/lit/ - Literature

>knows nothing about economics, capitalism and dynamic systems
The meme writes itself. He's a fucking pseud who never stopped to think that capitalism is the most scalable form of resource allocation we have. Literally closer to the communist utopia than communism itself.

>>9556633
Ok.

>all these literary theorists trying to insult and degrade good science
Lmao, quit trying to justify your bullshit man, this thread is full of Nietzschean ressentiment through and through. Literary theory is fine but if you're really still complaining about positivism and empirical sciences you've got some growing up to do.

>/lit/ tries philosophy of science / epistemology

>>8157255
>criticism of scientism

God you guys suck.

>>8088806
They, like most people, are the tragic victims of ideology.

I will be temporarily taking requests for books that you want me to grab off of Bibliotik. I won't grab any that have ridiculous file sizes though.

The most annoying thing about this guy is how faithful he is to his influences, it's an almost religious-like idolatry, and a childlike imitation. The fact that this is the best the intellectual scene can come up with these days makes me almost want to side with those 'philosophy is dead' science types.

What is ideology? I don't get it.

Is it true that Zizek can't keep up with the big boys of the English speaking academia, /lit/?

Are guys like Singer, Chomsky, Dawkins, Rorty, Chalmers, Dennett etc just too powerful for Zizek to ultimately deal with?

Will he forever be relegated to the level of a bit player, operating in the children's playground under the watching supervising eye of the Anglo establishment?

> To some extent, Hitler wasn't radical or violent enough.

What did he mean by this?

ITT: philosophers who make you want an ice cold coke

How much of this guy’s philosophy derives from anxiety from not being born a Jew?

You guys do realize that ideology is a meaningless buzzword right? That the term is so ambiguous that it can be applied to everything. That even individuals who purport to be uninfluenced by ideology are in fact influenced by ideology if I say they are. I can say that Zizek is an ideologue who promotes his own insidious ideology to subvert the masses because everything is ideology. Ideology is a meme. If you use it, you are a memester.

Can one claim to "know" philosophy without having studied and Stanford, Oxford, Cambridge, or NYU?

Can one really claim to have studied Literature without having studied at Oxford, Harvard or Cambridge?

What does it mean to "study" philosophy or literature without ever having attended institutions where the greats in these fields exist?

Philosophy and literature are not rapidly publicized and popularized like science is.

I think it's entirely reasonable to suggest that if you've never taken a lecture with Putnam, Chalmers, Kripke etc, you aren't really studying philosophy at all, but a kind of "history of outdated ideas."

So tell me /lit/:

Have you actually studied philosophy and literature? Or are you merely pretending to?

He's too supermodely, I prefer my pop-philosophers to be scruffy, sniffely ex-Soviets.

>mfw Plato was right
>mfw no matter what this guy says it will be worthless because of his appalling accent

What 'credit' would you give Zizek as a thinker?

Do you think he has any merit or is he really just some poser like Chomsky thinks?

I'm definitely not one of these people who thinks he's the greatest intellectual of our times or anything like that, but I'll grant him a few points.

1. He has a pretty deep understanding of repression and alienation and how liberal societies foster both.

2. His ideas about intimacy have something to them... I like this idea of his that people should deal straight up with each other instead of being isolated priggish shitlords.

3. He has a pretty good understanding of the meaning of Christianity, better than anyone I've ever read aside from that youtube faggot Father Barron

Is he a hack?

So is this guy really against human rights or is that just an edgy and provocative title?

I'm interested in Zizek's work about the real, but also his work in general.
Which one of his books is the best to start with?

Greetings, /lit/. I'm going to a lecture by Žižek with my school in a few days, yet I know virtually nothing about his stances. I have read up on his views and stances on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia sucks and I'm too much of a layman to understand any of it. I know that he is a leftist and a hegelian. Could you please bear with me and explain to me what he's all about in layman's terms? Thank you.

He even has sagas too
>Chomsky Feud Saga
>Stanley Hornbeck Saga

>>5114897
my god

>Buddhist 'Enlightenment'
>Oriental Sophistry
>Asiatic Fooferaw
>2014
So are you guys hot-shot go-getter executives who carry The Art of War and The Zen of Management wherever they go, or just taking the easy way out, intellectually speaking?