/lit/ - Literature

>>Now what you have in the case of 4chan is a macabro expression of ideology similar to Yugoslavia in the 1980s. If you have not heard of the lasting fashion, like pepe the scatological toad in which past visions of uber and undermen are sublated in a surreal manner, you are told to go to ray-did or tumbler because you aren't part of the tribe and commune and so on and so on. *sniff* There is an old East German joke in which an engineer gets sent to Siberia and he tells his friend beforehand that in his letters all that is true will be written with blue ink and all that is not with red and so in the first letter what is written on red is that how great the Gulag is and how they get new clothes and women and so on - in red ink. Only thin that is missing is blue ink. If we see this in the case of 4chan *sniff*, this is precisely the case. We have all the red ink we want - mehmehs, endless jokes and freudian ironies which go a long way to show us a creative and modern men. But there are no memes to show true pain, the truth of 4chan which is that it does not hate the Other, but rather, itself to the point of it unable to consider crippling solitude without turning it to a joke of having "no gf" or drawing a comic of two fellows you have here in the illustration. These men eat up ideology, shit ideology and make nonsensical machines out of ideology so that they don't see ideology, but an entertaining process of alienation and so on.

>>10921055
>essentially relies on him claiming existence isn't a property things possess, i.e. you can't define something that has the property of existing.
What exactly do you mean by "property"? A thing that "exists" in the sense the ontological argument seeks to apply the term to God (i.e. objectively) can only be said to be so when it is empirically determined, since without an empirical character, the thing is an idea, which we have no knowledge of as an empirical (and sensual) object. Existence itself is still a property in the sense that it is a logical predicate, i.e., it is a property that determines the relation of an object (intellectual or sensual) to the subject. Kant's point is that it's actually improper to apply the property of existence to something purely intelligible, because in this circumstance you are only treating the thing according to the idea of the predicate of existence, and not according to the predicate itself.

>>10818780
Sick of old white men yelling at me about how the world should be

t. bh

>>10810423
By "just a meme" I take it you mean there is no such thing: that's true in a sense. But in this understanding of the self we find of the many paths to the understanding of determinism as nonsense. The determinist will say something like, "you are your brain," but your brain can't said to be "you" formally because if we remove all of your other aspects your disembodied brain itself is as little "you" as a severed hand in and of itself can be said to be "you." The determinist might say, "you are your body," but this is equally untrue for the reverse reason: you can remove parts of your body and yet remain "you." They could say "you are your brain and your body together," but in this case they may as well say "you are you" or "you are John." They provide a definition that cannot possibly be false, a tautology.

All this is the case because "you" are the absolute subject, which cannot be known, since it is the formally linguistic subject of all predicates that are thought. The "I" contained in the thought "I am" is not empirically determined. By this simple truth alone, determinism is shown for the foolishness that it is, since in order for something to be causally determined, it must first be determined, that is, it must be taken as a definite empirical object in cognition, which the self cannot be.

Therefore the rational choices that we make are free, but our bodies (and all that are included within them, namely our brains) are subject to the physical laws of nature.

>>9168307

>>7865631
>>7865670

And yes you need to read Hegel; Continental philosophy is basically a Footnote to Hegel's work.

>>7847354

Don't fall for the "Sublime object of ideology" meme unless you've actually read Hegel, Marx and Lacan.

Start with The Parallax View; his main work and easier to read than tSOoI, this is basically where he outlines his system of analysis.

How to Read Lacan is also good for a more in-depth look at Lacan from Zizek's perspective.

After you have familiarized yourself with his thought and vocabulary read some of his "analysis" books; "The Sublime Object of Ideology", "Living in the End Times" and "Welcome to the Desert of the Real are all good.

IMO Zizeks best work is in his shorter essays rather than his published books: I liked his Essay about Object Oriented Ontology and Mao Zedong, they are very easy to read and you can do so in a couple of hours if your interested in them.

>>7842425
>tfw committed myself to living a ideology-free Zizekian life dictated by actively pursuing a communist and dialetic relationship between myself as an empty subject and the big other.
>tfw see a qt girl on campus not wearing a plain piece of clothing.
>tfw she smiles at me and subtly invites me to ask her out
>tfw begin walking over, excited to finally get a chance to break the phantasm of her shirt.
>inner voice asks "what would Zizek do?"
>realize if I sniff and argue with her out i'll reinforce the lame ideology of her t-shirt by conforming her prejudices.
>get intimidated by the prospect of all ideolgy and global capitalism
>panic and walk past her pretending not to see her
>walk home sniffing and so on and so on

>>7841452

An anrcho-syndicalist American analytic philosopher and linguistics professor was teaching a class on Bertrand Russell, known logician.

”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Russell as the most influential philosopher of the 20th century, even more influential than Jacques Derrida or any other continental philosopher!”

At this moment, a brave, psycho-analytic, Hegelian Marxist philosopher and cultural critic boldy stood up and tugged at his collar.

”My god, pure ideology! How can you ignore the work of Lacan and the Frankfurt School and so on and so on, like that? ”

The arrogant professor smirked quite Jewishly and smugly replied “Continental philosophy cloaks trvialities in fancy language and uses the scientific-sounding term 'theory' to describe propositions that could never be tested empirically. ”

”Wrong. If empricism is so important, as you would say, then how come you were so empirically wrong on the Khmer Rouge and Cambodia, and so on and so on?”

The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus . He stormed out of the room crying those unironic empirically verified crocodile tears.

There is no doubt that at this point our professor, Noam Chomsky, wished he had pulled himself up by his bootstraps and become more than an outdated linguist and blindly analytic philosopher.

He wished so much that he had an argument to save himself from embarrassment, but he himself had advocated for truth derived from empirical investigation!

The students applauded and all dropped out to transfer into the École Normale Supérieure that day and accepted French philosophy as superior to both German Idealism and the Anglosphere's Analytic traditions.

An eagle named “Critical Theory” flew into the room and perched atop a burning American flag and shed a single tear on the dropped chalk. Sections of Lacan's Seminars were read several times, and the Spirit of Hegel himself showed up and demonstrated the nature of dialectics so vividly that everybody in the room progressed to a trans-physical state transcending conventional notions of time and space.

The professor lost his tenure and was fired the next day and was forced to become a panelist on an MSNBC news show to make ends meet.

The brave psycho-analytic philosopher's name? Slavoj Zizek.

>>7497223
>23
>Boston
>yesterday
>Welcome to the Desert of the Real
>pic related

>>7271108
Progressives generally hate Zizek because he refuses to play the identity politics game. It has nothing to do with anything he says, it's because he won't eat from the trash can of ideology, and is therefore not part of the tribe.

He's one of the few people who will willingly self identify as a Cultural Marxist, and yet SJWs can't stand him

I would say read Zizek and go backwards. Start reading Zizek, then read some explanations on Lacan, then some Freud, more Lacan, then read whatever you want. A good first book by Zizek would be Less than Nothing. That's like his magnum opus. It's good cause he talks about so many different things in there.

>letting ideology choose you
PURE ideology, indeed.

>>7137280
not /lit/ but I guess it applies

>>7104347
HAHAHA it's funny because stirner!

Thish ish naw a Zizek meme thrread!

>>7060281
no, meme Zizek posters are
>Philosophy ruins this forum.
what about the christianfags ?
>forum.

>>7048808
Spurdo really is the best /lit/ meme

Marxism is for contrarians and teenagers who have never read philosophy.

>>6965812

>>6954425
>khemer rouge

>>6900638
>Now what you have in the case of 4chan is a macabro expression of ideology similar to Yugoslavia in the 1980s. If you have not heard of the lasting fashion, like pepe the scatological toad in which past visions of uber and undermen are sublated in a surreal manner, you are told to go to ray-did or tumbler because you aren't part of the tribe and commune and so on and so on. *sniff* There is an old East German joke in which an engineer gets sent to Siberia and he tells his friend beforehand that in his letters all that is true will be written with blue ink and all that is not with red and so in the first letter what is written on red is that how great the Gulag is and how they get new clothes and women and so on - in red ink. Only thin that is missing is blue ink. If we see this in the case of 4chan *sniff*, this is precisely the case. We have all the red ink we want - mehmehs, endless jokes and freudian ironies which go a long way to show us a creative and modern men. But there are no memes to show true pain, the truth of 4chan which is that it does not hate the Other, but rather, itself to the point of it unable to consider crippling solitude without turning it to a joke of having "no gf" or drawing a comic of two fellows you have here in the illustration. These men eat up ideology, shit ideology and make nonsensical machines out of ideology so that they don't see ideology, but an entertaining process of alienation and so on.