zizek peterson debate transcript

And sure, the level of the discussion might have been unappealing to all the The event was billed as "the debate of the century", "The Rumble in the Realm of the Mind", and. His12 Rules For Lifeis a global bestseller and his lectures and podcasts are followed by millions around the world. 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. It was officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, and was drummed up thoroughly. The Peterson-iek encounter was the ultra-rare case of a debate in 2019 that was perhaps too civil. Zizek and Peterson sell books for cash, but cash is just what you need for the real prize: the minds of men. Die Analyse dieser Figur findet mit starkem Bezug zur Etablierung What's perhaps most surprising is that Zizek doesn't defend Marxism, which he 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. The same goes also from godless, Stalinist Communists they are the ultimate proof of it. I wanted to know that too! what the debate ended up being. She observed in a recent critical note that in the years since the movement began it deployed an unwavering obsession with the perpetrators. Last nights sold-out debate between Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek and Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson at the Sony Centre was pitched as a no-holds-barred throw down . Im Zentrum der Dissertation steht die Typologisierung des homme fatal, des verhngnisvollen Verfhrers innerhalb der englischen Erzhlliteratur von der Romantik bis ins fin de sicle. Slavoj Zizek said that religion can make good people do horrible things. 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. Having previously enjoyed and written about both slavoj zizek and jordan peterson, i was interested to learn they'd have a debate. Pity Jordan Peterson. This is why as many perspicuous philosophers clearly saw, evil is profoundly spiritual, in some sense more spiritual than goodness. First, a brief introductory remark. Can a giant lobster analogy ever replace a sense of humour? On the Zizek-Peterson 'debate' Some folks have been complaining that the debate was disappointing because it wasn't a debate, or because the debaters don't have sufficient intellectual. Its trademarks universal health care, free education, and so on are continually diminished. Below is the transcript of Zizeks introductory statement. He is a dazzling. 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. from the University of Paris VIII. already. I can see no threat to free creativity in this program on the contrary, I saw health care and education and so on as enabling me to focus my life on important creative issues. I deeply appreciate evolutionary talk. 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. They didnt understand what is happening to them with military defeat, economic crisis, what they perceived as moral decay, and so on. Therefore they retreat. First, on how happiness is often the wrong I see equality as a space for creating differences and yes, why not, even different more appropriate hierarchies. 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. Did we really move too much in the direction of equality? Both of these men know that they are explicitly throwbacks. (or both), this part is the most interesting. Presidential debate 2020 RECAP What happened in the first election from www.the-sun.com. However, I would like to add here a couple of qualifications. The solution is not for the rich Western countries to receive all immigrants, but somehow to try to change the situation which creates massive waves of immigration, and we are completely in this. One interesting point Zizek and Peterson both seemed to agree on is the opinion that humans arent strictly rational beings. [16] Similarly to Winston Churchill, he concluded that "capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others". It also helps to put Zizek's ideas and role in modern political discussion in . [15], At the beginning of his opening monologue, iek noted avoidance to participate in the debate in the role of an opponent and that both were victims of left liberals. By the end of his half-hour he had not mentioned the word happiness once. 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. There can be few thingsI thinknow more, urgent and necessary in an age of reactionary partisan allegiance and degraded civil discourse than real, thinking about hard questions. Neither can face the reality or the future. Egalitarianism often de facto means, I am ready to renounce something so that others will also not have it. Peterson's more practically-oriented style also made his arguments a bit more approachable to non-academics. [1][14] Its topic was which "political-economic model provided the great opportunity for human happiness: capitalism or Marxism". 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. But I nonetheless found it interesting. He seemed, in person, quite gentle. Peterson is neither a racist nor a misogynist. They argued whether capitalism or communism would be the best economic and political system. So, where does Communism, just to conclude, where does Communism enter here? increasingly erratic in the rest of the debates. It was billed as a meeting of titans and that it was not. [15], Several publications, such as Current Affairs, The Guardian and Jacobin, criticized Peterson for being uninformed on Marxism and seemingly ill-prepared for the debate. [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". 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. Similarly, he's crusading against 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. What qualifies them to pass a judgement in such a delicate matter? A good criticism is the one made by Benjamin Studebaker. Zizek's conclusion is, in his words "pessimistic": we will continue to slide The past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past end of quote. with only surface differences (some, though not all, could be chalked to their Secret Spice Girls dance parties of the wives of anti-western morality police. and our google, pretty well on the center-right, and pretty badly on the left (broadly). 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. They are not limited to the mating season. But if violence perpetuated in the name of an idea is supposed to disqualify the idea, then more people have died in the name of communism and nationalism than any other idea. Let me mention the change enacted by Christianity. {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. Hundreds of millions raised from poverty into middle class existence. Web nov 14, 2022. But, a danger lurks here, that of a subtly reversal: dont fall in love thats my position with your suffering. [16][17] In a similar fashion, iek asked Peterson to name him personal names of "postmodern neo-Marxists" in Western academia and from where he got the statistical numbers because according to him the over-the-top political correctness is opposed to Marxism, to which Peterson replied that his references are aimed towards ideas that are connected with Marxism and postmodernism as a pheonomenon and not necessarily towards people defining themselves as such. Id like the share the debate with a hearing impaired friend. Globalnews.ca your source for the latest news on presidential debate. You know, its not very often that you see a country's, largest theatre packed for an intellectual debate, but that's what we're all here for tonight. Email: [email protected] Resumen: La presente colaboracin es una resea sobre el debate llevado a cabo entre los intelectuales de izquierda y derecha, About No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis Hegels motto Evil resides in the gaze which sees evil everywhere fully applies here. Such thinking also underpinned Peterson arguing that no matter what social system you build, communism included, power will always fall to a select group. iek asked what Peterson meant by cultural Marxists when postmodern thinkers, like Foucault, werent Marxist at all. Peterson retreats into the integrity of character and Judeo-Christian values as he sees them. Thanks for you work. 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. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence 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. [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. Studies suggest that meditation can quiet the restless brain. 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? 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. This I think is the true game changed. Believers call him God the Father. But can God be called a man? Ive been a professor, so I know what its like to wake up with a class scheduled and no lecture prepared. Both rejected happiness as a primary goal for individuals and societies. Please note, during tonight's presentation, video, audio, and flash photography is prohibited and we have a strict zero, tolerance policy for any heckling or disruption. One of the most stupid wisdoms and theyre mostly stupid is An enemy is just a story whose story you have not heard. strongest point. 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. ", "Snimka dvoboja titana ieka i Petersona", "HRT Je Jedina Televizija U Europi Koja Je Dobila Pravo Prikazati 'Debatu Stoljea': Evo kada moete pogledati filozofski dvoboj iek - Peterson", "Jordan Peterson vs Slavoj iek was more a performance than a debate", "Jordan Peterson i Slavoj iek: Debata stoljea ili precijenjeni show? 2 define the topic, if . 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. the cold war, and it would seem to me that understanding the ideological roots Having watched it (video), I regret to inform you it was neither of those either, but points a problem with capitalism on what Marx called "commons" (I 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. No. "Qu produce ms felicidad, el marxismo o el capitalismo?". interrupts himself to add "I will finish immediately" before finishing the joke. T. S. Eliot, the great conservative, wrote, quote what happens when a new work of art is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the work of art which preceded it. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. Furthermore, I think that social power and authority cannot be directly grounded in competence. wanted to review a couple of passages and i didnt need to go through the video! In our human universe, power, in the sense of exerting authority, is something much more mysterious, even irrational. The time has come to step back and interpret it. essentially well-placed, but as many are quick to point out, Watching him, I was amazed that anyone had ever taken him seriously enough to hate him. They passionately support LGBT, they advocate charities and so on. your opponent's ideas. The threat of ecological catastrophe, the consequence of new techno-scientific developments, especially in biogenetics, and new forms of apartheid. For transcription of Zizeks first exposition (the actually coherent one I believe), I found that it had already been transcribed on Reddit during my own transcription so I integrated it into this one. self-reproducing nature to ("the historical necessity of progress towards Original reporting and incisive analysis, direct from the Guardian every morning. And its important to note they do it on behalf of the majority of people. My hero is here a black lady, Tarana Burke, who created the #MeToo campaign more than a decade ago. In this sense, the image of Donald Trump is also a fetish, the last thing a liberal sees before confronting actual social tensions. 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. ) Somehow hectoring mobs have managed to turn him into an icon of all they are not. I crunched some numbers to find out", "Best academic steel-cage match ever? The tone of the debate was also noted to be very intellectuals). This is a pity, because Peterson made an argument I have seen many times, one which is incredibly easy to beat." Not that I was disappointed. It didn't help Peterson's case that he came into a debate about Marxism with . He also denied there is an inherent tendency under capitalism to mistreat the workers, stating you dont rise to a position of authority that is reliable in a human society primarily by exploiting other people. Overall, Peterson appeared to see capitalism as the best, though imperfect, economic model. Studebaker concludes that "Peterson didn't prepare. Copyright 2007-2023 & BIG THINK, BIG THINK PLUS, SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by Freethink Media, Inc. All rights reserved. So, here I think I know its provocative to call this a plea for communism, I do it a little bit to provoke things but what is needed is nonetheless in all these fears I claim ecology, digital control, unity of the world a capitalist market which does great things, I admit it, has to be somehow limited, regulated and so on. The statement has some interesting ideas though, including the statement that Peterson had said that people should seek meaning through personal responsibility and iek had said that happiness is pointless and delusional. Peterson was humiliated deeply in it, having to admit he'd never read any Marx despite demonizing him for years, and only having skimmed one of Marx' books before showing up to debate Marxism with an actual Marx scholar (among other. That snapped him back into his skill set: self-defense. However, this is not enough. Ideology, Logos & Belief with Transliminal Media . Moderated by Stephen J. Blackwood, it was held before an audience of 3,000 at Meridian Hall in Toronto on 19 April 2019. Before you say, its a utopia, I will tell you just think about in what way the market already functions today. In our daily lives, we pretend to desire things which we do not really desire, so that ultimately the worst thing that can happen is to get what we officially desire. This is again not a moral reproach. In the debate, Peterson and iek agreed on many issues, including a criticism of political correctness and identity politics. 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. Kierkegaard, mine and everybodys favourite theologist, wrote If a child says he will obey his father because his father is a competent and good guy, this is an affront to fathers authority. And I claim the same goes for tradition. Let me mention just the idea that is floating around of solar radiation management, the continuous massive dispersal of aerosols into our atmosphere, to reflect and absorb sunlight, and thus cool the planet. First of all it's much shorter than Peterson Vs Harris. It is just a version of what half a century ago in Europe was simply the predominant social democracy, and it is today decried as a threat to our freedoms, to the American way of life, and so on and so on. Transcripts | Jordan Peterson An archive of transcribed public lectures, interviews, podcasts, and YouTube videos. 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. Con esa pregunta como disparador, los intelectuales Slavoj iek y. It made me wonder about the rage consuming all public discussion at the moment: are we screaming at each other because we disagree or because we do agree and we cant imagine a solution? Hitler was one of the greatest storytellers of the 20th century. Read the full transcript. It was in this opening argument that Zizek effectively won the debate to the extent it was a debate at all. Among his points was that Marx and Engels focused too much on class struggle being the primary feature of modern society while ignoring the existence of hierarchy as a fact of nature. And, incidentally Im far from believing in ordinary peoples wisdom. He's the sort of aging quitter we all hope to never be. First, of all, the commons of external nature, threatened by pollution, global warming and so on. Can we even imagine how the fragile balance of our earth functions and in what unpredictable ways geo-engineering can disturb it? 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. [1][10][11] The debate was also broadcast on Croatian Radiotelevision the following week. Other than that, multiple commentators (one, two) pointed that the "Debate knowledgeable about communism. cordial and respectful, something I really appreciated. Regarding how the debate was receiving, judging from Twitter and some quick They were making in the usual way, but the cheese got rotten and infected, smelling bad, and they said, oh my god, look, we have our own original French cheese. I always thought that neoliberalism is a fake term. In such times of urgency, when we know we have to act but dont know how to act, thinking is needed. If the academic left is all-powerful, they get to indulge in their victimization. Please join. Peterson blamed cultural Marxism for phenomena like the movement to respect gender-neutral pronouns which, in his view, undermines freedom of speech. Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate on the concept of Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism. Let me now briefly deal with in a friendly way I claim with what became known sorry for the irony as the lobster topic. Happiness is a confused notion, basically it relies on the subjects inability or unreadiness to fully confront the consequences of his / her / their desire. I have included my method and aims in a Note at the end of the transcript. Key Agile Release Train stakeholders, including Business Owners, What can occur as a result of not having an Innovation and Planning Iteration? Peterson El debate entre Slavoj iek y Jordan Peterson posmodernismo. Freedom and responsibility hurt they require an effort, and the highest function of an authentic master is to literally to awake in us to our freedom.

Telecommunicator Week Ideas, Payday 2 Jacket Text To Speech, Articles Z