Guide to Žižek: The Plague of Fantasies

If you'd like to support my work and listen to this (and all previous lectures), join my Patreon here:
/ 84188368
You can also read the essay version of this lecture here:
/ 84415244

[@WanderingExistence]

Wow- Julian, I am always amazed by your ability to continue in your flow of consciousness while making each piece relevant. I mean extremely relevant, nearly every topic you touch on in your flow of consciousness brings up memories of my interactions with these concepts. From the paranoic and hysterical sexual relationship to the bourgeois commodification of cultural objects and the need to contextualize one's own self as a object in an other's eyes. It's always amazingly enlightening, and sometimes admittedly too close to home as the layers of my unconscious past get revealed to me. I am so very thankful that you put these up for free as Im unemployed due to PTSD, in a way this philosophy has been unintentionally therapeutic (But I guess that's what you get when you get into psychoanalysis). Thank you for you and your partner's assistance in making these concepts understandable.

[@julianphilosophy]

Thank you, that means so much to me. Wishing you all the best in your learning and recovery. Personally I would agree that philosophy is therapeutic

[@julianphilosophy]

Hope you enjoyed this lecture. I really tried to make this as complete an intro to Žižek’s thought as I could in 55 minutes. If you’d like to purchase my intro to Žižek ebook and download all of my lectures, they’re available on patreon. Here: www.patreon.com/jenalineandjulian

[@matthewpaluszak9937]

“Ideology gives us pre-packaged fantasies. Essentially it gives us-“ advertisement cuts in. The video as presented by KZbin is truer than the lecture Julian himself recorded

[@julianphilosophy]

Hence why the critique of ideology isn’t just the content, but to identify the hidden content within the structure itself 👍

[@SohaHashemi-p5i]

Your videos are blessing. Im from Iran & You have many viewers between my colleagues

[@anneallison6402]

One example I can think of for "what had to occur in the first place for this comodity to appear as valuable to you" are SUVs in which car producers rather than fulfilling the demand, they created it through markeing and selling the idea it was cool and safer to have them

[@g_hundman]

The glossery is getting larger and larger. Surplus enjoyment.

[@WanderingExistence]

Surplus enjoyment is such an interesting concept. I bought myself an "enjoy capitalism" shirt through Amazon... Just for the sheer ironic surplus enjoyment. It's not about the content of the shirt, it's about the content repressed within the form of the shirt and the sociological structures in which I got the shirt.... And the pure cynical irony in which I willingly indulged in the capitalistic gestalt that I cannot seem to escape.

[@g_hundman]

@@WanderingExistence we know we're doing it, and still we're doing it...

[@joshparrott8841]

I am reminded how the dopaminergic system works whenever I hear the treadmill-like nature of modern life explained like this. Physiological mechanisms are known that explain such psychoanalytic phenomena. Robert Supolski would probably agree and has alot to say about (the physiological mechanisms)

[@Anabsurdsuggestion]

Brilliantly done.

[@Ledhoven]

Maravilloso 😊

[@diegomoreno9557]

I always perceived this fantasy plague in my mind but I never had a name for it .

[@Nihil01]

19:30 21:10 - 23:23 31:51 - 36:11 48:08 - 50:32 beautiful points! Another great lecture Julien!!!! I think this one will become one of my favorite^^

[@julianphilosophy]

So very kind, thank you. I recorded this one whilst feeling quite I’ll and with a bit of a fever, so I’m glad it didn’t show!

[@Nihil01]

@@julianphilosophy I didn't notice that you had a bit of a fever. You looked as healthy als always! Hope you are doing good now though^^

[@gore66sick]

Julian says "Brasil" the right way

[@sandwormleto3358]

this was beautiful, thank you

[@ievgenpylypchuk1827]

Thanks !

[@Leonardo-el6sq]

I think this one was particularly brilliant

[@shipaoroa401]

2:00 introduction 3:00 plague of fanasy

[@shipaoroa401]

Plague: ongoing inquiry to the Unknown, as if they are they enjoyment we seek for

[@shipaoroa401]

Fantasy: structure our reality

[@shipaoroa401]

Idealogy: prepackaged fantasy (e.g. tv version)

[@marlie4872]

15:54 21:34 37:07 40:42 48:03

[@scottharrison812]

I think Christianity was the fantasy which characterised much of my life … and (and in the sense that Peter Rollins described in “The Divine Magician” - I believed TOO much (thus I was the classic psychotic subject). At the end of religious belief I have found no “replacement fantasy”, and thus find myself adrift … “Without a supplementing fantasy reality is inaccessible to the subject” … so… in a sense, I experience reality as alien and inaccessible…

[@ThorianSaga]

Is plague of fantasies related to mid life crisis?

[@ricardoqueiruga3971]

I would like to ask you something in order to understand couple of things that I find at least kind of ambioguous in lacanian psychoanalysis and that maybe explain the "professional option" and the political and "anticlinal" lacanian use of Žižek. I find it ambiguous, I don´tknow what you think, the status of Big Other. If Big Other belongs to symbolic while little other belongs to the imaginary, but after all, Big Other doesn´t exist (then it is imaginary), is it not the idea of the symbolic, the postion of "official" psychoanalisis respect the symbolic (not only language, also law), i would say, "ambivalent" (in the freudian sens if you want)? It doesn´t mean to accept the fiction while we should accept that in fact is a lie, but still remaining in the supposed "need" of that fiction, that is, the structure (then, in my opinion, the ambiguous position of Big Other as symbolic need)? I guess psychoanalysts would say that the symbolic is need in order to be "socialized", and then you realize about the fiction (the fact that reality itself is structured as a fanatasy, it means, the limits of the symbolic, the need of the very fiction), but still sometimes I find it ambiguous... Does Žižek share this point of he is more radical? Thank you!

[@ricardoqueiruga3971]

Just something more that can clarify the point I was asking because I can understand it´s quite confusing. In the last part of the video when you say that, as long as the commodity is the sublime object of ideology, and that in that point lacanian analysis of ideology should render, for Žižek, the revolutionary marxism, (I agree that point), I just wonder if that´s implicit or not in lacanian psychoanalisis. I know that Lacan was not a marxist despite he used in a very specific way important marxist concepts, but I just ask you if till that point Žižeks lacanism is or is not compatible with official lacanism, in a very banal way, for example, does lacanism question family as institution, or, as Deleuze and Guattari suggest, sustains it as a supposed part of culture, as Oedipus? It´s in that way that I was asking you for the difference between symbolic and imaginery in ideology, for example, for Žižek... Does Lacan have a theory of ideology? I guess it should be the same as the Levi-Straussian theory of mythology, related, I guess, to thigs like "point de capiton" or "consistency"... But I couldn´t find any specific place where he describes things like "ideology", and very few where he clarifies concepts like "discourse", and how registers are there codified or structured... I guess I know how it should work but still wonder if there´s any specific place... Sorry for the extension... Thank you..

[@dtskdtsk8599]

There is no “pleasure of fantasies” If zizek had any originality or ideals of his own he would feel as accomplished as any other groundbreaking philosopher trophy or not.

[@reubencanningfinkel5922]

says you!

[@hamiltonmackenzie3340]

I remain unimpressed, making a living by refining confusion.

[@reubencanningfinkel5922]

@@hamiltonmackenzie3340 nice! i don't see which of Zizek's theories you find refined confusion--but i'd love to hear which ones! i mean, considering his output alone--as author, public figure--being unimpressed seems like a weird stance to have. but, again//what specific theories are 'refined confusion'? does the same hold for Lacan, Hegel, Althusser AND Marx?!?! wow!!

[@Anabsurdsuggestion]

This is both angry and creepy at the same time.

[@reubencanningfinkel5922]

what is happening here