zizek peterson debate transcript zizek peterson debate transcript

Please feel free to correct this document. 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. However, I would like to add here a couple of qualifications. Directly sharing your experience with our beloved may appear attractive, but what about sharing them with an agency without you even knowing it? It felt like that. Theres nothing to support, proposed Peterson, that a dictatorship of the proletariat would bring about a good outcome, especially considering the lessons of Soviet atrocities in the 20th century. Come here for focussed discussion and debate on the Giant of Ljubljana, Slavoj iek and the Slovenian school of psychoanalytically informed philosophy. Posted on August 20, 2021 by David Roman. Along the same lines, one could same that if most of the Nazi claims about Jews they exploit Germans, the seduce German girls were true, which they were not of course, their anti-Semitism would still be a pathological phenomenon, because it ignored the true reason why the Nazis needed anti-Semitism. 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. Is such a change a utopia? so that ultimately the worst thing that can happen is to get what we Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM35zlrE01k. EL DEBATE DEL SIGLO: Slavoj iek y Jordan Peterson Disfrut la discusin filosfica entre Michel Onfay y Alain Badiou , pesos pesados del pensamiento alternativo, y qued satisfecho. 76.3K ,809 . TikTok Zizek is my dad (@zizekcumsock): "From the Zizek-Peterson debate. But, it is instantly clear how this self-denigration brings a profit of its own. [16] Similarly to Winston Churchill, he concluded that "capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others". One interesting point Zizek and Peterson both seemed to agree on is the opinion that humans arent strictly rational beings. by its protagonists. The Hidden Argument in the Zizek/Peterson Debate, From a Competitive Debator | by Timothy Clark | Dialogue & Discourse | Medium 500 Apologies, but something went wrong on our end. Press J to jump to the feed. 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. Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. My hero is here a black lady, Tarana Burke, who created the #MeToo campaign more than a decade ago. We have to find some meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival. In that part of the discussion, you say that you calling yourself a Communist is a bit of a provocation . And is not the standard, but the true unconstrained consumption in all these creeps here? Furthermore, I find it very hard to ground todays inequalities as they are documented for example by Piketty in his book to ground todays inequalities in different competencies. You can find a transcript of it here. Equality can also mean and thats the equality I advocate creating the space for as many as possible individuals to develop their different potentials. The very liberal gaze with demonizes Trump is also evil because it ignores how its own failures opened up the space for Trumps type of patriotic populism. Moderated by Stephen J. Blackwood, it was held before an audience of 3,000 at Meridian Hall in Toronto on 19 April 2019. First, a brief introductory remark. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. things. Should we then drop egalitarianism? {notificationOpen=false}, 2000);" x-data="{notificationOpen: false, notificationTimeout: undefined, notificationText: ''}">, We all get monkey mind and neuroscience supports the Buddhist solution, The mystery of New Zealands Tamil Bell, an archaeological UFO. Privacy Policy. He gave a minor history of the French critical theorists who transposed categories of class oppression for group oppression in the 1960s. 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? Zizek Peterson Debate Transcript. This is again not a moral reproach. Peterson: Otherwise, the creative types would sit around and see them again. [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". We often need a master figure to push us out an inertia and, Im not afraid to say, that forces us to be free. A French guy gave me this idea, that the origin of many famous French dishes or drinks is that when they wanted to produce a standard piece of food or drink, something went wrong, but then they realised that this failure can be resold as success. My main purpose with this text is not to prove that Marx was right, but rather that Peterson's and Zizek's analysis are shortsighted and yet still give valuable insight about the state of For more information, please see our Peterson opens with a 30-minutes speech where he criticizes the communist It's hard not to crack up when out of time for About No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis It was officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, and was drummed up thoroughly. It can be watched on Jordan Peterson's channel here. Peterson blamed cultural Marxism for phenomena like the movement to respect gender-neutral pronouns which, in his view, undermines freedom of speech. And I also think this may be critical to some of you there is a problem with capitalism here for the simple reasons that its managers not because of their evil nature, but thats the logic of capitalism care to extend self-reproduction and environmental consequences are simply not part of the game. By Tom Bartlett April 4, 2019 If you want tickets for the forthcoming showdown between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek, which will be held later this month in Toronto, better act fast: There. So, I agree that human life of freedom and dignity does not Some idea make a reappearance, other are newly developed, but it's That the debate will be live-streamed and more than 1,400 people have already dropped $14.95 for. 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. Egalitarianism often de facto means, I am ready to renounce something so that others will also not have it. Debate is a process that involves formal discourse on a particular topic, often including a moderator and audience. Therefore they retreat. 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. Boston 24/7 with principal mcafee Then once you factor in the notion that much of Marxism is . [, : Thank you. They both wanted the same thing: capitalism with regulation, which is what every sane person wants. They needed enemies, needed combat, because in their solitudes, they had so little to offer. Below is the transcript of Zizek's introductory statement. Second yes, we should carry our burden and accept the suffering that goes with it. They argued whether capitalism or communism would be the best economic and political system. Who could? clear these are coherent thoughts from the same thinker. But it did reveal one telling commonality. Finally, the common space of humanity itself. This I think is the true game changed. what the debate ended up being. There was an opportunity. And that was basically it. statement. The Master and His Emissary: A Conversation with Dr. Iain McGilchrist Transcript . So, a pessimist conclusion, what will happen? Here is the original video extracted from https://www.jordanvsslavojdebate.com (livestream.com HLS source) using ffmpeg from Akamai CDN with the original audio and custom CC transcribed. Studebaker wrote that "Zizek read a bizarre, meandering, canned speech which had very little to do with anything Peterson said or with the assigned topic. This is NOT a satire/meme sub. At least Marxism is closed off now that Marx The Petersoniek debate, officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, was a debate between the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson (a clinical psychologist and critic of Marxism) and the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj iek (a psychoanalyst and Hegelian) on the relationship between Marxism, capitalism, and happiness. authors with occasional bridges being thrown accross. [1], Around 3,000 people were in Meridian Hall in Toronto for the event. The Zizek-Peterson Debate In early 2019, after the occasional potshot at one another, it was announced that iek would debate Jordan Peterson in Toronto. Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate on the concept of Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism. I wanted to know that too! And here applies the same logic to Christ himself. "If you have a good theory, forget about the reality. He has published more than three, dozen books, many on the most seminal philosophers of the 19th and 20th centuries. The second threat, the commons of internal nature. It came right at the end of ieks opening 30-minute remarks. Of course, we are also natural beings, and our DNA as we all know overlaps I may be wrong around 98% with some monkeys. [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. It can well secretly invert the standard renunciation accomplished to benefit others. Or, they were making wine in the usual way, then something went wrong with fermentation and so they began to produce champagne and so on. We have to find some When somebody tries to convince me, in spite of all these problems, there is a light at the end of the tunnel, my instant reply is, Yes, and its another train coming towards us. Life and career Early life iek was born in Ljubljana, PR Slovenia, Yugoslavia, into a middle-class family. 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. The debate, titled "Happiness: Marxism vs. Capitalism," pitted Jordan Peterson against Slavoj iek, two of the West's reigning public intellectuals. agreement (as well they should, adopting neither deluded far-left or far-right The two professors had both argued before against happiness as something a person should pursue. 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. He's the sort of aging quitter we all hope to never be. Here refugees are created. This means something, but nature I think we should never forget this is not a stable hierarchical system but full of improvisations. El debate entre iek y Peterson se produjo en Toronto, Canad. Zizek also pinpointed white liberal multiculturalism as the reason for the Lefts current political woes. In spite of protests here and there, we will probably continue to slide towards some kind of apocalypse, awaiting large catastrophes to awaken us. Through this renouncing of their particular roots, multi-cultural liberals reserve for themselves the universal position: gracefully soliciting others to assert their particular identify. Refresh the. towards disaster, maybe some catastrophes can shake us out of our ruts. And what about foreign interventions in Iraq and Syria, or by our proxies like Saudi Arabia in Yemen? El denominado "Debate del siglo" entre el filsofo y socilogo esloveno Slavoj iek y el psiclogo canadiense Jordan Peterson, fue uno de los eventos intelectuales de mayor trascendencia del ltimo tiempo. it's made of many idea nuggets only tenuously linked to one other although But, are the Chinese any happier for all that? [16] Due to lack of defence for Marxism, at one point Peterson asked iek why he associates with this ideology and not his philosophical originality, on which iek answered that he is rather a Hegelian and that capitalism has too many antagonisms for long-term peaceful sustainability. First, on how happiness is often the wrong Peterson stated that although capitalism produces inequalities, it is not like in other systems, or even parts of the world compared to the so-called Western civilization as it also produces wealth, seen in statistical data about the economic growth and reduction of poverty worldwide, providing an easier possibility to achieve happiness. Really? If there is no such authority in nature, lobsters may have hierarchy, undoubtedly, but the main guy among them does not have authority in this sense. causes (from Donald Trump to migrants). And I claim the same goes for tradition. I mean primarily so called popularly neural-link, the direct link between our brain and digital machines, and then brains among themselves. should have replied to defend communism. Id like the share the debate with a hearing impaired friend. He's also quite The size and scope of his fame registers more or less exactly the loathing for identity politics in the general populace, because it certainly isnt on the quality of his books that his reputation resides. So, where does Communism, just to conclude, where does Communism enter here? The Jordan Peterson-Slavoj iek debate was good for something Andray Domise: Debate has its place in debunking bad actors and their ideas, but it only works when the participants have. people consumed the debate. them, of all things, to French cuisine) are also worth a listen/read. They dont mention communism to legitimise their rule, they prefer the old Confucian notion of a harmonious society. As the debate ostensibly revolved around comparing capitalism to Marxism, Peterson spent the majority of his 30-minute introduction assailing The Communist Manifesto, in fact coming up with 10 reasons against it. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence The cause of problems which are, I claim, immanent to todays global capitalism, is projected onto an external intruder. Peterson El debate entre Slavoj iek y Jordan Peterson posmodernismo. The pathological element is the husbands need for jealousy as the only way for him to sustain his identity. imblazintwo 4 yr. ago What I Learned at the 'Debate' Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek iek was less a cognizant thinker and more a pathological sacred cow tipper while Peterson was a bard for the. It's quite interesting, but it's not enjoy while Zizek is his tick-ridden idiosyncratic self. Both Zizek and Peterson transcend their titles, their disciplines, and the academy, just as this debate we hope will transcend purely economic questions by situating those in the frame of happiness of human flourishing itself. In this sense, the image of Donald Trump is also a fetish, the last thing a liberal sees before confronting actual social tensions. The two generally agreed on. Still, that criticism would be salutary for most "communists" But, nonetheless, deeply divided. His charge against Peterson's argument is followed with how he thinks Zizek Does Donald Trump stand for traditional values? Just remember the outcry against my critique of LGBT+ ideology, and Im sure that if the leading figures were to be asked if I were fit to stand for them, they would turn in their graves even if they are still alive. wrote about commons before). [20] Stephen Marche of The Guardian wrote that Peterson's opening remarks about The Communist Manifesto were "vague and not particularly informed", and that Peterson seemed generally unprepared,[21] while Jordan Foissy of Vice wrote that Peterson was "completely vacuous", making "ludicrous claims like no one has ever gotten power through exploiting people". Again, even if there if the reported incidents with the refugees there are great problems, I admit it even if all these reports are true, the popularist story about them is a lie. Unfortunately, this brief moment of confrontation of their shared failure couldnt last. It's also entertaining to watch, and I suspect this was the mode in which most But market success is also not innocent and neutral as a regulatory of the social recognition of competencies. Christ was justified by the fact of being Gods son not by his competencies or capacities, as Kierkegaard put it Every good student of theology can put things better than Christ. Hegels motto Evil resides in the gaze which sees evil everywhere fully applies here. This largely contrasts Peterson's viewpoint who admittedly has never used that term to refer in any way to the associated conspiracy theory, but only to raise critique about cultural phenomena that are, according to him, directly associated with postmodern thought. The people who laugh might do it that way, he replied. Learn how your comment data is processed. There is no simple democratic solution here. Its not just that in spite of all our natural and cultural differences the same divine sparks dwells in everyone. This one is from the Guardian. A renunciation of pleasure can easily turn in pleasure of renunciation itself. 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. critcial theorists that were widely read. semi-intentionally quite funny. of the Century", its official title was "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism". This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. It Was In This Opening Argument That Zizek Effectively Won The Debate To The Extent It Was A Debate At All. Peterson's opening remarks were disappointing even for his fans in the audience. However, this is not enough. Take what is perhaps the ultimate rogue state Congo. The twentieth century left was defined by its opposition to the truth fundamental tendencies of modernity: the reign of capital with its aggressive market competition, the authoritarian bureaucratic state power. MICHAEL FEDOROVSKY 1* 1* Investigador Independiente y ensayista. cordial and respectful, something I really appreciated. back to this pre-modern state of affairs. 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. And I must agree. If you look closely, you will say that state plays today a more important role precisely in the richest capitalist economics. Iran is a land of contradictions where oppression and freedom uneasily coexist. Key Agile Release Train stakeholders, including Business Owners, What can occur as a result of not having an Innovation and Planning Iteration? Blackwood. White, multi-culturalist liberals embody the lie of identity politics. We live in one and the same world which is more and more interconnected. iek & Peterson Debate . A New World Order is emerging, a world of peaceful co-existence of civilisations, but in what way does it function? We will probably slide towards apocalypse, he said. But precisely due to the marketing, 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. "post-modern neo-marxists" and it's strange not to understand or at least know Deep underwater, temperatures are close to freezing and the pressure is 1,000 times higher than at sea level. Both rejected happiness as a primary goal for individuals and societies. On April 19th, at the Sony Centre in Toronto, these two celebrated thinkers (and Big Think contributors) went head to head in a duel promisingly-dubbed Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism. 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. 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. [15], Peterson's opening monologue was a reading and critical analysis of The Communist Manifesto. 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. of the Soviet Union would be pretty important. First, since we live in a modern era, we cannot simply refer to an unquestionable authority to confer a mission or task on us. (or both), this part is the most interesting. [1][14] Its topic was which "political-economic model provided the great opportunity for human happiness: capitalism or Marxism". I call this the tankie-bashing bit. So, the term Cultural Marxism plays that of the Jewish plot in anti-Semitism. The very premise of tonight's event is that we all participate in the life of, thought. Not that I was disappointed. 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. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. In typical Zizek fashion, There was a livestream which people could pay to access that peaked at around 6,000 viewers. Cookie Notice with its constellation of thinkers. Answer (1 of 5): Well, that 'debate' occurred in April of 2019. yardstick: In our daily lives, we pretend to desire things which we do not really desire, Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism: the Peterson and iek Debate, I am releasing this transcript free of charge to best facilitate free use discussion of, the debate and the two authors. I encourage you to watch the video or read the transcript thank you! He is now a, Professor at the Institute of Sociology and Philosophy at the University of Ljubljana, and the Director of, the Birbeck Institute for the Humanities at the University of London. Please join. I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. intellectuals). 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 asked what Peterson meant by cultural Marxists when postmodern thinkers, like Foucault, werent Marxist at all.