[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 435 KB, 560x482, fc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12961550 No.12961550 [Reply] [Original]

Is Žižek vs Peterson going to be better than Foucault vs Chomsky?

>> No.12961579

No.

>> No.12961584

>>12961550
No

>> No.12961589

No unironically

>> No.12961596

No.

>> No.12961605

Pretty low bar desu

>> No.12961607

No.

For the simple reason of
>Peterson
Alright?

>> No.12961613

>>12961550
Yes
You all are overrating Chomsky and Foucault

>> No.12961620

>>12961607
>>12961613
No, Peterson just sucks

>> No.12961625

>>12961550
Foucault looks like a manlet

>> No.12961626

More like the Logan Paul boxing match

>> No.12961632

>virgin water
>chad orange juice

>> No.12961670

>>12961550
More importantly, will it be better than Yarvin vs Hanson?

>> No.12961701

zizek is a stroked out hack
peterson is a coked out fraud

>> No.12961756
File: 120 KB, 768x768, deathanddreamsintorontocanada.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12961756

YE OF LITTLE FAITH

>> No.12961757

Communism vs Capitalism

The future is at stake here

>> No.12961895

>>12961550

More memeable maybe.

>> No.12962071

>>12961756
I like the idea of Zizek being a 1800's hegelian lich king fueled by cocaine, very aesthetic desu

>> No.12962108

uh where to watch this?

>> No.12962149

>>12962108
people will probably post streams when its up otherwise youre gonna have to pay up some shekels on kermits website

>> No.12962624

>>12961550
I have a better question: how many years faggot OP needs to grow up to catch up with 15 y.o kid?

>> No.12962644

>>12961550
I recall watching some segments of that debate and my understanding of it was that Foucault couldn't understand a single thing Chomsky was talking about, and his replies were completely unrelated to what Chomsky said.

So yes, that's exactly what we're getting out of Zizek vs Peterson

>> No.12962646

>>12962149
Will streams be posted on this board or another (if there are any)?

>> No.12962651

>>12962108
>>12962149
Someone posted a supposed stream last night
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q46AoR80M4&feature=youtu.be

>> No.12962673

>>12961550
Two public intellectuals engaging in dumbed down debate for the benefit of mass consumption? What could be better?

>> No.12962694

>>12962673
>Peterson
>intellectual
he is intelligent because smart enough to extract money from masses, not intellectual

>> No.12962716

>>12962644
Both of them were running their goalposts to opposite sides of the field, if you think Chompsky was making any more sense I've got bad news for you

>> No.12963002
File: 815 KB, 1080x1920, Screenshot_20190419-191921_Gallery.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12963002

I'm there right now. Anybody wanna meet up?

>> No.12963026

>>12962694
That's the case of all "public intellectuals". I mean it pejoratively

>> No.12963030

>>12963002
imagine paying to watch two hacks disagree on definitions for 3 hours lol

>> No.12963034

>>12961550
https://youtu.be/jhyCyAwr7A4

>> No.12963036

>>12961625
forced perspective trickery

>> No.12963120

Is the illegal jewtube stream gonna have volume eventually?

>> No.12963163

>>12963120
It did for a minute just now

>> No.12963172

>>12963030
and meeting fellow 4channers while you do it

>> No.12963180

>>12963030
You know we're going to be talking about this for the next two years right?

>> No.12963208

>>12963180
>you know we're going to be mindlessly regurgitating what the two hacks say in this video for years right?

>> No.12963235

>>12963208
please, every single pseud here will give their take on why both of them are dumb and he, anon, is superior

>> No.12963236

>>12963208
>no fun allowed

>> No.12963286

>>12963120
>>12963163
Sound is back on now.

>> No.12963308

No

But similar dynamic of an academic fraud encountering a sober political commentator

>> No.12963565

>>12961550
>focault vs chomsky
>trash vs trash

>peterson x zizek
>self-help guru x trash

yes

>> No.12963641

>can literally hear his lips
for fucks sake Zizek just grab the microphone

>> No.12963709

>>12962651
It's legit :O

>> No.12963710

>>12961757
They both suck, why should i watch this again?

>> No.12963729

>mfw I'm going to have to listen to lip and nose sounds all night, in addition to wearing a raincoat

>> No.12963764

fuck fuck fuck how many times do i have to hear his lips?

>> No.12964147

>>12963565
you can't even spell foucault correctly kek

>> No.12964310

>>12963565
>>self-help guru
so, trash?

>> No.12967665

>>12961625
Foucault a chard

>> No.12967685

>>12967665
*chad

>> No.12967689

>>12961550
How the fuck is peterson even close to zizek's level?

>> No.12967708
File: 212 KB, 1200x1043, land pshh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12967708

zizek vs peterson is like the first boss battle in a video game. very easy for zizek.

Zizek vs nick land would be like one of those final fantasy boss battles were they got like 500 energy bars and you have to switch discs to complete it

>> No.12967735

>>12963180
Fuck 4channel fuck women fuck black people fuck getting a job fuck reinstating previously lost friendships fuck college

>> No.12967752
File: 99 KB, 800x800, 49319639_2490946560934225_6081261226949531721_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12967752

>>12967708

>> No.12967761

>>12967708
You're right that would be fucking sweet

>> No.12967763

>>12962644
Do you mean the opposite? Foucault seemed to talk on a different level from Chomsky.

>> No.12967769

>>12963208
Yeah, sounds like /lit/.

>> No.12967789
File: 40 KB, 480x299, FBWPvwf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12967789

LET'S MAKE IT HAPPEN, BROS.

>> No.12967798

>>12967752
>But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade. - original beard dude

>> No.12967805

>>12967789
And Pentti Linkola in the left hand corner.

>> No.12967807
File: 111 KB, 351x500, 1485304097211.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12967807

>>12967708
>>12967752
>>12967789
Land is really polite irl I doubt he'd take the debate and if he did he'd lose because he most likely engage in producing counter points to arguments, if you've seen any interview or videos of him he just seems like the avg. cute sophisticated brit. I think its the speed that makes the guy a a.i. god worshiper/cultist

>> No.12967816

>>12967807
Land debated some professor over skype once, he did quite well

>> No.12967822
File: 428 KB, 866x436, 43634345.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12967822

>>12967789
They should stream a debate from their homes

>> No.12967824

>>12967789
Land can barely convey a coherent thought when being interviewed. The thought him being in a debate sounds extremely painful.

>> No.12967830
File: 25 KB, 482x482, mugshot-land.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12967830

>>12967807
How did one of the most Anglo people ever manage to out French the French?

>> No.12967844

>>12967822
Can we crowd fund this or something? I'm not kidding.

>> No.12967857

>>12967708
final boss is Evola rises from the dead.

>> No.12967892

>>12967708
>likes: goin gast
kek

>> No.12967925

>>12961550
Yes

>> No.12968014

>>12961550

Chomsky/Foucault ended as a 1-1 draw (Chomsky was and is correct as to the existence of a human nature, one of the few things that I will give him credit for apart from his refusal to die) although Foucault scored the more impressive goal in the second half (one does make war because it is just. "One makes war in order to win". The irony here is that Foucault understands human nature itself while rejecting the concept of human nature for various wrongheaded Marxist-pseudo-historical reasons.

Yet to hear the new one (didn't know it was a thing until tonight) though of course the Chomsky/Foucault comparison is irresistable.

>> No.12968033

>>12968014
*"one does not make war because it is just. One makes war in order to win." -Foucault

"Yeah, nah, I don't agree with that" -Chomsky, badly misunderstanding reality on the politics-side, though he had just effectively correctly articulated human nature earlier, in scientistic terms. The more I think about it, the more I think that the Chomsky/Foucault debate is classical philosophy done right: a civil exchange with a minor actor (Elders), in which each actor has roughly half of Truth, and our engagement is required to arrive at full Truth.