Slavoj Žižek and Graham Harman in conversation, moderated by Anna Neimark (March 1, 2017)

[@cskolnik1]

Great conversation. A real dialogue. Zizek and Harman really inspired, responsive, and gracious here. SCI-Arc setting a high standard of civil academic discourse.

[@gujono.eiriksson8553]

dialog? almost more like a monolog

[@hainish2381]

From time to time, I listen to this talk again. Absolutely brilliant!

[@walterramirezt]

From time to time I listen to this talk again to see if I can understand it then lol

[@hainish2381]

@@walterramirezt :)))) I guess I do it for the same reason.

[@WolfAndLamb3]

Same!

[@yararocha7139]

@@walterramirezthjlh KKhK hh lhe hhlhlhhh

[@yararocha7139]

Jflhjgkdhlhgl

[@graysonjd5624]

From their talks I’ve watched, Slavoj and Harman paired are my favorite to watch, they seem to really enjoy talking with and listening to each other, and they are excited about it.

[@MrsSippi75070]

That part.

[@yanik435]

Agree

[@farrider3339]

That's what I would call a friendly open debate. What fascinates me, how can someone like Harman ever write a book. I imagine his mode of thinking even 10 x faster than his talking😮

[@maxcano2063]

Dude... After 4 years I'm going back to this debate and finding so many problems to resolve!!! This is historical

[@Antiposmoderno]

this is gold

[@shmaughn]

Zizek wound up being the moderator.

[@erikschmitt5262]

The comment that the Peloponnesian war had to be fought so Thucydides could write his history reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut saying the only positive outcome of Dresden being bombed was so he could write his book Slaughterhouse-Five. Such a thought provoking way to view history and its impact on the creative process.

[@rareselsase]

Mr.Harman, it s smart, Zizek it s a true genius. Not saing that Harman is not briliand. Just that from the begining you can observ some kind of perspective limitations. From my point of wiew he have a briliand mind , but he his allmost at his 100% procent, and by comparision with Mr . Zizek who is allways at 100% in each of his 0.01% of mind. Zizek can make a great mind limited just by a simple word. He can allmost creeate a new ideea for himself just to be, and Harman as a majority of people create ideea s just to combat not for creation. Zizek crate for the pasion of it, Herman create to be seen.

[@rohxn6988]

Why is the quality so shit for 2017. It makes sense tho

[@guy936]

I like what Harman is saying quite a bit, but why does he speak so fast?

[@lattematcha1661]

1:46:00 This audience guy made a great point that we need a computational version of ontology, a synthesis between Kant, Hegel, and Leibniz.

[@TorneHeichou]

Not much about ontology, but read Intelligence and Spirit maybe.

[@torusg]

That audience guy is Karl Chu.

[@windokeluanda]

Excellent!

[@bogdanandone9022]

Amazing one. I really enjoyed how they didn’t punk Latour out of it great quality !

[@TudorStubei]

interesting how would a talk like this would look like in the after pandemic world

[@gonzogil123]

38:38min. I am making my way through his ouvre, and a good question would be "What led him to write for the Vatican as well"?

[@gabrielajonczyk5663]

They were talking about mathematic covering everything and then appears "who is you".

[@rickysturgis4614]

Great talk, but hate that the audience was allowed to contribute. Except for Kipnis, kipnis is ok.

[@dimo5477]

Why

[@kanishkkaushik780]

16:50

[@MassimoAngotzi]

Thank you!

[@Sosarchives]

1:14:25 😂😂😂

[@jamesbubbastewartjr]

Harman was amazing.

[@timaeustestified3951]

they should have showed. youre a big guy. at the start.

[@brianglass8310]

"conversation"

[@RYBATUGA]

1:06:13 1:06:47

[@redbruhcolli]

The face of Graham while Žižek talks lol "but but but *cracks a joke.... you see Lacan you know *cracks a joke... Hegelian " The number of "but" Žižek throws is too damn high.

[@brandgardner211]

Note to Harmon: try decaf

[@kvaka009]

Try spelling names correctly. But yeah his hype gives Zizek a run.

[@billmao5040]

Great till QM pops up. Both of them are obviously not well versed in QM. Foundation of QM is a vast field which has gone way beyond Bohr and Heisenberg

[@swagatosaha]

Copenhagen still remains the dominant interpretation of Quantum Physics though.

[@dkim7338]

Ok

[@PCMcGee1]

I think I disagree with Slavoj, it's not that reality is imperfect and cannot be known, but that it is infinite, and always escapes complete understanding. The more that we know, the more we find out about what we don't yet know. Imagine that no amount of information will ever encompass the infinity of the unknown.

[@kidscadbuttended]

That´s an horrible argument...

[@oneshot2028]

How does Zizek KNOW that reality is imperfect and cannot be known??? Or is it his 'belief'???

[@natenatenate10]

@@kidscadbuttended a*

[@dethkon]

That’s interesting. I have an impossible time comprehending “Infinity.” My understanding it’s that it’s obviously not a number, but it is a symbol (same with 0). In this way, both “0” and “infinity” signify the same thing, no? I think there maybe is a tautology in your argument. “Information” can never penetrate or be present in the “unknown” (0/infinity), because otherwise it would be “known” by definition, right? And so if we take this thing (or rather, “non-thing”) as “The Real,” both Žižek and Harmon seem to believe that it can only be pointed towards, or talked around, but never accurately talked about. I believe Lacan would say that this 0/Infinity/Real is a sort of unmediated void from which Experience/Reality itself emerges from. Analogous to a black hole, perhaps, which we only know exists because of what it’s not: a “non-thing” remainder of which no light/information exists.

[@rareselsase]

@@dethkon nice

[@tinodiwataguma4936]

pakabatwa basa apa.......

[@TheGoodMorty]

"all my indian friends would much rather be called 'indian' than 'native american'" uh, citation needed, slavoj

[@dethkon]

I think that was the citation, no? Whether you believe him or not depend would depend on the level of faith. I don’t know if he’s being truthful or not, but I appreciate the anecdote for the sort of inversion of colonial attitudes that it provides.

[@TheGoodMorty]

@@dethkon Yeah you're right about that. since posting this comment, I have heard this from enough sources to believe it's at least an acceptable common term, most importantly hearing this from native people directly.

[@MrHerzog333]

Ontological incompleteness makes it so you can't speak of discrete objects existing out there, in-themselves. Also, can you guys even believe that Harman said we should "stop complaining about capitalism and neo-liberalism", because, according to him, this will somehow help with finding a solution to climate change and the refugee crisis? Harman is more disconnected from reality than Trump.

[@georgeeinstein781]

An education using the same principles as capitalism will prepare a society to experience the ideal of Capitalism !!!

[@ComradeDt]

My god Harman is painful to listen to

[@herbertmasing]

The way Žižek jokes about the gulag does not seem that funny after the lockdowns and isolation camps in some of the highly developed countries in 2021/2.

[@herbertmasing]

@Hoenheim Elric they did not start with sending millions to Siberia in the first year either. The important thing was that the society accepted it then and accepts it now. Nothing has changed. The lockdown culture around the world showed that gulag could have happened anywhere.. the western masses are no different from the eastern. Unfortunately.

[@herbertmasing]

@Hoenheim Elric Sorry for the late reply! Changes in human rights and the way the society perceives it should be scary. I'm not sure what do you mean by American concentration camps (Guantanamo?), but my perception of the gulag is based on the memoirs and books by Russian prisoners: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Varlam Shalamov, Evgenija Ginzburg, Vadim Tumanov, Yury Dombrovsky. When uneducated people are scared of a huge invisible enemy, they very easily start doing cruel horrible things.