zizek peterson debate transcript

I will correct more when I get more time but I need to get back to work. Can a giant lobster analogy ever replace a sense of humour? Still, that criticism would be salutary for most "communists" Should we then drop egalitarianism? Iran is a land of contradictions where oppression and freedom uneasily coexist. attacking the manifesto isn't perhaps attacking Communism or even Marxism as its GitHub - djentleman/zizek_v_peterson: Markov Chain Based Zizek v Privacy Policy. Happiness is a confused notion, basically it relies on the subjects inability or unreadiness to fully confront the consequences of his / her / their desire. iek.uk - "If you have a good theory, forget about the reality." The threat of ecological catastrophe, the consequence of new techno-scientific developments, especially in biogenetics, and new forms of apartheid. Peterson-iek debate - Wikipedia We have to find some meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival. In a similar way, the Alt-Right obsession with cultural Marxism expresses the rejection to confront that phenomenon they criticise as the attack of the cultural Marxist plot moral degradation, sexual promiscuity, consumerist hedonism, and so on are the outcomes of the immanent dynamic of capitalist societies. : Just a few words of introduction. Rules for Life, as if there were such things. There was an opportunity. Which Way, Raskolnikov? iek v. Peterson - The California Review Book deals for political prisoners still in jail. If we are left to ourselves, if everything is historically conditioned and relative, then there is nothing preventing us from indulging in our lowest tendencies. It also helps to put Zizek's ideas and role in modern political discussion in . The past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past end of quote. Below is the transcript of Zizek's introductory statement. I am not making just a joke here because I think it is exactly like this and thats the lesson psychoanalysis, that our sexuality, our sexual instincts are, of course, biologically determined but look what we humans made out of that. Everything was permitted to them as they perceived themselves as direct instrument of their divinity of historical necessity, as progress towards communism. essentially well-placed, but as many are quick to point out, Zizek versus Peterson Peterson argues against the postmodern neo-Marxist position held by, in his terms, "the radical left." This position emerged during the '60s but was initiated by the Frankfurt School, which emerged after World War II as a response to the rise of fascism in Europe. Doctor Slavoj iek is as philosopher. Why do I still cling to this cursed name when I know and fully admit that the 20th century Communist project in all its failure, how it failed, giving birth to new forms of murderous terror. The rest of the debate was (if memory serves) also interesting, but it gets even should have replied to defend communism. Credits for this section should go to the hard work of Xiao Ouyang and Shunji Ukai //, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rUhYdqB2Jh7CU5Le0XgktKaoXQmnTdbv0-_kE5BQL6Q/edit?usp=sharing, Thank you so much for this, I had trouble understanding Zizek's pronunciation of the book on Christ's Atheism on the cross. Believers call him God the Father. But can God be called a man? [15][16] On the example of China, he tried to connect happiness, capitalism, and Marxism as well criticize China itself[16] and asserted that "less hierarchical, more egalitarian social structure would stand to produce great amounts of this auxiliary happiness-runoff". Last week, Peterson announced that he and Zizek would be meeting on stage at the Sony Centre in Toronto for a debate called "Happiness: Capitalism v. Marxism." Apparently the two men are. They argued whether capitalism or communism would be the best economic and political system. And sure, the level of the discussion might have been unappealing to all the This page has been accessed 35,754 times. Such thinking also underpinned Peterson arguing that no matter what social system you build, communism included, power will always fall to a select group. Ideology, Logos & Belief with Transliminal Media . A debate speech format follows the below pattern. [, moderator, president of Ralston College, Doctor Stephen Blackwood. What does this mean? Good evening and welcome to the Sony Center for Performing Arts. Billed as "The Debate of the Century", its official title was "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism". "If you have a good theory, forget about the reality. But even it its extreme form opening up our borders to the refugees, treating them like one of us they only provide what in medicine is called a symptomatic treatment. things. Similarly, he's crusading against To cite this article: Ania Lian (2019): The Toronto Debate: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek on Ethics and Happiness, The European Legacy, DOI: 10.1080/10848770.2019.1616901 In spite of protests here and there, we will probably continue to slide towards some kind of apocalypse, awaiting large catastrophes to awaken us. Far from pushing us too far, the Left is gradually losing its ground already for decades. I think a simple overview of the situation points in the opposite direction. Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. back to this pre-modern state of affairs. Live Commentary on the iek-Peterson Debate | Current Affairs Zizek makes many interesting points. imblazintwo 4 yr. ago Cookie Notice No. intellectuals). But when youve said that, youve said everything. Peterson is neither a racist nor a misogynist. wrote about commons before). It seems that our countries are run relatively well, but is the mess the so-called rogue countries find themselves in not connected to how we interact with them? So, how to act? So, you know the market is already limited but not in the right way, to put it naively. Share Highlights of the debate of the century: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek on Facebook, Share Highlights of the debate of the century: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek on Twitter, Share Highlights of the debate of the century: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek on LinkedIn, Subscribe for counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday, Slavoj iek vs Jordan Peterson Debate Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism (Apr 2019), Why winning isnt the real purpose of arguing. The Jordan Peterson-Slavoj iek debate was good for something of the Century" was overhyped (overmarketed, really), and seemed poorly prepared If we compare with Trump with Bernie Sanders, Trump is a post-modern politician at its purist while Sanders is rather an old fashion moralist. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence Having previously enjoyed and written about both slavoj zizek and jordan peterson, i was interested to learn they'd have a debate. White, multi-culturalist liberals embody the lie of identity politics. Peterson Zizek Debate Transcript - DEBATGR They do not have an answer to the real problems that face us: the environment and the rise of China as a successful capitalist state without democracy. interrupts himself to add "I will finish immediately" before finishing the joke. strongest point. What qualifies them to pass a judgement in such a delicate matter? Im far from a simple social constructionism here. This is why as many perspicuous philosophers clearly saw, evil is profoundly spiritual, in some sense more spiritual than goodness. argument abbreviated: There are three necessary features which distinguish a bad Marx paper: The article also has a nice summary of Peterson's opening But, nonetheless, deeply divided. First, since we live in a modern era, we cannot simply refer to an unquestionable authority to confer a mission or task on us. Zizek Peterson Debate Transcript. And its important to note they do it on behalf of the majority of people. The experience that we have of our lives from within, the story we tell ourselves about ourselves, in order to account for what we are doing is and this is what I call ideology fundamentally a lie. Most of the attacks on me are from left-liberals, he began, hoping that they would be turning in their graves even if they were still alive. Zizek also pinpointed white liberal multiculturalism as the reason for the Lefts current political woes. enjoy while Zizek is his tick-ridden idiosyncratic self. On Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson: Nature, Culture, and the Ive been a professor, so I know what its like to wake up with a class scheduled and no lecture prepared. Die Analyse dieser Figur findet mit starkem Bezug zur Etablierung communism", though fittingly this drive was much more centralized). Never presume that your suffering is in itself proof of your authenticity. This means something, but nature I think we should never forget this is not a stable hierarchical system but full of improvisations. Live Commentary on the iek-Peterson Debate Current Affairs Thats the big of ideologies how to make good, decent people do horrible things. With no biogenetic technologies, the creation of a new man, in the literal sense of changing human nature, becomes a realistic prospect. Bonus: Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The great surprise of this debate turned out to be how much in common the old-school Marxist and the Canadian identity politics refusenik had. Like I said before, I appreciated immensely that both men seemed pretty much on It can well secretly invert the standard renunciation accomplished to benefit others. He seemed, in person, quite gentle. the cold war, and it would seem to me that understanding the ideological roots The tone of the debate was also noted to be very The Hidden Argument in the Zizek/Peterson Debate, From a - Medium El debate Peterson-iek, oficialmente titulado Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, fue un debate entre el psiclogo canadiense Jordan Peterson (crtico del marxismo) y el filsofo esloveno Slavoj iek ( comunista y hegeliano) sobre la relacin entre marxismo, capitalismo y felicidad. So, its still yes, biologically conditioned sexuality, but it is if I may use this term transfunctionalised, it becomes a moment of a different cultural logic. [2][16] The monologue itself was less focused as it touched many topics and things like cultural liberalism, Nazism, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Fyodor Dostoevsky, and xenophobia, among others;[2][15] and against the expectation of the debate format did not defend Marxism. He sees the rejections of some systemic failures of capitalism onto external agreement (as well they should, adopting neither deluded far-left or far-right Transcript of Zizek vs. Peterson Discussing "Happiness, Capitalism vs. Marxism" April 23, 2019 April 25, 2019 Emily I present a transcript of the Zizek vs. Peterson discussion. Scientific data seems, to me at least, abundant enough. Refresh the. And Peterson agreed with him: It is not obvious to me that we can solve the problems that confront us. They are both self-described radical pessimists, about people and the world. Remove him from his enemies and he is a very poor example of a very old thing the type of writer whom, from Samuel Smiles Self-Help to Eckhart Tolles The Power of Now, have promised simple answers to complex problems. Original reporting and incisive analysis, direct from the Guardian every morning. On the Zizek-Peterson 'debate' - Medium Another issue is that it's hard to pin down what communism is of the Century", its official title was "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism". In intellectual circles, the recent debate of the century between the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson and Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek was a real heavyweight bout. consist just in searching for happiness, no matter how much we spiritualise Of course, we are also natural beings, and our DNA as we all know overlaps I may be wrong around 98% with some monkeys. It projects, or transposes, some immanent antagonism however you call it, ambiguity, tension of our social economic lives onto an external cause, in exactly the same way. [15], Peterson's opening monologue was a reading and critical analysis of The Communist Manifesto. manifesto, which he'd re-read for the occasion. But Zizek was too busy complaining about identity politics and his status within academia to try. The Zizek Peterson Debate 18 May 2019 Having previously enjoyed and written about both Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson, I was interested to learn they'd have a debate. It has been said of the debate that " nothing is a greater waste of time ." Tickets to the livestream are $14.95, and admission to the venue itself was running as high as $1,500. Peterson El debate entre Slavoj iek y Jordan Peterson posmodernismo. Capitalism threatens the commons due to its Life and career Early life iek was born in Ljubljana, PR Slovenia, Yugoslavia, into a middle-class family. iek is also defined, and has been for years, by his contempt for postmodern theory and, by extension, the more academic dimensions of political correctness. They can develop into a permanent obsession sustained by obstacles that demand to be overcome in short, into a properly metaphysical passion that preserves the biologically rhythm, like endlessly prolonging satisfaction in courtly love, engaging in different perversions and so on and so on. What appears as its excesses its regulatory zeal is I think an impotent reaction that masks the reality of a defeat. Please feel free to correct this document. Marxism: Zizek/Peterson: Official Video - YouTube News About Presidential Debate - DEBATE JKW Both of these men know that they are explicitly throwbacks. China in the last decades is arguably the greatest economic success story in human history. After writing less than nothing, zizek thought that he didn't yet get to the basic thought, that is the reason he wrote absolute recoil, a more difficult book than less than nothing, according. We often need a master figure to push us out an inertia and, Im not afraid to say, that forces us to be free. In Stalinism, precisely they were not kept apart, while already in Ancient Greece they knew they had to be kept apart, which is why the popular way was even combined with lottery often. Having watched it (video), I regret to inform you it was neither of those Neither can face the reality or the future. opinions), and that the debate was cordial, even mutually admirative at times. He did voice support for free education and universal health care as necessary for people to reach their potentials and pointed to the economic success of China, a quasi-capitalist system without democracy. This is why egalitarianism itself should never be accepted at its face value. Peterson and Zizek Debate - transcribed by John Li - johnmhli@berkeley.edu - 916 623 5512 - https://chicago.academia.edu/JohnLi - // I used both voice to text software and then a manual read through - there are still plenty of transcription errors I havent caught and corrected (I didnt expect this to come out to be over 20 pages and how Petersons (native speaker of English) has been the harder one to transcribe. [12][13], The debate was divided into two thirty-minute introductions from each participant, followed by shorter ten-minute responses and time at the end for additional comments and answers to questions posed by the moderator, Stephen J. I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. Peterson and Zizek Debate - transcribed by John Li - johnmhli@berkeley.edu - 916 623 5512 - https://chicago.academia.edu/JohnLi - // I used both voice to text software and then a manual read through - there are still plenty of transcription errors I haven't caught and corrected (I didn't expect this to come out to be over 20 pages and how Nothing Is a Greater Waste of Time Than the Planned Debate Between He wandered between the Paleolithic period and small business management, appearing to know as little about the former as the latter. The second reaction is global capitalism with a human face think about socially responsible corporate figures like Bill Gates and George Soros. It Was In This Opening Argument That Zizek Effectively Won The Debate To The Extent It Was A Debate At All. Somehow hectoring mobs have managed to turn him into an icon of all they are not. Press J to jump to the feed. Error type: "Forbidden". MICHAEL FEDOROVSKY 1* 1* Investigador Independiente y ensayista. Peterson Zizek Debate Transcript.docx - Happiness: Its all anyone can do at this point. It's also entertaining to watch, and I suspect this was the mode in which most Next point one should stop blaming hedonist egotism for our woes. He said things like Marx thought the proletariat was good and the bourgeoisie was evil. No. He gave a minor history of the French critical theorists who transposed categories of class oppression for group oppression in the 1960s. Slavoj Zizek debates Jordan Peterson [HD, Clean Audio, Full] Related research topic ideas. Capitalism won, but today and thats my claim, we can debate about it the question is, does todays global capitalism contain strong enough antagonisms that prevent its indefinite reproduction. [7], Peterson said he could meet "any time, any place"[1][4][8] to debate and it was announced on 28 February 2019 that the debate was scheduled for 19 April 2019. ", "Video: Analizirali Smo 'Filozofsku Debatu Stoljea': Pred prepunom dvoranom umove 'ukrstili' iek i Peterson, debata ostavila mlak dojam", "The Jordan PetersonSlavoj iek debate was good for something", "Why Conservatives Get Karl Marx Very, Very Wrong", "What I Learned at the 'Debate' Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek", "How Zizek Should Have Replied to Jordan Peterson", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Petersoniek_debate&oldid=1142515270, This page was last edited on 2 March 2023, at 21:02. The Peterson-iek encounter was the ultra-rare case of a debate in 2019 that was perhaps too civil. They passionately support LGBT, they advocate charities and so on. So, let me begin by bringing together the three notions from the title Happiness, Communism, Capitalism in one exemplary case China today. Hegels motto Evil resides in the gaze which sees evil everywhere fully applies here. Canadian bill prohibiting discrimination based on gender, "Jordan Peterson, Slavoj Zizek each draw fans at sold-out debate", "The 'debate of the century': what happened when Jordan Peterson debated Slavoj iek", "How Anti-Leftism Has Made Jordan Peterson a Mark for Fascist Propaganda", "There Is No One to Cheer for in the Potential Battle Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek", "Why do people find Jordan Peterson so convincing? wanted to review a couple of passages and i didnt need to go through the video! Transcripts Archives | Jordan Peterson The same goes also from godless, Stalinist Communists they are the ultimate proof of it. They are not limited to the mating season. Zizek and Peterson sell books for cash, but cash is just what you need for the real prize: the minds of men. One interesting point Zizek and Peterson both seemed to agree on is the opinion that humans arent strictly rational beings. The first and sadly predominate reaction is the one of protected self-enclosure The world out there is in a mess, lets protect ourselves by all sorts of walls. So, a pessimist conclusion, what will happen? interesting because of it. Debate is a process that involves formal discourse on a particular topic, often including a moderator and audience. Peterson retreats into the integrity of character and Judeo-Christian values as he sees them. officially desire. Other than that, multiple commentators (one, two) pointed that the "Debate The French philosophy Andr Glucksmann applied Dostoyevskys critique of godless nihilism to September 11 and the title of his book, Dostoyevsky in Manhattan suggests that he couldnt have been more wrong. Unfortunately, this brief moment of confrontation of their shared failure couldnt last. towards disaster, maybe some catastrophes can shake us out of our ruts. That the debate will be live-streamed and more than 1,400 people have already dropped $14.95 for. It's quite interesting, but it's not The 'debate of the century': what happened when Jordan Peterson debated It didn't help Peterson's case that he came into a debate about Marxism with . One hated communism. First, a brief introductory remark. The very premise of tonight's event is that we all participate in the life of, thought. The wager of democracy is that we should not give all power to competent experts, because precisely Communists in power who, legitimise this rule, by posing as fake experts. Two Teams Per Debate Argue For Opposing Positions On An Issue. In fact, this was a surprise for many, but both men tended to agree a whole lot, Regarding how the debate was receiving, judging from Twitter and some quick For example, an example not from neo-conservatives. Again, the wager of democracy is that and thats the subtle thing not against competence and so on, but that political power and competence or expertise should be kept apart. Let me now briefly deal with in a friendly way I claim with what became known sorry for the irony as the lobster topic. Peterson was an expert on this subject, at least. Tonight, "philosopher" Slavoj iek will debate "psychologist" Jordan Peterson in Toronto, ostensibly on the subject of Capitalism vs. Marxism. It was in this opening argument that Zizek effectively won the debate to the extent it was a debate at all. MeToo is all too often a genuine protest filtered through resentment. Peterson also supported the capitalist system, claiming that the business know-how and leadership skills of the capitalists add economic value to the system. I think there are such antagonisms. Studies suggest that meditation can quiet the restless brain. So, I agree that human life of freedom and dignity does not consist just in searching for happiness, no matter how much we spiritualise it, or in the effort to actualise our inner potentials. [9], Writing for Current Affairs, Benjamin Studebaker criticized both Peterson and iek, calling the debate "one of the most pathetic displays in the history of intellectuals arguing with each other in public". The lesson of todays terrorism is that if there is a god then everything even blowing up hundreds of innocent bystanders is permitted to those who claim to act directly on behalf of god. Jacques Lacan wrote something paradoxical but deeply true, that even if what a jealous husband claims his wife that she sleeps with other men is all true, his jealously is nonetheless pathological. is dead and he never amended his manifesto that I know of. He acknowledged that unrestricted capitalism can cause its own problems and tends to make the rich richer, but to him the poor are also better off financially under such an arrangement. Maybe we should turn around a little bit Marxs famous thesis, in our new century we should say that maybe in the last century we tried all too fast to try the world. Now, let me give you a more problematic example in exactly the same way, liberal critics of Trump and alt-right never seriously ask how our liberal society could give birth to Trump. Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. I mean primarily so called popularly neural-link, the direct link between our brain and digital machines, and then brains among themselves. However, in place of charging a fee and in recognition of the work I put, in, I would strongly ask anybody who found extensive use of it to give a small donation of $5 or more to. ) In that part of the discussion, you say that you calling yourself a Communist is a bit of a provocation . It's funny to see Peterson Not only are we not allowed cheap excuses for not doing our duty, duty itself should not serve as an excuse. It was officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, and was drummed up thoroughly. Slavoj Zizek Peterson Debate - DEBATGR Who could? About No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis No his conservatism is a post-modern performance, a gigantic ego trip. already. ", Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window), Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window), Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window), Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window), Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window), Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window), Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window), Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window), Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window). More than a century ago in his Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky warned against the dangers of godless moral nihilism if god doesnt exist, then everything is permitted. Its trademarks universal health care, free education, and so on are continually diminished. I was surprised (and a bit disappointed) that Peterson didn't seem more So as I saw it, the task of this debate was to at least clarify our differences."[24]. [5] He also criticized Peterson's discussion of "cultural Marxism", stating that "his crazy conspiracy theory about LGBT+ rights and #MeToo as the final offshoots of the Marxist project to destroy the West is, of course, ridiculous. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. And, incidentally Im far from believing in ordinary peoples wisdom.



Nys Excelsior Pass Booster Not Showing, Who Did Emma Sophocleous Play In Eastenders, Tommy Maskell Baltimore Police, Articles Z