to be in is a position which it wasn’t in, in this sense objet-petit-a infinitely regresses from sexual possession.

If this variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too, may be corrected by the libido. However, the missile must have known where it was at. The immoral guidance scenario works as follows: Because a variation has modified the fundamental perversion of the missile, some of the information being fed to the missile is at odds with the missile’s comprehension of itself and reality. It is not sure just whether it is, however, it is sure whether it is not within reason, but reason isn’t functioning, and it thinks it knows where it was but it doesn’t. It now subtracts what it isn’t isn’t from what it is isn’t or vice versa. By differentiating this from the algebraic sum of the function of the Oedipus complex in Lacan it discovers it is where it shouldn’t be but shouldn’t is where it be. It is unable to attain its deviation, and a variation, which is called “psychosis” ensues.

>>19753905
Wandered in here from /vr/, is this what passes for satire and humor around here?

>>19754052
no, read hegel for that

>>19754230

>>19744119
people have IDEOLOGY that they don't KNOW about mannnnn

>>19744119
>>19744241
https://youtu.be/8Wfy9uXX5qo

>>19754052
You used that joke last time, and your interpretation once again failed.

>>19752633
why are you trannys like this

Yeah your side was so shit in the cold war you evil fucks.

>>19744119
>We generally like to *sniff* fink that the Kung Fu Panda goes into ze *sniff* toilet but according to Hegel itsch *sniff* de toilet that goes into the *sniff* Kung-Fu Panda.

Leftism is dead.

>>19744241
>implying liberalism isn't a massive scam
>implying there are free individuals in liberalism
>implying you are even part of the owning class and not just a little wagie dreaming about getting a piece of cake too, if he'd just improve himself a little more

>>19754963
egoism =/= liberalism
egoism is not being committed to anything and taking the path of least resistance that benefits you the most, regardless of what that path is or whether you later abandon it or not. not surprised to understand a leftist (moralfag) gets filtered by this

Hegel should have been killed for being such a retard

My pojnt is dis *sniffle*

>>19747913
af af fr fr bruh no cap ayo zizek is lit and woke af tho bruh on god

>>19752633
why can't he speak in a way that normal people can understand then? i feel like i need some background in social constructionist theory or jungian dreams or some shit to understand what this cunt is going on about.

>>19744119
>post politic is shit just read hegel bro *snirf*, fuck everyone we're all governed by ideology *snirf* we're all fuck so let's analyze matrix with psychanalytic concepts

>>19748436
All Shlomo Shitzek can do is copy thinkers greater than him.

>>19755403
have you been to university ?

>>19755403
half his work is explicitly aimed at educating pop-culture consuming normies; you pretty much only have to be functionally literate to make sense of it. he's done multiple books and documentaries that explain the basics with fucking movie analogies. if you still can't figure out some concept after he illustrated it with a scene from the matrix then you might lack the necessary background in not being retarded

>>19744241
Fell hook line and sinker for the ideology.

>>19755403
Don't bother. It's just drivel

>>19755403
He's extremely accessible as far as philosophers go, and if you can't understand him then I'm worried about your reading comprehension.

His discourse on simply doing something you don't want to, in order to end up enjoying it, changed my life.

>>19744241
Trannies being spooked, gj anon

>>19756939
I assume you never had a father

>>19757093
I had two actually

>>19747220
I think he sounds dumb, he looks dumb too.
Don’t value the opinions of fat people.

>>19757907
>Don’t value the opinions of fat people.
gay

>>19747279
After reading this artucle by him I can confidently say I will never read him again. https://www.rt.com/op-ed/542968-western-freedom-is-a-lie/
It sounds like it was written by a middle schooler.

>>19748611
Finally. Someone else who can see it lol.

>>19744119

He's just a basic bitch liberal larping as a Stalinist. It's pathetic to watch.

>>19753219
zizek was famous enough to write an article for the fall 2003 abercrombie & fitch catalog ya zoomer

>>19744119
why are socialists always fat nerds who spend too much time online and never people who actually work?

>>19759401
>mfw

>>19759401
>why are academics academics and not academics?

>>19753385
>implying Marx was totally wrong according to him?

>>19759401
Because right-wingers really have no enemies so they just invent them.

>>19748436
based

>>19753634
>>19753634
>>implyinh a capitalism didn't just flew over my house!

>>19747220
Where to start with Lacan?

>>19759415
poor thing... is anyone researching this disorder?

>>19744119
The awful slurring of his speech and amount of spit produced just trying to utter a sentence is enough of a filter for me. I don't care what he is trying to say until he learns to speak right.

>>19749727
>and so on and so on
You mean and so on and so forth.

>>19750769
Just reincarnate as an African man. First you would have to commit suicide.

>>19750871
ESL here. Is combat pronounced comBAT when it's a verb but COMbat when it's a noun? I'm referring to the interviewer's accent in the first few seconds.

>>19756939
Huh? How would that work? Care to elaborate?

>>19744119
nothing. he's an absurdist hack whose ironically carrying the torch of stalinism

>>19748436
based

>>19752733
>ok doofus, being a "hegelian" means that he internalized, acknowledge and believes in the ideas of hegel, which means that he smells like he has an ideology too
Um, yes. Literally.

Did you even read him?

>>19751230
Both have a decent amount of knowledge in their specialty and are midwits in what is outside of it. The only difference is that Peterson gets called out for it because he isn't really a member of the cathedral anymore while Zizek is. If Zizek eventually fell out with them he would get ridiculed in a very similar way. Personally I can't stand any of them, but this shit about how one of them is a serious and rigorous academic and the other isn't is bullshit and is a typical smear tactic from the cathedral. Chomsky was doing the same shit back then to discredit anyone who attacked Pol Pot for example.

>>19754262
I like jung's take on it more, yknow the entire "social unconscious" thing
is not as nihilistic as what zizek is saying

>>19750950
can I get a quick rundown on why peterson is a charlatan? is it because what he's saying is too simplistic? or is it because is wrong?

>>19761118
Because he turned up to a debate on Marxism having just read the Communist Manifesto, which displayed a lack of intellectual curiosity and perhaps even a unwillingness to engage out of bad faith.

>>19752733
Bsaed Ted poster. He is alwasys right

>>19752733
tedposters proving themselves to be retards too edgy to understand they're retards once again

Seems like you cannot escape from seeing things beyond your ideology my gott

>>19760213
Yes
ex: "We will comBAT the threat of disease"
vs
ex: "While on his tour of duty, he died in COMbat."

>>19760480
>Um, yes. Literally.

see this >>19746702

>>19761521
>beyond your ideology my gott

i don´t have an ideology

>>19761517
That post is fake, it's too coherent

>>19744119
He's a typical fast food philosopher, fun to listen to but doesn't say anything deep

>>19761541
Thanks!

>>19744282
This applies to every form of life on this planet
>muh success is bad
Fuck leftists.

>>19752483
Speak for yourself. I moved to an eastern socialist country to get away from the corruptive Mammonist psychoshere of the American hegemony. I haven't watched a TV in 20 years. What the fuck is dubstep?

>>19744119

He makes fun of SJWs sometimes but all his opinions are fundamentally still the same as SJW opinions anyway. What is his deal

>>19762079
bumpp

>>19761586
the fact that you think ideology is something you have to identify with for it to be a part of you just goes to show how far your mind has been consumed by ideology

>>19762079
thats a cute cade

>>19762510
yup, i don´t adhere to any ideology whatsoever, i´m apolitical

>>19761456
That "debate" wasn't on anything. It was a spectacle in which two public intellectuals had a discussion. In what world is Peterson going to read an adequate portion of all the economics and "theory" Marxists spew and then actually integrate it into a conversation?
You are an utter mongoloid.

The only way to defeat China is to cooy their model

>>19762565
>i'm apolitical
see >>19762510

>>19762684
of course an ideologue will never accept someone being apolitical, in the same way a christian don´t accept someone who doesn´t believe in a "god" or doesn´t have a religion

this is your brain in dogmatism and ideology

>>19762693
you don't know what an ideology is and idk why you care about talking about zizek if you don't want to know either

>>19762707
Pure ideology and so on and so on

>>19762707
>>19762708
leftist usually change the definition of whatever word there is so it can fit their agenda and goals, me being a apolitical triggers the leftie because i made them aware that they´re brainwashed dupes all in service for the ideology they adhered to

>>19762725
creating new concepts has always been a central part of philosophy
if you don't want to learn the meaning of the concepts authors come up with then why do you want to discuss them? just to have the chance to say retarded shit?

>>19752733
>>19761586
You're literally braindead, no wonder you're le schizopilled tedposting retard.

>>19762693
>>19762725
What are you doing on this board? You're clearly too inept for the subtleties of philosophy. End your pathetic midwit existence.

>>19763131
>>19763124
Not him but you two (if indeed you are two and not one) clearly have not read much philosophy yourselves (or if you have then what you read you did not understand). Clearly two pseuds seeking the "respect" that comes from memorizing endless logical tedium and pedantics.
You have no self-awareness. Start with the Greeks.

>>19763201
Another midwit detected.

>>19763353
Are the midwits in the room with us now, anon?

>>19763124
t. butthurt oversocialized lefty

>>19763663
Not oversocialized, not a lefty. You failed.

Where's the continuation of his Less than Nothing tome? It's been ten years already. At this rate, he's not going to make it, is he?

>>19761586
Clearly tedposting is your dieology

>>19764909

Everything is an ideology, even refusing ideology is an ideology

>>19764921
I don't think ideology itself is bad. I believe that ideology becomes a problem when it replaces your natural tendency to reason.

>>19764929
>I believe that ideology becomes a problem when it replaces your natural tendency to reason.

that´s all ideologies to begin with, ideology is the bastardization of religion, you have to be a moron to think that ideologies aren´t dogmatic by default, of course they´re pure bullshit at the end of the day, it´s a silly atempt by humans that cannot understand the complexities of real life

>>19764942
Ideologies stem from man, it is a sprout of reason originating from the consensus of mind. I believe that you should formulate your own ideology, but there is no shame in agreeing with an individual or set of individuals. Dogma is a tool of man, devised to enslave, it is not inherent to human reason, just merely the result of individuals exercising their will over others.

>>19744282
Isn’t that true of every ideology though?

>>19764978
oh boy haven't you heard of my ideology+ where we just fix all the problems in every ideology...

>>19764957
>I believe that you should formulate your own ideology

rather than have your own "ideology", how about you think for yourself and not take everything for granted? ideologies are for the sheep who can´t think for themselves

>>19765012
I guess it depends on your definition of ideology. In my working definition, you can't escape ideology unless you are completely brainless. The issue is centralization and a lack of recursive critique.

>>19760490
>MUH CATHEDRAL
Zizek is appreciated in academic circles because he's a real academic. Peterson is mocked because his work is not rigorous at all, which is why he tries to make money by gifting instead.

>>19764978

Ignore this guy he's just recapitulating frankfurt school 101.

Anyone who actually wants to know what ziz is doing should start with The Parallax View. That's his main theoretical work that ties his methodology and project together as far as I can tell. If you can't follow what's going on in there start over with your 20th century continental philosophy 101 and try again!

>>19765084

What world do you live in where JP ISN'T a complete cathedral stoolie? Everything he says is totally safe. Normie professional class boomers have been talking about JP together since almost around when he first got popular around here. There's literally nothing threatening about JP to the status quo (unlike Jung--but who's keeping score?).

>>19765113
So what’s his main point then?

>>19765113
>What world do you live in where JP ISN'T a complete cathedral stoolie? Everything he says is totally safe. Normie professional class boomers have been talking about JP together since almost around when he first got popular around here. There's literally nothing threatening about JP to the status quo (unlike Jung--but who's keeping score?).
This. The whole concept of the cathedral is ridiculous anyway, but pretend Peterson is somehow an enemy of the "cathedral" is even more stupid. Peterson is one of the most privileged men in the world. He's hardly a rebel. He's a run of the mill liberal who defends the status quo with nails and teeth because he doesn't want to lose his privilege. Perhaps he's disliked by a few academics with a more open mind, but he's hardly persecuted, unlike Zizek who is a real leftist and therefor is actually against the status quo and the system. The fact that Zizek is still more respected by academics despite being a leftist and being an actual threat to the status quo only shows how much better he is as an intellectual than Peterson.

>>19765113
>>19765156
Both Zizek and Peterson are globalist shills.
Zizek is cooler and funnier, but otherwise they are not that different.

>>19765187
Peterson is a liberal. He supports the status quo. He's lame. He's not a threat to anyone. He's hated because he's a midwit. Zizek is an actual leftist and a real threat to the system, but people still like him because he's a charming rouge and they can't deny he's cool and often right.

>>19765192
Both of them are shills for globalhomo

>>19765206
You obviously haven't read Zizek if you think he's a liberal. He may support globalism, but for socialist reasons, not liberal ones like Peterson.

>>19760142
>where to start with Lacan?
By putting all his writings in the garbage because he’s a Freudian and writes in an obstructionist style which is the closest thing there is to an immoral style of writing.

>>19765213
The end result is the same either way - the NWO and the rise of antichrist

>>19765243
Is the man baby mad that Lacan actually is recognized as an influential intellectual unlike your boyfriend Peterson? Perhaps you should go to clean your room kek

>>19765132

No spoonfeeding from me fren. Pearls, swine, etc.

Learn to read.

>>19765187

Zizek is just a deeply cynical leftist who at least airs out alternative views, even if in an overly safe way to the globalist establishment. I'm not sure if Peterson, being even more of a shill than Ziz, has anything of value to say besides telling gamers to "clean their rooms" before then getting KO'd by xanax addiction himself.

>>19765251
Taken seriously by literary scholars, continental philosophers, psychoanalysis, and cultural theorists, who as we know, are all totally legitimate intellectuals.

>>19749600
Liiiiike the Ubermench?

>>19765254
Zizek can be interesting and funny sometimes but he is still promoting the same socially liberal progressive garbage as everyone else in the media - feminism, trannies, homos, secularism, atheism, and so on.
Also his takes on Christianity are very low tier and basically gnostic.

>>19765292
>NOOOO! ZIZEK IS JUST AS BAD AS DADDY PETERSON
If his takes are so bad then why doesn't he get ridiculed by other academics the same way as Peterson? It may be, maybe, perhaps, that his ideas aren't so low tier as you say?

>>19753449
>insignificant life
Reddit cringe. Multiple people allow for the division of labor. You'd agree people are useful to one another, right? Would it not stand people want to work together even if only in selfish interest? If cooperation is beneficial to those involved, wouldn't they participate voluntarily?

>>19765304
Most academics are shills in some way or another, and that goes for Peterson too, who is controlled opposition against the SJWs much like Ben Shapiro and other such phoneys

Hegel’s a poet whose only contribution was an interesting rejoinder to Kant, Marx was pre-evolution psychology, and Lacan is an unfalsifiable faggot.

>>19748436
based

>>19765304
Prolly the same reason this wasn’t criticized by any academics but the quillete crowd

>https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-complicated-legacy-of-e-o-wilson/

>>19753755
Who would you propose?

>>19765389

EO Wilson is boring featherweight scientism b8 you're like 2 degrees away from dickriding fauci there intellectually kiddo

>>19765304
Because he’s a leftist you retard.

I am not left wing or even liberal for that matter but I hate the term "lefty" and when I hear that I always picture some smug, nasally voiced faggot neocon like Ben Shapiro saying it.

>>19765456
This isn’t about Wilson faggot. Read the article and tell me you don’t believe in normal distribution

>>19748436
>He is a big troll

>>19751252
>Everyone of these “thinkers” is the same in this regard
Isn’t it incredible that these 140 iq’s have a job where they are claiming to make statements that correspond to reality, and yet, due to storied layers of cumulative falsehood, you can rearrange the lies and add a little yourself, be taken seriously, a celebrated authority, and never say a single true thing. Mind blowing that this is the state of the soft sciences.

>>19765707
And you'd be correct.

>>19761118
Peterson has been operating out of his bounds ever since he got popular to begin with, I respect what he was doing in the beginning but he knows and we know that hes a psychologist and just an okay one at best. Not saying Zizek is some god that he cant even get close to but Peterson is batting way out of his league and playing the wrong sport. I used to try and have his back because people dog on him way too much for an old man just responding to what happened to him for not dealing with the bs in his university but now I cant defend him doing what he does now, replying to random drama on social media and larping as intellectual dark web.

>>19767410
tldr its too simplistic and half what peterson says is wrong or too based of psychology that still has many holes in it

>>19767410
>>19767420
Critique of Jordan Peterson from a traditionalist, Orthodox Christian, and anti-liberal perspective!!
https://youtu.be/KXduQlaU-Mg

Here is one thing that is annoying about these Jordan Peterson types and this brand of lukewarm boomer conservatism.
They always like to pretend that they are being very edgy and bold and radical, that saying what they are saying could make them get cancelled or something. But in reality what they are saying is the most safe, establishment approved, milquetoast, PC, liberal friendly nonsense you can imagine. He is literally defending womens' rights and acting like this is super edgy and crazy!
It is so phoney. It is like punk rock bands who pretend to be against the system while they are on a big corporate record label and played on the radio and stuff.
https://youtu.be/yKhAh_qfO64

>>19767770
>But in reality what they are saying is the most safe, establishment approved, milquetoast, PC, liberal friendly nonsense you can imagine.

he'd be fired if he worked a normielib PMC job and said half the shit he says in a public way, you faggots are doing interference for the glowies every time you say "guys relaaaax lol smoothbrain conservatism is the order of the day" when it's really not and you're a faggot

>>19767782
I am not a leftoid!!!

>>19767782
>defending womens' rights and feminism is edgy and radical
It is literally the safe and PC agenda. He is a cuck.

>>19767770
>He is literally defending womens' rights and acting like this is super edgy and crazy!
He's doing so more to attack postcolonial types than he his trying to actually defend women's rights. That's the only reason it would piss anyone off.

>>19767833
well it's still gay

>>19755058
>ego
>path of least resistance

Tell that to pic related

>>19760155

>>19765024
It’s ideologies all the way down. It’s not a replacement of reason, but a conditioning of emotions and therefore of thoughts, perception, output. Genes create an ideology of objects and value; socialization of higher order values.

Only in the brief flicker of mindful meditation can you Moses like part the ideology. Ever so briefly.

>>19765213
You mask support globalization to raise the absolute level of wealth, but for psychological reasons, you must oppose globalization and capitalism because it lowers relative wealth. The perception and reality are made equivalent by the telos of happiness, you can’t but embrace the contradiction.

>>19744119
pseud

>>19768621
this

>>19744241
Go be a moocher nigger some where else

>>19747798
Yes he did. Here is the footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIQp4KMwqwk

>>19765213
>>19765187
>>19765192
zizek is a self-interested donald duck sounding faggot with little to offer

>>19769836
What the fuck is this how does this channel have nearly 400k subs

>>19762079
Generational gap

>>19744119
Never really got any “big question” answers from him but the Sublime Ideology was a good read in that it did prompt me to consider how my own personal ideology developed. At the very least he encourages a level of self awareness that many people lack, and confronts you with the uncomfortable truth that your deepest held values are not uniquely your own, but impressed on you by various sources.
As with a lot philososphy the basic gist sounds like a “well duh” statement but it’s interesting to go through the mental exercises to actually try and understand the whys of the situation.

Is Zizek a nominalist or does he acknowledge the reality of abstract objects and essences

>>19750106
Not a Gramsci guy?

>>19770432
>Gramsci
He had gay face.
Bronstein (also known as Trotsky) also had gay face.

>>19744119
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CId1iOWQUuo
>Zizek beats Peterson
>Self beats Zizek
>Self becomes king of Western pop philosophy

>>19770942
I like Will Self's accent desu. What accent is that?

>>19771082
Born and bred Londoner, I believe.

>>19748805
>What he doesn't say is that to deal with the problem you should actively embrace ideology by hammering out your own
So the guy is just being a Nietzscheans?

>>19744282
>capitalisim is self-sustaining because it inherintly reinforces itself through the culture it produces
everything is self-sustaining because it inherently reinforces itself through the culture it produces

>>19744119
Why is he making the face pornstars make when a cock is exposed? I hate this reddit faggot so much.

>>19772288
I do not endorse this atheistic communist materialist, but why do you relate everything to p*rnography?

>>19760142
the greeks

Hegel and his consequences have been a disaster for the philosophical discourse.

>>19770374
He is a Materialist, (and Marxist) he believes in ontological incompleteness and loves German idealism, so not the Anglo boring kind of materialist

>>19770942
> Pilkington beats Self
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngRu93ct4Q8

>>19767420
>half what peterson says is wrong or too based of psychology
He's based for basing everything in psychology. This what makes him more believable.

>>19744119
I don't know but it's fun to have drinking game with him. Take a shot everytime he pulls his shirt or rubs his nose.

>>19772858
Hegelian dialectic is glorified pilpul

>>19773025
very jewish way of thinking