[ 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: 82 KB, 900x675, jfstudios.com_-e1547748276466.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15612693 No.15612693 [Reply] [Original]

Was this the biggest non debate? They just presented their own points of view and didn't even bother to debate, let alone settle them. I don't understand why they even bothered to come. My guess is that Peterson did it for money and Zizek tried to reach out to a part of Peterson's audience.

>> No.15612712
File: 663 KB, 741x970, 1588651074095.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15612712

Zizek wiped the floor with Peterson to a degree I didn't think was possible.

>> No.15612739

>>15612693
Zizek went easy on him once he realized JP literally didn't understand him
JPfags coped by calling it a tie

>> No.15612767

>>15612693
they're both pseuds, the event was cringe and this thread is reddit

>> No.15612833

I noticed something about Peterson but I am not sure because I never read any of his books or watched his lectures.

But it seems to me that he keeps raging against post-modernism because Peterson thinks post-modernists are proponents of post-modernism, that they think the post-modern condition is a good thing. I think that is a very bad take, I think post-modernists recognize the condition of the world as such but they do not make any normative claims.

>> No.15612914

>>15612712
>>15612739
>>15612833
Wtf are you guys talking about? They just talked in circles never really adressing the exact point the other brought up. Its like when 2 high school students do not understand they are talking in very different terms and still dont try to find some comon main ground for the topjc to actually make any progress in a debate. Peterson Talks about “socialists” as a type of mentality and people given his psychology background, while Zizik is talking about “spcialism” as it is in theory. So whatev er “side” you are ons it seems like you have one. Therebis a similar discounect throughout the other topic with JP asking Zizek to get back on topic, and Zizek wondering why JP isnt directly adressing his discourse.

It was just a self confirming cluster fuck. 100% agree with you>>15612693

>> No.15612943

>>15612914
No they didn't. When Zizek pressed Peterson on his points, Peterson totally caved in. This constant straw grabbing is fucking sad btw, they debate once, Peterson gets his ass handed to him, and it's this cloying "noooo! Peterson must have not lost really!!" bullshit all the time.

>> No.15612990

>>15612943
Debate wasn't good anyway. They conceded a lot of points to each other and the whole thing was filled with flattery.other.ate wasn't good anyway. They conceded a lot

>> No.15613007

>>15612914
I wasn't talking about this debate specifically

>> No.15613010

>>15612990
>They conceded a lot of points to each other
You really think that? Peterson constructed (quite badly) a strawman, and when that fell apart had no idea what to do.

>> No.15613015

>>15612693
Post debate:
>Peterson on ŽiŽek
"omg, that guy blew my mind" *sob* "like Jesus on cross asking father why have you abandoned me?" *more crying*
>ŽiŽek on Peterson
*sniff* "Yea, that guy" *condescending smirk*

Why is Žižek such a cunt and why is Peterson such a crybaby?

>> No.15613022

>>15613015
>Why is Žižek such a cunt and why is Peterson such a crybaby?
How was Zizek being a cunt? The debate was a joke against a man totally out of his academic area. There was no reason to respect anybody involved or take it seriously yet he managed to do both decently

>> No.15613026

Chomsky won the debate, and psychoanalysis as a discipline lost.

>> No.15613032

>>15613026
HOW DOES HE KEEP WINNING

>> No.15613641

the debate was reddit

now recommend me some good debates im being archive lectures and stuff

>> No.15613802

>>15613641
The Amazing Atheist vs Caughlan 666

>> No.15613885

>>15612712

I didn't see the debate and have no interest in watching it, but just from the few minutes of footage I've seen of each man speaking, I think Zizek is about 20 IQ points more intelligent than Peterson and much better-read, so if anyone won, it was probably him.

The problem is that to have any decent debate, you need to agree on some things and disagree on some things, and also to know which things are which. That probably wasn't the case here.

>> No.15613919

>>15612990
>with flattery.other.ate wasn't good anyway
What?

>> No.15614215

>>15613641
Linkara vs Nostalgic Critic - The Bat Credit Card