Slavoj Zizek - Talk At Princeton With Cornel West

[@NoofGoof]

Oh My God. Zizek & West together. 2 of my favorites. Yay.

[@sorinruga3434]

Check out the michael brooks show brother, they just had a little special

[@JovaCozzo]

@@sorinruga3434 literally came here to say this ahah amazing

[@DaboooogA]

Protip: This is a video of Cornel West Listening to Slavoj Zizek

[@nicanornunez9787]

"on 20 years we will take power" 5 years to go.

[@azure5644]

Only 4!

[@ArmLegLegArmHead47]

3 more to go

[@swagman2269]

2

[@ay_U_K_Buddy]

Mr. Cornel West is indeed running for the president

[@ufkun20]

POV: You came here after watching them on TMBS

[@christopher1474]

on what?

[@intersticesimplication7741]

Zizek & West are brothers.

[@ozzytesfatz9506]

I love how this guy talk

[@howtomakeamonster]

starts at 3:28

[@AirSandFire]

Thank you for this insightful comment and for letting us know what is distracting you.

[@MrWhooy]

This "tic" is called "being Eastern European".

[@RobertKwapich]

Was that a conversation Zizek with West? Or rather: Zizek talking entirely throughout the whole movie, with an interruption of West? Nevertheless it's worth to watch it.

[@sebastianquilt]

I love Cornel's comments at the end: Oh, we got a whole lot to say! They went off to the café or pub for the night, alone and had a good time I should think! Of course! Great minds will, if left unfettered by agents (almost 95% of them are without agents, so they care about thinking and truth more than anything, so they do the whole private thing. It's great. Would've been cool to be there!)

[@nightoftheworld]

1:13:23 *the chicken in us* "Like the chicken in us-it highlights the traumatic core of the modern subject and in many ways what I see in your work is the centrality of the catastrophic, the monstrous and the traumatic and even Jacques Lacan is a kind of _means by which_ you force us to come to terms with the traumatic-and postmodern moves of cynicism and relativism and nihilism and so forth are simply modes of evasion that somehow don't want us to come to terms with that _traumatic core._ "

[@intersticesimplication7741]

Scientifically the gap is everywhere. There's no form without void.

[@OliverHaddo]

... inspirational talk about belief ...

[@scholar1972]

Zizek forces the reader to think outside of his and her box of thought.

[@MultiHogleg]

Basically he is talking about the way in which people believe today, and how belief can exist in social reality itself, rather than within yourself - he also talks about the way Christianity contains this kind of belief - that by dying on the cross, God is split from himself (in the sense that Christ is God, but says "God, why have you forsaken me?") - it's more complicated and the implications are hard to explain but that's as simple as I think I can make it

[@cbawt]

I don't think it would have been abandoned at all. It's also near inconceivable that we should forget such fundamental notions. Anyone can say anything they wan't. Whether you believe them or take them seriously is the only significant merit you have to give them. It's been quite a few centuries since academia generally accepted an appeal to anything but sensible rational inquiry. There really is a multitude of ideas that one could introduce you to, that zizek deals with. i'll continue..

[@cbawt]

...Just to add, i will be happy to recommend literature that is not his own as well to back up specific notions (in so far as it is a notion i understand and have experience with myself of course :)

[@robertoivanperezluna6467]

recommend it, period. it seems to me, you are alone and angry because you think you are free or have something that no one recognizes in you, just be you, you do you, but really... bitching in youtube about philosophy????

[@Medytacjusz]

becouse zizek is such a prolific speaker, there are many lectures on YT that have too much recycled content and are of lower quality (at least to someone who's familiar with Zizek's thought). This, though, is one of his best. Especially the Q + A section / Cornel West section. Shame that the audio quality prevents me from understanding some of the questions posed.

[@aydnofastro-action1788]

Funny.. Slavoy reveals in another talk that he is not versed in Nietszche.. But his critique of Buddhism resonates exactly with Nietzsche in " The Anti-Christ."

[@bozoc2572]

As much as Nietzche was a brilliant thinker and a prophet. I would not take his views on Buddhism too seriously. Same for Žižek.

[@karl-arnal]

Cornel West starts around 2:18, but the sound is really bad, does someone knows if there is a better quality recording? such an interesting document should have better sound

[@nightoftheworld]

1:24:05 *night of the world* "Again-I think the best sign/index of the shift from enlightenment to German Idealism is the change, the fundamental change in the metaphor for the subject. In enlightenment the subject is the _light_ and when you are haunted by darkness, darkness tries to invade into you from the outside. But with German Idealism, with Schelling and Hegel explicitly, they both refer to that mystical language, _night of the world._ Night/darkness is the term for the very excessive, crazy core of subjectivity and here, not only Schelling, but Hegel should be re-read [...] "he has there wonderful twenty pages of notes (reconstructed afterwards from his improvisations in his lecture course) about how _madness_ is inherent there and how the whole then of civilized mind/language is desperate attempt to contain this madness-we don't have time to go into this.."

[@dylanvoisard]

56:38 prime example of corporate sales logic-pumping up the fantasy constellation of identity to fully capitalize on ideology.

[@jonahlubin638]

at the beginning does zizek say "i do not really want to chat"

[@nightoftheworld]

1:27:25 *atheism as a moment in divine life* "You know my paradox would be the following one-and we agree here more than it may appear. When I say atheism what I try to assert is, and I'm trying to be precise here, _atheism as a moment in divine life itself._ What I'm _totally_ opposed to is this simplistic, stupid Feuerbach reading of Christianity as 'the incarnation of Christ means that really God becomes man' but in this stupid sense that 'humanity is the Truth of God we just have to accept that God was our fantasy and so on'. I agree with you, I totally reject it."

[@youkoshi]

@youkoshi He starts at 1:10:40

[@youkoshi]

When does Dr. West start to respond/speak?

[@MrWhooy]

starts around 3:00

[@cbawt]

...I'm going to recommend you watch this video of his on here called "the reality of the virtual", it's probably one of the most focused videos on youtube where he presents his thought without too diversion. No one can force you to agree with Zizek or even think he makes sense... In the end, all there is, is what you clearly and distinctly percieve to be truth, and what you can infer and deduce from that :)

[@karl-arnal]

sorry, 1:18 not 2:18

[@marutanray]

does anyone understand this abstract stuff? true there is humor in between. but i have no idea where this guy is going? am i the only one?

[@Lambda_Ovine]

No, but you're the only one admitting it.

[@jimbo5276]

@@Lambda_Ovine 🤦‍♂️

[@cbawt]

For this reply i will only talk about the steven pinker comment (which i didn't know he made, but i may have made the comment myself :) so here goes) Zizek as he makes clear often, calls people idiots whenever he disagrees with them - and usually does so with a smiley. About Steven pinker, he is a productive fellow, but is himself quite dismissive with areas of linguistics and connective areas of philosophy - and has made statements revealing that he lacks basic philosophical knowledge there.

[@cbawt]

You're asking for something way too broad. The man wrote 50+ books himself... and you're asking for something substantial. There is no magic potion here. Just like you would attain any real knowledge you have to engage it from different sides and give yourself time with it. Astrology makes "substantial" predictions, without as you say, "substantial" evidence. If you choose a narrower scope than "zizeks ideas" as such - i will be more than happy to recommend some literature.

[@robertoivanperezluna6467]

so? you dont agree, fine, just dont bitch about it as if your preconceptions and "subjectivity" are better, you are doing what you hate in zizek, just because you dont use insults, doesnt mean you are not imposing your views

[@Liberalviewer1]

@hyevoltage Agreed. I guess Zizek hasn't met many atheists!

[@iseeicyicetea]

his voice is also pretty distracting ;-) lucky for him, he has some really interesting things to say.

[@prasantbanerjee8199]

very poor audio.

[@cbawt]

Your comparison to psycho-analysis only makes it more condescending i am afraid. I will give you an overworked platitude only because it seems fitting. Freud himself, as well as psychoanalysis, are "victims" of his success in the sense that some ideas which seem obvious to us today are ideas that he literally invented. As an example almost all kinds of advertisement seen today are direct products of the understanding of the human psyche fathered by freud. "Subconsciously" is not a medical term.

[@cbawt]

I'm not a communist no. I think i see the appeal, and i have a kind of fascination with the bolsjevik revolution, but i think anyone with a heart and interest in history does. On political ideology, i am not really too interested in that part of Zizek's work. I like many political thinkers, both right and left wing, but i think the way Zizek is involved in these topics is more banner-carrying than actual theory - and as such i don't know what i would need him for, if that makes sense?

[@intersticesimplication7741]

God as superego. Interesting. Theoretical bullshit 4 da win

[@elkezwinge]

What kind of illness Zizek is presenting? He likes the show, speaks a lot and what does he realy say? I can compare him with a german guy Heribert Münkler, who is open for "humanitarian" interventions. I am not impressed by Zizeks line of "philosophical"- "scientifical" words more or less nonsense...