[ 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: 106 KB, 460x271, zizek.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2411598 No.2411598 [Reply] [Original]

This guy.

>> No.2411617
File: 110 KB, 483x725, slavoj_zizek_pancakes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2411617

>> No.2411655

this guy is a phony

>> No.2411661

>>2411655
Why do you consider him phony or are you hopping on the edgy anti-continental philosopher bandwagon after they've been branded hipster or such

>> No.2411665

His philosophy in general is an intellectual feint. I don't think he seriously believes in Marxism, as he is not a guerilla fighter or anything like that. I like his take on psychoanalysis, because he does a decent job of accessing Lacan. In general, he is just too caught up in relics from the past for my taste.

>> No.2411668

I think he has a lot of interesting concepts -- his atheistic interpretation of the bible, ecology is the new opiate of the masses, parallax, sublimation, etc. -- but his books seem to be a little all over the place. He never really posits a thesis and works towards proving it; rather, his books are Chomsky-ish re-tellings of modern events through a marxist-lacanian lens. It isn't so much that he is espousing bad ideas but he moreso seems to be compiling all the bits of modern philosophical thought into his books. Perhaps he is put on too high a pedestal here; that because he isn't as influential as Hegel we must instantly berate him to show we don't pay homage to any of the current, fashionable philosophers - despite the fact that their reputation may blossom past something of a fad. If you've read his book you know what he's like -- more quoting others than anything else and I, in fact, find his stuff fun to read the same way reading an angry poster on /pol/ lash out at some institution or news story may be "fun."

>> No.2411669

>edgy anti-continental philosopher bandwagon
>implying others are hipsters
son, you are doing it wrong

when i read zizek it always reminds me of that academic experiment where dudes used computer algorithms to create fancy sounding and then submitted them to journals they got published of course

His stuff is like bauman's: it's either really simple ideas (truisms) donned in really shitty and convoluted language or total bullshit based on zero scientific evidence (like most marxists - "you disagreeing with me is just an element of capitalist 'x' influencing you! thats why i dont have to prove shit")

I like how guys like them never admit that they were wrong on certain topics (my recent favourite example: internet social trends). Idiots tresspass to empiricaly verifiable sciences, get smashed by reality after short period and simply never bring up the topic again cos they are used to lofty mumbo-jumbo that they can get away with in social sciences.

>> No.2411671

>>2411669
>to create fancy sounding
fancy sounding theses

but tbh those are not even theses cos they are not expected to be proven

>> No.2411681

i am a continental and i believe stupid awful shit like hegelian dialceticiacniacnaieni and i still don't like zizek

you don't need to be a zany 2deep4u faggot to like continental philosophy

please kill all marxists after marx (sartre and de beauvoir were ok before they got marxist brain disease)

>> No.2411689

>>2411669
>it's either really simple ideas (truisms) donned in really shitty and convoluted language
To some extent this is true, for example the way he discusses current politics is needlessly academic, but I think he is trying to lend legitimacy to certain ideas which would not be possible if he ''dumbed it down'' so to speak, i think in this way he is simply being a member of his profession and doing what is required of him...
>or total bullshit based on zero scientific evidence (like most marxists - "you disagreeing with me is just an element of capitalist 'x' influencing you!
I have never seen this in Zizek, actually--I think you just pulled it out of your ass..besides, criticizing philosophy or cultural theory as having ''zero scientific evidence'' is irrelevant as neither use scientific methodology and are in fact attempts to create a unique method, as such they are more of a creative than a scientific pursuit..if you think creative pursuits are somehow less important than the scientific I would have to say
>>>/sci/
Finally, the idea that marxists only make tautological arguments is a straw man, and may be true for the legion of self proclaimed marxist college students, but is not true of the theorists themselves. Not to say Marxism is ''valid''

>> No.2411692

>>2411681
def not killing Gramsci or Bourdieu bruv

>> No.2411693

>>2411681
>i am a continental
how exactly?
>fuck all marxists after marx
I'm not saying you are wrong, I just disagree..I think many post-marx Marxists sometime outdo the man himself, I'm thinking of specifically Guy Debord...

Seriously, though, has no one read any of his work in psychoanalysis? It's really his best...kind of like how Chomsky is a more reputable linguist than political theorist..(honestly i think both of these guys got into politics for the money)

>> No.2411702

>>2411689
>criticizing philosophy or cultural theory as having ''zero scientific evidence'' is irrelevant as neither use scientific methodology and are in fact attempts to create a unique method, as such they are more of a creative than a scientific pursuit..

Is this unreasonable to expect evidence where some technically can be provided? Marks and Engels used statistics and economics of the time - I gladly take those in place of nothing. Marxism is a special case cos it historically was a basis for massive social engineering. When you start tinkering with physical world it seems wise to be based on evidence and reason.

Marxists philosophers have a custom of citing one another yet the closest you can get to empiricism is when by the net of citations you approach fathers of marxism.

>> No.2411704

>>2411702
Marx and Engels were enlightenment thinkers born into the wrong time. They were so tied to the scientific worldview, they were like siamese triplets.

>> No.2411707

>>2411704
[citation needed]

>> No.2411708

>>2411707
Don't have to cite common knowledge.

>> No.2411713

>>2411708
see
that's why equating marxists and jeebusfags is common practice

>> No.2411852

ITT: People butthurt that they can't understand him

>> No.2411864

>>2411852

Well he does have a really thick accent.

>> No.2411865

>>2411598
Yep. There he is.

>> No.2411866

>>2411852

>> No.2411876

>>2411668
>current, fashionable philosophers

Like who? The endless mass of liberals like John Rawls, Peter Singer and so on who make the same bad arguments for the same thing?

>> No.2411885

He's certainly fun to read if you can get your head around his endless name dropping, but if he bothered to have the rigor of an analytic philosopher each chapter would be the length of Ulysses. My main issue is that he doesn't really justify his psychoanalytic/semiotic approach, he just applies it.

>> No.2411898

>>2411669

That is not how the Sokal Affair went down. It wasn't an algorithm it was a physicist who wrote a satirical article on the hermeneutics of quantum gravity. However, there is a joke website that has an algorithm that makes "post-modern" criticism articles...

Btw, Zizek doesn't read like either of these.

>> No.2411950

>>2411665
he believes in marxism, it's stupid to think that just guerrilla fighters are marxist, in fact, there are a lot of guerrilla fighters who don't really believe in marxism. Violence is way more complex than just a few guys with guns

>> No.2411967

>>2411693
> I'm thinking of specifically Guy Debord...
Agreed.

>> No.2413173

He's always been a curiosity to me. His interviews and speeches can really open up some valid questions. I just watched his interview with Charlie rose and now my interest is piqued. Where is a good place to start reading him? I'm more than anything interested in his analysis of ideology

>> No.2413178

>>2413173

Latter day sophist, entertaining he is; profound he is not.

>> No.2413184
File: 16 KB, 300x457, 1327434069728.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413184

He is a thinker.

>> No.2413185
File: 42 KB, 460x500, 1287071334695.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413185

Is Zizek's marketing manager paying people to post him here? Yeah, we know him. No, he says nothing new/interesting.

>> No.2413186
File: 157 KB, 746x1000, anna 4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413186

>>2411665

>I don't think he seriously believes in Marxism, as he is not a guerilla fighter or anything like that

That basically disqualifies a good chunk of Marxist theorists then.

>> No.2413187
File: 93 KB, 720x720, 1327434182928.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413187

He read much more than you. Much more.

>> No.2413189
File: 44 KB, 350x263, 1324082194750.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413189

He is eloquent.

>> No.2413193
File: 34 KB, 441x280, 1324050011108.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413193

Great sense of humour.

>> No.2413197
File: 87 KB, 467x627, aHyNHMV3llc14h2goXApslrMo1_500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413197

All the women at his feet.

>> No.2413202

>>2411693

>I think many post-marx Marxists sometime outdo the man himself, I'm thinking of specifically Guy Debord...

You cannot be serious. Please expand on how a rehash of Horkheimers work by an edgy Parisian beats out Marx himself.

>> No.2413205
File: 16 KB, 483x345, slavoj_zizek.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413205

do you think he does cocaine he is always touching his nose and jittering in his chair

>> No.2413206

>>2411898

Funny thing is that Sokal is actually an avowed leftist who was part of the American expat flock who went down to Sandinista land in solidarity.
That tends to get lost in the hatred thrown his way. Not that I endorse what he did.

>> No.2413208
File: 23 KB, 400x286, tumblr_l0m9d7tfsy1qbo0bbo1_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413208

Poser

>> No.2413209

Or he takes Sodium Valproate for a Bipolar 1 condition.

>> No.2413220

>>2413208

His critique of Deleuzian rhizomes is worth checking out. Probably Zizek's best published work imo.

>> No.2413224

Fucking Zizek, the philosopher a la mode for 2 deep 4 u college students. I get people were fooled by Lacan, but this guy?

>> No.2413225

He's basically Noam Chomsky if all he talked about was shit and sex.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzXPyCY7jbs

>> No.2413255
File: 33 KB, 460x276, Slavoj-Zizek-007.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2413255

he's a good fella
most humorous intellectual i know
he's making fun of our misery
politics, environmental issues, economy, religion
and the inability to solve major problems
I also like how he bashes the green hippies

>> No.2413272

>>2413205
THANK YOU. I always thought of that, I'm preety sure he does cocaine. He does not drink alcohol and he smokes marijuana, I heard him stating that, but I think cocaine is more of his thrills. I've met people of that type, they don't like to feel dizzy or out of control, they enjoy the control over themselves. Marijuana can make you lose it or gain it and these people gain control from it. And cocaine leads you to super-sober state, where you are just active in every way possible (except your flacid dick). I think he is a coke man.

>> No.2413283

He has tourette's, guys.

>> No.2413291

>>2413224
Lacan actually made sophisticated arguments. Zizek parrots them in an embarrassing way, but Lacan is no less interesting because of it.