Zizek is an idiot

[Anonymous No.12904402]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM9erS90gTE [Embed]

see this video of him talking about Beethoven's 9th, he doesnt really say anything just a lot of pretense, cliches and then tries to ambiguously apply a political meaning to the music when there isnt any

all the comments are ''wow Zizek is a genius'' ''the next Plato'' I imagine all his philosophy is like this

[Anonymous No.12904409]

wait did the Olympics ban 4chan?

[Anonymous No.12904416]

>>12904402
okay, good try anon. this time, rather than saying a bunch of pretense, cliches, and then ambiguously trying to extrapolate that to works you haven't read, why don't you explain what you think his argument was and why it is incorrect.

[Anonymous No.12904443]

>>12904416
its popular cause its an accessible hym melody but has some class it being Beethoven simple as that,

his bs about Alex loving it cause of it being universal and individualistic[if you read the novel Alex simply likes classical music and has good taste] and says that the variations are Beethoven trying to show some of this philosophy was cringy as fuck

and then the whole middle garbage lol

[Anonymous No.12904451]

>>12904443
try again anon, what do you think his argument is

[Anonymous No.12904479]

>>12904451
>blah blah blah blah I am the great philosopher you can tell because of my shittty accent blah blah blah and because I'm fat and need a shower blah blah blah bunch of nonsense blah blah some more pretentious nonsense blah blah I am genius blah blah blah

[Anonymous No.12904495]

>>12904443
>its popular cause its an accessible hym melody
>He ignores the second half and its dissonances
Lmao zizek was calling out brainlets like you btw

[Anonymous No.12904503]

What is with commies constantly referencing pop culture? I mean is this a direct result of Adorno? Or is it because they’re cultural critics commenting on the status quo or something? It’s not hard for someone like Zizek or Mark Fisher to talk about lowest common denominator art like movies and deconstruct them. It doesn’t make them genius’s. It’s like that kid that wore a dog chain necklace and loved Sevendust too much that would always tel you stuff like “it’s all bullshit man, all of it”

[Anonymous No.12904504]

>>12904451
you must really like zizek

[Anonymous No.12904511]

>>12904504
if someone can't give an accurate account of the position they are trying to argue against they don't understand what they are talking about

[Anonymous No.12904515]

>this professor at 3 different universities is an idiot

[Anonymous No.12904529]

>>12904515
It’s funny when people make appeals to authority about universities as if they aren’t a joke. I mean it was just like 15 years before Marxism and more broadly the left took over the universities when eugenics was really popular. You’re just arguing for things that are popular.

[Anonymous No.12904539]

>>12904529
>thinking that Cultural Marxism is a thing that actually happens
thread is bait, everyone pack up and leave

[Anonymous No.12904541]

>>12904495
its just variations, no meaning to it just music

[Anonymous No.12904546]

>>12904511
Zizek doesn’t take positions so you’re asking an impossibility of anon. Good try though. Go play hardball in little league

[Anonymous No.12904556]

>>12904541
>music, a form of art, cannot have meaning
literal brainlet

[Anonymous No.12904561]

>>12904515
blah blah

I dont work at a university and I'll say I'm smarter and have better understanding of life, give me 10 mins with him and he'll be on the floor

[Anonymous No.12904573]

>>12904556
it cant, I compose as well, music is abstract we think of music simply in its own musical language, you can have some program stuff but apart from that absolute music has no real meaning you can find multiple interpretations from it

[Anonymous No.12904581]

>>12904573
>art can only have meaning if there's precisely one correct interpretation
literal brainlet

[Anonymous No.12904591]

>>12904581
>buh duh u brianlnllett

wow I'm stunned at the genius of a student of Zizek

[Anonymous No.12904593]

>>12904515
Jordan Peterson isn't an idiot because he's a professor at universities

[Anonymous No.12904605]

Friendly reminder of the time that Zizek got BTFO by Will Self https://youtu.be/CId1iOWQUuo

[Anonymous No.12904612]

>>12904591
>student of Žižek
never said I was. personally, I don't hate him, but I don't care for him much either
also, respond to the argument or you're only confirming you're a brainlet

[Anonymous No.12904630]

>>12904612
I dont talk in BS I talk in truths, absolute music is abstract, come up with your little interpretation of how it tells some story or has a message but I assure you Beethoven wasnt thinking this when composing, he was more concerned just about the musical substance

[Anonymous No.12904640]

>>12904630
oh shit, turns out I was the brainlet all along, you were only talking about LvB's 9th specifically, sorry. I doubt you actually think it's impossible to make music with deeper meaning, just that there was none in this case, which I would agree with

[Anonymous No.12904663]

>>12904593
Jordan Peterson isn't an idiot at psychology

[Anonymous No.12904667]

>>12904593
I didn't know there were self-help departments in American universities

[Anonymous No.12904673]

To be fair, you could say that music cannot have any meaning other than those extrapolated by the artist.
But then you hear Suicide in an Aeroplane and realise that it's not that simple.

[Anonymous No.12904676]

>>12904667
Jordan Peterson lectures psychology and comparitive myth

[Anonymous No.12904682]

>>12904546
Okay let me take a shot. He's trying to demonstrate that every ideology functions because of a surplus gap of meaning within itself that allows it to act as a container for your own personal psychology. As an example he shows how Beethoven's 9th was able to be incorporated into being the anthem for many conflicting ideological movements, showing where even East and West Germany could stand together underneath it seemingly without contradiction. This is signified in a concrete way by the movement of the music as well, Zizek thinks this carnivalesque mirroring of the grandiose theme was an intentional move poke fun at the own absurdity it's own empty container of meaning (the swelling emotion of glory, victory, ect. is reduced to comedy). This leads to his conclusion that in this way Beethoven was doing an early critique of the this surplus gap of meaning which Zizek has identified as Ideology.

[Anonymous No.12904688]

>>12904663
His PhD is in clinical psychiatry actually

[Anonymous No.12904691]

>>12904605
did you not watch it?
will self is based btw, that thing he did with karl pilkington was great

[Anonymous No.12904694]

>>12904682
>This leads to his conclusion that in this way Beethoven was doing an early critique of the this surplus gap of meaning which Zizek has identified as Ideology.

if he actually thinks that he is an idiot, might as well go freud and say its about Beethoven wanting to fuck his mother

[Anonymous No.12904701]

>>12904688
No it's in clinical psychology

[Anonymous No.12904743]

Wait, I thought I was supposed to like Zizek because he doesn't like JP?

[Anonymous No.12904748]

>>12904694
It's not that outlandish of a claim is it? That Beethoven would poke fun at his owns song's ability to stir empty emotions?

[Anonymous No.12904755]

>>12904694
Your reading comprehension is poor. No one here is saying Beethoven was a Marxist but simply that his work can be understood through a Marxist framework. The problem with an anonymous forum without gatekeepers is that every remedial college dropout feels entitled to an opinion which degrades the quality of discussion overall.

[Anonymous No.12904758]

>>12904640
leave

[Anonymous No.12904761]

>>12904673
>But then you hear Suicide in an Aeroplane

hmm whadya huhbbaloo?

[Anonymous No.12904762]

>>12904676
hes a failed joseph campbell knock off who has to pander to the idiot self help crowd. I've tried to read his shit, but its all dribble dressed into in pseudo-intellectual word salad.

[Anonymous No.12904768]

>>12904762
He's succeeded, actually.

[Anonymous No.12904772]

>>12904758
wait, you actually think that music itself is what can't be meaningful? wow, we're both equally brainlet. if I have to leave, then you do too

[Anonymous No.12904774]

>>12904682
>an intentional move [to] poke fun at [its] own absurdity[, its] own empty container of meaning
I need to start editing my posts in word

[Anonymous No.12904778]

Man, fuck this thread, and fuck deconstructionism.

[Anonymous No.12904779]

its his usual juxtaposition thing. i like ziz but hes coming off as a bit of a one trick pony. watch his recent interviews and its almost the same thing or thats just the inevitable getting old and losing edge.

[Anonymous No.12904781]

>>12904778
>Deconstructionism
The absolute state of brianlets holyyyy

[Anonymous No.12904783]

>>12904772
no I'm a lurker. But I smell an over zealous pseud

[Anonymous No.12904784]

>>12904781
I won't take the bait, faggot. Try harder.

[Anonymous No.12904785]

>>12904748
It’s pretty outlandish but Zizek needs a hot take on every issue so it’s expected

[Anonymous No.12904787]

>>12904784
>says he wont take the bait, implies a non-emotional acknowledgement
>still emotionally lashes out towards the other anon

what did he mean by this

[Anonymous No.12904789]

>>12904762
>he's a faile-
3 million copies sold so far. New book coming out this year.

[Anonymous No.12904795]

>>12904748
well for one its not 'carnival music' its written as in a march style and sounds kinda Turkishmarch, it sounds 'amusing' because its well 'ode to joy' and thats only a tiny part of the piece from one of the variations halfway though the movement

[Anonymous No.12904797]

>>12904783
>a person who thinks all art is meaningless calling someone else a pseud
pot, may I introduce you to kettle?
>>12904784
not him, but replying to bait is inherently taking the bait. sorry, anon, but it's already too late

[Anonymous No.12904801]

>>12904539
You don't have to think George Soros and freemasons control everything to acknowledge that humanities and social science departments (at least in the West) have become increasingly dominated by Marxism and other pseudo-Marxist ideologies. All you have to do is look at a few syllabi.

[Anonymous No.12904803]

>>12904755
>surplus meaning
define meaning in a material context right now. oh wait, that's right, you can't take things like 'meaning' or 'value' and pretend they are discrete and have a basis in the material world.

[Anonymous No.12904807]

>>12904801
bitch, I'm taking courses from a humanities department right now and nothing on the syllabi is remotely Marxist

[Anonymous No.12904812]

>>12904778
>deconstructionism
Where do you people come from?
>What de Man, and Žižek following him, sees in this is more than simply an oversight on Derrida’s part; it is rather the very structure of his deconstructivist methods, the means of the establishment of his authorial subjectivity, and, hence, his need to distance himself from those whom he perceives as performing a similar gesture (i.e., most directly in his lectures on The Beast and the Sovereignwith regard to Agamben). As Žižek himself puts it: “[...] this oversight is not an accident, but a structural necessity: Derrida can only see what he sees (deploy his deconstructive reading) through such blindness. And it would be easy to demonstrate the same paradoxical overlapping of blindness and insight in other great Derridean readings—say, for his detailed reading of Hegel in Glas”.21 Though there may be a way to read Derrida’s ‘blindness’ as constitutive of hisdistance from the political, it is also what motivates his incessant critique of politics.
https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?&httpsredir=1&article=1041&context=theology_facpubs

[Anonymous No.12904816]

>>12904787
what makes you think i emotionally lashed out at someone ? because i called him a faggot ? dude... c'mom... acknowledge your surroundings.

[Anonymous No.12904819]

>>12904803
Lmaooo holy shit this nigga mad

[Anonymous No.12904829]

>>12904784
It's not bait. I'm genuinely apalled at how stupid you are. Do you mean deconstruction? Because even if you do this is not it.

[Anonymous No.12904834]

>>12904807
Anecdotal as a mofucka. Listen here cracka ass mufucka, erryting from psychiatry to da bitch azz anglish courses n’ sshheeiitt are Marxist bruh. Why you gotta try and bullshit on front street nigga? It’s all about a cultural lens homie and perhaps you jus’ can’t see it hoe becuz you ain’t nothin but a normie ass NIGGA

[Anonymous No.12904838]

>>12904797
>may I introduce you to kettle
I just told you I'm not that anon you mong.

[Anonymous No.12904841]

>>12904789
He's rich, ill admit that. In the field of psychology, you know his 20+ year long career, his biggest accomplishment was completely misunderstanding Canadian law?

[Anonymous No.12904842]

>>12904529
You can when arguing against a person that hasn't graduated from high school

[Anonymous No.12904843]

>>12904816
>look at all the guys calling each other names!
>haha i better do it to to fit in

lmao@your slave morality

stay slick lil richie, puff puff my dude.

[Anonymous No.12904845]

>>12904812
>main interest: theology
wait what

[Anonymous No.12904850]

>>12904834
I'm too white to read this and understand what it's saying, please repeat that in either General American English or Received English
>>12904838
you literally didn't

[Anonymous No.12904857]

>>12904850
>>12904783
>no, I'm a lurker

Please fuck off, I was pretty blunt when I said "no" and denied the invitation for you to assume I was the same anon.

[Anonymous No.12904865]

>>12904841
He was an accomplished psychologist before c16. 10k citations if I recall correctly.

[Anonymous No.12904868]

>>12904819
He’s right though, the anon who wrote that attempted to make his post seem more intelligent by using that term but it doesn’t hold up. His post is basically “Zizek says different people use the song...” I see no contradiction, no anomaly, and nothing even remotely strange in its use across different groups.

[Anonymous No.12904870]

>>12904857
saying you're a lurker doesn't deny that you're the original anon. it could have meant that you were the original anon and you were admitting that you don't post that often. for future reference, the correct etiquette for jumping into an argument is to start with some variation on "not him, but"

[Anonymous No.12904872]

>>12904843
LoL, this isn't your campus university or your sociology class, Michael E. Dyson.

[Anonymous No.12904873]

>>12904850
Look at this Cracker Jack

[Anonymous No.12904874]

>>12904870
Actually my jump in was here
>>12904758

Your not very good at this 4chan thing are you?

[Anonymous No.12904880]

>>12904872
Aw, aren't you but dollop of whip cream on my grans apple pie.

[Anonymous No.12904882]

>>12904874
I know that was your jump in, I figured it out by context when you explicitly said you're not the same anon. this is what that should have said:
>not him, but you need to go back
considering this hopelessly simple error and your weird Reddit spacing, you're not very good at this 4chan thing, are you?

[Anonymous No.12904883]

>>12904803
I was the one that posted the rundown, not that anon. I'm guessing you want an answer from me? If you want the answer, he did write a thousand page book on Hegel called Less than Nothing that really gets to the heart of it, or you could watch the full Pervert's Guide (both of them), or you could watch his lectures, or you could read the encyclopedia articles on Zizek, or read some of the Zizekian Studies Journal, but if you want me to give you a rundown instead, I have to say I'm flattered and I will oblige you anon. The surplus gap of meaning is precisely the gap inherent to the vaccination in semblances, a gap between the real and perception of the real that is necessary for the perception of the real to exist in the first place. Zizek's point isn't that he has a key to escape ideology, his point is that the structure of ideology is the structure of reality. The moment you think you have stepped outside of ideology you are precisely in the middle of it. The only proper response to ideology is violence to yourself, what ever it is in you which chains you to the ruling ideology. The nature of the surplus gap of meaning isn't to be overcome, it's to be critiqued.

[Anonymous No.12904885]

>>12904845
He's written more than one book on Christianity

[Anonymous No.12904886]

>>12904882
>de masking my anonymity for sake of a brainlets feeling not getting hurt

lmao@ur life

[Anonymous No.12904899]

>>12904761
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hby7Q0KFA2Q
it's great

[Anonymous No.12904907]

>>12904885
Yet he hasn’t accepted Christ

[Anonymous No.12904910]

>>12904886
>i think that distinguishing anons apart is against anonymity!! i wont lend this basic courtesy that everyone does because it hurts my feelings!!
I hear InfChan accepts people like you, you should try their community

[Anonymous No.12904911]

>>12904910
already apart :)

[Anonymous No.12904914]

>>12904899
that was good, it feels unfinished desu

[Anonymous No.12904920]

>>12904573
>I compose as well
Lmao and you also write English, but just like how you won't be the next Shakespeare you won't be the next Beethoven. Your posts are as vapid as your music, if the ninth is meaningless and only popular for its accessibility, then explain to me how the grosse fuge or his late string quartets survived to our times?

[Anonymous No.12904926]

>>12904630
>This boy never read death of the author
Authorial intent doesn't matter sweetie
Come back after high school

[Anonymous No.12904929]

>>12904920
the choral is popular in anthems and ceremonies cause its a hymn style, the rest of the symphony along with the rest of Beethoven is popular with music lovers cause its well written

[Anonymous No.12904938]

>>12904907
Because Christianity as an institution is still an opioid of the people, Zizek is a good Christian because he realizes all the mumbo jumbo of the Bible is metaphoric

[Anonymous No.12904941]

>>12904938
>all the mumbo jumbo of the Bible is metaphoric
>all the mumbo jumbo

not his position

[Anonymous No.12904942]

>>12904929
You seem like that kid in his first music theory class that finds out all his favorite pieces are the same I-IV-V-I progression and then proceeds to dismiss all creativity in music as
>It follows a structure lmao

[Anonymous No.12904950]

>>12904942
since your citing chord progressions I doubt you even read music, I can actually compose quite well

[Anonymous No.12904955]

>>>/mu/

[Anonymous No.12904956]

>>12904950
okay nerd post an opera youve written

[Anonymous No.12904957]

>>12904834
cringe

[Anonymous No.12904959]

>>12904938
It’s time to stop posting

[Anonymous No.12904961]

>>12904956
yeah I'm just going to put my music up on 4chan

[Anonymous No.12904966]

>>12904961
whered you go to school

[Anonymous No.12904971]

>>12904950
lmao okay, tell me how you would describe the chord changes of any piece without using Roman numeral analysis within the confines of a 4chan post
I'll wait

[Anonymous No.12904982]

>>12904961
The only thing more empty than op's promises is his music desu

[Anonymous No.12905003]

>>12904971
more the independent notes and the relationships between eachother, yes you could divide it into chords progression but its a gross simplification and for most stuff that analysis cant be applied or just gives a very useless surface

[Anonymous No.12905011]

>>12904982
you just would love to hear it, yes its great but no you cant hear it

[Anonymous No.12905017]

>>12904971
not him, but this is an image board; we can just write out the symbols in pen or in programs that can handle them and take a picture/screenshot

[Anonymous No.12905018]

>>12904402
The thing is that no one actually cares about the lyrics to the music so that message doesn't even work there. He is right that when people from various political parties talk about "the people" and "freedom" and "brotherhood", etc. they are meaning different things but using this piece of music to talk about that is really pushing it.

[Anonymous No.12905021]

>>12905003
Lmao the relationship between notes is a chord within the context of a piece
You've outed yourself as having never read any text on common practice or a non-contemporary composition text
Read Schoenberg

[Anonymous No.12905023]

>>12905017
Tell that to OP dismissing my post for using numeral notation with the retort of "I can read sheet music"

[Anonymous No.12905027]

>>12904402
>music doesn't have any meaning
imagine being this much of normalfaggot

[Anonymous No.12905035]

>>12905021
you didnt understand what I wrote,
you've said it yourself you can find thousands of pieces that have the same chord progressions be it something simple like I-IV-II to V but they will sound completely different from Bach to Ligetti because chord progressions dont give you an adequate descriptor any more than saying ''fight, talk, love. kill'' gives you an adequate descriptor of a novel, you have to consult the sheet music itself, its about each note

[Anonymous No.12905055]

>>12905035
>lmao okay, tell me how you would describe the chord changes of any piece without using Roman numeral analysis within the confines of a 4chan post
This is where it started, and you still haven't given me a proper response.
I don't care that Roman numerals don't cover anything outside of chord progression, they are only for describing chord progressions. You just dodging makes it seem like you have no clue of the subject and are dancing around it playing gotcha
It's very, dare I say, zizekian

[Anonymous No.12905060]

>>12904402
Never have i come across a thread that contained within it a hatred for fellow anons that has made me feel this uncomfortable. Very little is achieved through this sort of discourse. So why don't we try to arrive at the truth instead of flay each other with the salt of our bitterness. Fuck.

[Anonymous No.12905069]

>>12905060
It's because OP is either baiting or fifteen, hard to tell with the zoomer generation

[Anonymous No.12905086]

>>12905035
dude let it go, I write good music and we know it

[Anonymous No.12905239]

Chomsky thinks he is a bullshit artist with no theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0Z18UOBGXE

[Anonymous No.12905249]

>>12905239
why does he spit so much? but Chomsky is even a worse commietard

[Anonymous No.12905254]

>>12905239
chomsky is a literal brainlet, though

[Anonymous No.12905270]

>>12905254
I watched a video today where Chomsky said that the stock market is simply up because the 1% are happy that Trump is cutting regulations, and that it has nothing to do with the economy. I was actually blown away.

[Anonymous No.12905282]

>>12905270
he also said something along the lines of ''soviet union wasnt real communism, Lenin was going to create a workers utopia but was taken out by capitalists, we will rise again''

[Anonymous No.12905293]

>>12905270
Current world economy is completely driven by speculation alone
Accept it kiddo

[Anonymous No.12905310]

>>12905270
not really that far-fetched, really

[Anonymous No.12905311]

>>12905293
Uuhhhhhmmmm no sweety. Sure, there such a thing as market confidence and there’s no way to know the future but to say that the stock market and the economy aren’t related at all and then to just leave at that like a smelly
Fart in the air is brainlet tier. His argument was basically “orange man bad” just like every other leftist but he uses bigger words. For what it’s worth I find a lot of his analysis on foreign intervention and things like that pretty dead on except for what he said about the Kurds (lol) but the whole cult of personality around him is insane. He’s a linguist. A LINGUIST .

[Anonymous No.12905318]

>>12905310
You do realize your paranoia about how there’s an elite group of people running these things resembles white supremacies view on the Jewish Question don’t you? These companies have many disparate moving parts.

[Anonymous No.12905320]

>>12905254
>I disagree with this man therefore he is a brainlet
Why do brainlets do that?

[Anonymous No.12905324]

>>12905320
T. Brainlet

[Anonymous No.12905325]

>>12905311
utterly retarded post. consider suicide

[Anonymous No.12905327]

>>12905311
Chomsky's popularity as an ideologue is the greatest living argument in favor of anti-intellectualism.

[Anonymous No.12905331]

>>12905325
Wow you absolutely devastated me with your bone cutting criticism. Who would of thought making fun of the hero of every sociology 101 student would inspire such teen angst.

[Anonymous No.12905334]

>>12905270
>what is speculation

[Anonymous No.12905337]

>>12905320
it's not that i disagree with him, it's that he's literally always wrong, and the fact that he can't understand what zizek is saying makes me think he's a literal brainlet

[Anonymous No.12905340]

>>12905327
What do you mean by that? That he’s not an intellectual?

[Anonymous No.12905348]

>>12905334
The stock market isn’t a direct correlation of market confidence. That’s the most reductionist shit I’ve ever heard.

[Anonymous No.12905367]

>>12905340
What? No, the opposite, he is the archetypal intellectual. He's made some noteworthy contributions towards linguistics and because of this we are forced to take him as an authority in economics, politics, sociology, and whatever else he decides to jabber on about. An intellectual who succeeds in one field is given carte blanche to profess authoritatively in all of them, and you see this not just with typical lefty types like Chomsky but with supposed right wingers like Peterson too. Intellectuals like Chomsky exemplify why the whole concept of "the intellectual" should be forcefully opposed.

[Anonymous No.12905380]

>>12905348
its speculation and AI making up random numbers. face it, it's all a farce

[Anonymous No.12905391]

>>12905367
I couldn’t agree more. The most cartoonish version of this in recent memory is Neil Degrass Tyson. I do respect people that are true intellectuals and delve into multiple fields. But just as the nobility passed on this tradition to academia I think it’s getting passed on to somewhere else as the academy continues to undermine itself. I’m
Just not sure where.

[Anonymous No.12905399]

>>12905380
If by “AI making up numbers” you mean metadata calculated by complex algorithms then sure. But even then it’s reductionist and retarded and the fact that you can’t see that this was used as a simple political prop in a ramble about Donald Trump (lol) just shows you don’t have a fuckin clue about what you’re talking about. Get raped faglord.

[Anonymous No.12905400]

>>12905311
>He's a linguist
So what? Do people become incapable of learning after choosing a career? Dude is 90, he had a lot of time to learn.

[Anonymous No.12905404]

>>12905367
I disagree, though i dont agree with their methods i think the general idea of a "public intllectual" is important. The compartmentalization and elevation of knowledge to a seperate public sphere has made it sterile in the face of action.

Now more than ever people feel alienated from the world around them because the tools to make change seem relegated only to people who have spent 30 years studying a hypperspecific topic. This is not a problem i think, because we need well educated people to make decisions, but the problem is even these people feel incontinent to make change because they cant possibly see how studying something like the effects of radiation on subterranean algae can fix a dying planet
We need more people willing to think on that higher level which allows them to see the necessary links between their hyperspeciality and the greater world around them. We need more multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary intellectuals. At least this is what i think.

[Anonymous No.12905405]

>>12904402
How could you know he isn't the next Plato since you haven't read Plato.

[Anonymous No.12905407]

>>12905400
hes the Bernie Sanders of philosophy. a legit brainlet

[Anonymous No.12905409]

>>12905400
Well I don’t disagree with you however it means you can’t make appeals to authority type arguments. It also means you have no other choice than to recognize Jordan Peterson as the most important and popular western intellectual alive right now regardless of what your feelings on him are as he’s accredited and was even cited often before he was popular. Is this the world you want to live in? I’ll wait.

[Anonymous No.12905414]

>>12905400
Don't argue with poltards it is always a waste of your time

[Anonymous No.12905419]

>>12905404
What you’re desiring is the age of scientism but nobility classes have always exited. There’s no reason to think we can socialize people to maximize their education anymore than we already have and we peaked with literacy already. What we’re seeing now is. Degeneration.

[Anonymous No.12905424]

>>12905414
>HAR HAR MY ARGUMENTS ARE GETTING RAPED PUBLICLY
>TIME TO CALL THEM ALL NAZIS HEHEHE

[Anonymous No.12905425]

>>12905391
>>12905404
When I say intellectual, I don't mean "that guy I work with who's pretty smart and well-read", I mean it as an institutional class of people who exist to do nothing more than think. The bourgeoisie are either not capable or not interested (probably a mixture of both) in thinking for themselves and pursuing "high culture" so a natural class of thinkers have arisen in the form of the intellectual class exiting on the dime of the bourgeoisie-ruled system. But these are people who are entirely in the realm of the thinker, rather than the doer (even moreso than the bourgeoisie who at least has the ability to pull himself up economically on his own accord), and because of this their thoughts are detached from reality and peppered in arrogant naivete. What's the solution? Seems obvious to me that the best answer we have right now (not to say its impossible that a better answer will not present itself) is for a martial class to seize power once again and subvert the intellectuals, bourgeoisie, and whoever else with pure strength of force. They'd at least be capable of creating a high culture anchored in the reality of action, and therefore virtue.

[Anonymous No.12905445]

>>12905424
That was my first post ITT but I think its about time I take my own advice

[Anonymous No.12905452]

>>12905425
>these people aren't digging ditches so they must be "detached from reality"
wew lad

[Anonymous No.12905457]

>>12905425
I agree with this. I believe this happened during different periods of French intellectual life (maybe even as far back as the French Revolution? I can’t readily recall right now) but certainly it isn’t unheard of for the populace of places to seize intellectual life and considering the separation from the general public and the internet it actually seems ripe for this to happen. I think this is one of the main functions of academia now; to gatekeep data otherwise they cease to matter. Proprietary things like JSTOR are very protective of their data and looking at a person like Aaron Schwartz is proof that they’ll throw all their institutional might to hold on to that power.

[Anonymous No.12905465]

>>12904409
good taste in music anon

[Anonymous No.12905470]

>>12905425
its capitalism bro, edgy teens buy his books so he works. kinda ironic though

[Anonymous No.12905504]

>>12905465
ty

[Anonymous No.12905531]

>>12905419
But I'm not necessarily sure if I'm talking about maximizing education or literacy. I think what I'm trying to say is more along the lines of education reform. Take cognitive science for example. It's interdisciplinary field which is more of a discussion between linguistics, neuroscience, mathematics, analytical philosophy etc. But more radical than that. Something like the intersection between cog sci and political sci or neuroscience and anthropology. A shared and organic public sphere cant exist between these disciplines because of what Kenneth Burke called "trained incapacity". This idea is the same phenomenon which prevents us from seeing the common enterprise that academia ought to have.

Public intellectuals are a step in the right direction in this sense because their ideas usually come from a place of specialization but they also engage with other rhetorical fields. Of course an ideal in my system wouldnt necessarily be a public intellectual

[Anonymous No.12905540]

>>12904529
These cats do the same when smearing Ayn Rand too.

[Anonymous No.12905546]

>>12904573

bro multiple interpretations does not equate to ‘no real meaning’ you are really stupid

[Anonymous No.12905550]

>>12905425
Eh. I half agree with you. Virtue is not action though virtue is thoughtful action, its premeditated, deliberated, and ultimately understood to the point of habit not simply empty habit itself. Well this is only if you take Aristotle as a starting point for virtue.

Without intellectuals and the acknowledgement of the pursuit of a "guiding principle" action becomes incapable of legitimate change or growth.

[Anonymous No.12905564]

>>12905531
Specialization does continue to maximize and continue to spread out. Every field has a vested interest In propagating itself. The entire point of higher education was to culture ourselves in not just our majors but the humanities AND sciences. The more commodified its become the further away this is. Why even study for a two year degree if ones goal is to make money in a specialized field? Not to mention the humanities are so hijacked by ideology that the education of graduates is more focused on esoteric writings or history of POC rather than classics there’s no point in trying to culture yourself to move into the higher classes. You can’t discuss Milton if you only ever read Alice Walker. So I agree with you that it should be reformed but your grand vision for a more engaged society of people just isn’t something that’s going to happen. We’re on an unstoppable train now.

[Anonymous No.12905567]

>>12904402
How is this news to anyone? Zizek has no qualifications. He does not know ANYTHING. He has no understanding of music. He has no understanding of science. He has no understand of psychology. He has no understanding of politics. He is an intellectual, his job is to talk about things he has NO UNDERSTANDING OF, and to be convincing, and to convince a particular way. Zizek is an idiot because idiots are for Zizek.

[Anonymous No.12905570]

>>12905546
there is no real meaning to most absolute music
you could imagine one though, the meaning to the piece is just continue with the variations and conclude the symphony

[Anonymous No.12905578]

>>12905567
pretty decent bait 7/10 was a little too heavy-handed with the idiocy to be believable. tone that down and it'll be perfect

[Anonymous No.12905584]

>>12905570
what is a particular example of music with meaning in your eyes?

[Anonymous No.12905586]

>>12905564
Yes I agree with the first half of what you said. I think it's not just post secondary but secondary school too. I think c wright mills wrote about this phenomenon. But idk i dont know if it has to be an unttainable goal. We just need to find a way to contemporize classical liberal education lol.

[Anonymous No.12905588]

>>12905578
>32 unique IPs
>157 replies
Aren't you tired of being stupid?

[Anonymous No.12905589]

>>12905584
The sound your moms pussy makes when I slam that clam

[Anonymous No.12905605]

>>12905586
Well it doesn’t seem like it’ll
Happen anytime soon. We need to make Washington focus on that issue but they’ve been scared to touch it because college debt is so out of control. Maybe when that bubbles pops or when we balance the budget and the middle class are fucked it’ll be updated. In some places we basically teach Cold War era pedagogy. It’s also worrying how many of these intellectuals have made these fields so distinct and authoritative.

[Anonymous No.12905608]

>>12905584
well an opera obviously or any form of programme music, or even something without words like Liszt's Mesphisto waltz which uses music to imitate a text.

however thats not to say most classical music is meaningless no I find absolute music more meaninglful to me, not in the sense that
it translates messages or stories from english but how what it does in the whelm of sound, the harmony develops, the themes are treated e.t.c thats musical meaning

[Anonymous No.12905667]

>>12904503
pop culture is a major contributor to the maintenance of capitalism hegemony over the cultural sphere.

[Anonymous No.12905677]

>people unironically take anything this unwashed hegelcel writes or says seriously
he is good for a laugh and not much else

[Anonymous No.12905850]

>>12904938
>Opioid of the people
What specifically did Marx mean by this phrase? Does he think religion is perscribed by the state, rather than an organic desire for meaning hijacked by the state? Comparing religion to opium just seems clumsy unless I'm missing something.

[Anonymous No.12905929]

>>12904630
What Beethoven was thinking is at best a minor curiosity. It might be interesting to know, but it's irrelevant for anything other than being mildly cool.

[Anonymous No.12905938]

>>12904402

Welcome to literally all continental philosophy, from Kant onwards.

Now imagine double the retardation on much more weighty subjects, white the philosopher is being worshipped as a world changing genius.

[Anonymous No.12905947]

>>12904402
peterson is for reddit alt right kiddies. zizek is for reddit young commies. both are shit, the only difference is zizek fags are more likely to rage out like pitbulls in defense of him.

[Anonymous No.12906229]

>>12905367

This is 100% correct. Some guys who achieve prominence in their field suddenly start to think they can lecture people in other fields of which they only understand the basics themselves (or in the case Peterson not even the basics).
Their ignorance of their own ignorance disqualifies them as intellectuals.
I'm following a financial risk management course which is given by a mathematician who thinks his phd in maths is enough for him to also understand everything about climate change and to assume the IPCC and the consensus among 99% of scientists is wrong.

[Anonymous No.12906328]

>>12904402
It is, same for his contemporaries. He can sometimes be funny though.

[Anonymous No.12906561]

>>12905850
No he compared the act of going to church and participating in religion as something akin to opium houses. Remember that Marx was writing at a time when atheism was becoming hip and cool so he argued that proles use religion to escape the pain of labouring for the capitalist

[Anonymous No.12906594]

>>12905947
t. subtle petersteinfag

[Anonymous No.12907962]

>>12904755
fuck off back to mumsnet you schweinhund.

[Anonymous No.12908649]

>>12904402

>Rightists

"Wow this Wagner piece makes me think of the will of man, my country, nationalism, traditional values, conquest and such... Perhaps there is something more to this that we can exploit to stratify our cultural hegemony

>Also rightists

"Lol stupid commies and their MICROANALYSIS and INTERPRETATION - music is just music, nothing else".

[Anonymous No.12909326]

>>12904503
Trying to speak to the proletariat obviously

[Anonymous No.12910616]

>>12904402
>beethoven's 9th is ideology
Holy shit, this idiot never even read The Birth of Tragedy

[Anonymous No.12911156]

>>12904682
this but unironically

[Anonymous No.12911274]

>>12904748
Do you seriously believe Beethoven inserted a post-ironic jab at the audience for taking his music seriously? Seems like a pretty unfounded and ridiculous thing to think given what a serious-minded perfectionist who was obsessed with writing music with authentic emotional expression.

[Anonymous No.12911392]

>>12911274
yes, but even if he didn't it literally doesn't matter because it's just an example to demonstrate Zizek's larger point about ideology

[Anonymous No.12911477]

>>12904402
>>12904443
Well, yes, Zizek is projecting his own view onto Schiller's poem and Beethoven's music. That's quite common to do. You aren't really saying much yourself either, though.
>>12904495
Arguably the most striking part of the 9th is the "terror fanfare" (as Wagner put it) at the very beginning. The finale is otherwise quite a disaster and hardly Beethoven's best piece. The other 3 movements, however, are quite good.
>>12904503
No one takes pop culture hate nearly as far as Adorno. Most people who identify as communist - at least in my experience - find him elitist and even insinuate his hatred of jazz to be racist.
>>12904541
The second Beethoven added Schiller's poem to his composition, he made it at least somewhat programmatic. Now, yes, it can exist by itself without that context very well, meaning that it can also simultaneously be absolute music, but, for most, it is not listened to that way. Everyone tries to apply some sort of meaning to that final movement, and it's usually projected entirely from within, or, if you're more conservative, you merely stick to Schiller's words.
>>12904682
The blunt, rhapsodic nature of the variations on a nursery rhyme - which are highly inconsistent - are more of a failing on Beethoven's part than him making a statement on anything in particular.
>>12904748
It's really not that likely. There are cases where Beethoven certainly took jabs at the audience in his compositions, but if you read the history around the 9th and its premiere he seems quite genuine in his approach to it and was overwhelmed with joy at the positive reception it got.
>>12908649
Wagner's music has words attached to it much of the time and he was himself a philosopher of sorts. Those elements are weaved into his libretti. The majority of Beethoven's music - especially the popular pieces - is primarily absolute.

[Anonymous No.12911479]

>>12904402
>>12904443
zizek's might be stretching by saying that beethoven was practising any sort of critique of ideology, but the first half about the universality of the tune and its political use to celebrate universality is well known (perhaps not in burgerland?)
and the second part about critique, is acknowledged as irony (albeit explicitly non-political) even by wittgenstein (although about the first movement):
>In Beethoven's music what one might call the expression of irony is to be found for the first time. e.g. in the first movement of the Ninth. With him, moreover, it is a terrible irony, that of fate perhaps. -- In Wagner irony reappears, but turned into something bourgeois.
>You could no doubt say that Wagner & Brahms, each in his own way, imitated Beethoven; but what with him was cosmic, is earthly with them.

(also interesting, on the fourth):
>Phenomena akin to language in music or architecture. Significant irregularity--in Gothic e.g. (I have in mind too the towers of St. Basil's Cathedral.) Bach's music is more like language than Mozart's & Haydn's. The double bass recitative in the 4th movement of Beethoven's 9th Symphony. (Compare too Schopenhauer's remark about _universal_ music composed to a _particular_ text.)

[Anonymous No.12911487]

>>12911479
Yeah, Wittgenstein is wrong there. I wish people who made grand statements on these kinds of things would at least brush up on music history. Hell, you don't even have to go far - Haydn - who taught Beethoven - wrote many an ironic piece. Though they are largely only humorous to those who can read music. Though it's no fault of WIttgenstein to not know this, you can actually chase back expressive irony to the Medieval Era. The original Carmina Burana, for instance.

[Anonymous No.12911776]

>>12905270
Ayy what's wrong with saying that?

[Anonymous No.12911922]

>>12905282
this is true

[Anonymous No.12911929]

That video is pure bullshit, as expected from a continental.

His main interpretation is: the first part of the 4th movement of the 9th Symphony is ideology; the second part, which is somber (actually, it's just a Mass-like sequence, which makes sense considering Beethoven actually wrote the Missa Solemnis around the same time and that the movement had already used a chorus) is supposed to be ''critique'' of ideology.

The problem, of course, is that HE GIVES NO ARGUMENT.

As much of continental prose (and the script is prose) it is merely assertive writing, not argumentative writing. Zizek states, but doesn't prove anything.

As such, it is very hard to refute, because when you want to refute something the first thing you look for is an argument, and there is none to be had here. The nearest thing to an argument is based on uses of the 9th symphony in history and in the movie The Clockwork Orange, but that of course has nothing to do with what Beethoven was doing/not doing, since the way people use a work of art has nothing to do with the intentions of the artist - but still, Zizek clearly states that Beethoven is critiquing ideology. Makes no sense.

What Beethoven is doing is merely to develop a theme which he stated in the first part of the movement into a Mass. At the end of the movement, the joy comes back again in its whole triumphal ''ideology-like'' simplicity. Just listen to the coda, for God's sake.

Here's an interpretation by an actual intellectual:

'In line with Cook's remarks, Charles Rosen characterizes the final movement as a symphony within a symphony, played without interruption.[32] This "inner symphony" follows the same overall pattern as the Ninth Symphony as a whole:

First "movement": Theme and variations with slow introduction. The main theme, first in the cellos and basses, is later recapitulated by voices.
Second "movement": Scherzo in a 6
8 military style. It begins at Alla marcia (m. 331) and concludes with a 6
8 variation of the main theme with chorus.
Third "movement": Slow meditation with a new theme on the text "Seid umschlungen, Millionen!" It begins at Andante maestoso (m. 595).
Fourth "movement": Fugato finale on the themes of the first and third "movements". It begins at Allegro energico (m. 763).

The movement has a thematic unity in which every part is based on either the main theme, the "Seid umschlungen" theme, or some combination of the two.[citation needed] Indeed, Rosen also notes that the movement can also be analysed as a set of variations and simultaneously as a concerto sonata form with double exposition (with the fugato acting both as a development section and the second tutti of the concerto).[32] '

[Anonymous No.12911955]

>>12911487
This goes to show how you shouldn't take philosophers that seriously.

Really, I've had Music 101 courses in the past and Haydn's use of humor and irony is ALWAYS mentioned when his name starts coming up.

How could Wittgenstein not have known that?

Was he musically illiterate? Wasn't his brother a pianist? Didn't he grow in 19/20th century Vienna?

Jesus Christ, what a complete fool.

Why do continentals (Witt might be an analytic in content, I don't know, but in terms of style and illusions of grandeur he sounds very much like a continental) insist on making such bold statements on things they HAVE NOT PROPERLY STUDIED IN THE MOST TECHNICAL, SCIENTIFIC SENSE OF THE VERB ''TO STUDY''?

[Anonymous No.12911965]

>>12911477
>Well, yes, Zizek is projecting his own view onto Schiller's poem and Beethoven's music. That's quite common to do.

Maybe in continental circles, not among actual musicologists.

I mean, there's a difference between devising a well-informed, albeit somewhat personal interpretation (as all interpretations will inevitably be), and completely extrapolating things in a very badly-informed manner just so they can fit your stupid philosophy, which is what that pseudointellectual Zizek did.

[Anonymous No.12911967]

>>12904899
>just a racket
Worse than pop music.

[Anonymous No.12911998]

>>12911929
Yup. Pretty much. It also wasn't the first time Beethoven had used these elements in his music. Granted, the 9th is considerably more rhapsodic on the surface.

I don't really mind these kinds of interpretations towards music, I just wish they weren't stated so authoritatively. "Here's what this music means to me" is much better than "here's what Beethoven meant by this." There's a certain kind of arrogance in the latter sentiment that I don't quite like.

>>12911955
His brother was indeed a pianist. Ravel wrote his Piano Concerto for the Left Hand for him, for which there is a (rather bad) recording of.

I don't really have a strong opinion on Wittgenstein the philosopher, though. There's certainly a musical ignorance there, but that's so common that I'm hardly incensed by that. But ignorance is one thing, and espousing incorrect information as facts is another - for that I certainly lose a bit of respect for him.

>>12911965
That's true. But musicians and musicologists can do it too. A good example is Shostakovich, who has had some stupendously awful musicology surrounding him. Thankfully there are sane minds who push back against that, though.

There are only a few philosophers who I think are particularly adept (or, at the very least, acceptable) at talking about music. It isn't a high number.

[Anonymous No.12912000]

>>12911955
>shouldn't take philosophers seriously
Obviously. The majority of continental philosophers were absolute hacks spewing off artistic (and autistic) ramblings about things they knew nothing about simply because they were too inept and narcissistic to just write fiction. With the exception of analytic philosophers and philosophers such as Marx and Descartes (who can be seen a strong more analytical in their approach) you should look at philosophers as nothing more than artists.
Just to bring another point up. Žižek unironically has stated that the structure of toilets in different nations is representative of the nations ideology.

[Anonymous No.12912898]

>>12911929
Imagine being such a brainlet you think Zizek was talking about music. The veracity of Beethoven's intentions matter about as much as if Plato had an actual cave with people chained in it.

[Anonymous No.12912960]

>>12904865
>accomplished psychologist

[Anonymous No.12913030]

>>12904503
Read the 1971 article "Cinema/Criticism/Ideology" by Camolli and Narboni.

[Anonymous No.12913074]

>>12912898
>explicitly mentions Beethoven all the time
>says 'Ode to Joy' repeatedly
>talks about the ''two parts'' (it's more, but he's a brainlet) of the fourth movement
>says that Beethoven was critiquing ideology MUSICALLY
>no, sweetie, he isn't really, like, you know, talking about music, you know what I mean? maybe you should read my favorite authors, then you'd be really smart like me and be able to comprehend such complex intellectuals like Zizek

Back to Paris, Jean.

[Anonymous No.12913140]

>>12913074
>explicitly mentions cave all the time
>says 'chained to the wall' repeatedly
>talks about the ''shadows'' (it's more, but he's a brainlet) on the wall
>says the people couldn't look away PHYSICALLY
>no, sweetie, he isn't really, like, you know, talking about people in a cave, you know what I mean? maybe you should read any other philosophers, then you might not be so much of a brainlet to miss the point of an example this hard
He says Kung Fu Panda does the same thing the 9th does, you are getting hung up on literally the dumbest minutiae. I should break it to you now, you know those jokes Zizek tells? Those never happened either

[Anonymous No.12913298]

>>12905938
>>12905947
>>12905567
>>12905018
brainlets

>>12904443
king of the brainlets

[Anonymous No.12913301]

>>12912898
>>12913140
He even tries to play music analysis by referencing specific parts of the compositional techniques therein and botches it. Sorry, but Zizek was simply wrong about this one.

[Anonymous No.12913336]

>>12913301
no one's denying he's analyzing the peice, the mistake is assuming he's doing musicology. he is talking about ideology, and if you are really Zizek-pilled, speculative ontology.

[Anonymous No.12913344]

>>12913336
>the mistake is assuming he's doing musicology.
No one said he was.

[Anonymous No.12913430]

>>12913140
That's a completely fallacious analogy and you know it.

The cave myth is a thought experiment. What Zizek is doing is talking about how Beethoven MUSICALLY 'criticizes' ideology.

Jesus, you post-modern idiots are unbearable.

[Anonymous No.12913528]

>>12913430
It's entirely plausible, and even expected, for music to accomplish something outside of its author's intentions. Whether or not it does what Zizek says that it does I don't know. But I think it is pretty naive to approach anything in the human sciences as if it were just a matter of either objectively describing the "meaning" of the work or of recounting subjective impressions. It isn't eo ipso stupid, although it might be poorly advanced, to argue a work of art has a critical function in a certain context, entirely apart from what the author thought he was doing. I am not really even that sympathetic to Zizek's argument. I just think authors must be more than themselves, and that the whole enterprise of art would be something really pathetic were it constrained by the creator's self-conception.

Also the cave myth is not a "thought experiment" (because not hypothesis about the facts of reality) but an illustration of how beings appear according to the orientation of the soul.

[Anonymous No.12913556]

>>12913528
Zizek says it was beethoven's intention

And what he calls "carnival music" is a March that only is one if the variations and is halfway though a 20 minute movement, anyone familiar with the piece would know Zizek is being an idiot

Also his talk about clockwork orange is again Bs, Alex likes all classical music i dont think the chorale movement is even mentioned in the book

[Anonymous No.12913577]

>>12904503
they just try to find excuses about why it's totally not their fault that they failed in normal everyday life stuff

[Anonymous No.12913584]

>>12904682
everything is ideology by Zizek's standard, not exactly a very useful concept when you can apply it to literally anything

[Anonymous No.12913601]

>>12913344
did you not read the thread or something? that's the general assumption itt
>>12911965

[Anonymous No.12913609]

>>12913556
>the book
Zizek never mentioned the book, it's a documentary specifically about films

[Anonymous No.12913623]

>>12913609
Even in the film he listens to a different classical music and different beethoven than the chorale music

The actor even said they picked beethovens 9th just cause Burges liked the piece a lot and there was no deeper message to their choice

[Anonymous No.12913714]

>>12913601
Where did he say that Zizek was playing musicologist? He's just saying that musicologists would never make a statement like that, probably because they know the actual history and meaning behind the music.

[Anonymous No.12913738]

>>12913528
>It's entirely plausible, and even expected, for music to accomplish something outside of its author's intentions.
Agreed. The issue is mostly that he was claiming it was all Beethoven. Now, I know this is a common thing and all, but I still like to go after it when I see it, especially when it's so out of sorts with reality. I don't even dislike Zizek's viewpoint, I think it's an interesting one. But was it Beethoven's intentions to convey such ideology? Probably not. Of course Beethoven's 9th can mean many different things to people, and that's a beautiful thing. I just wish people would own their interpretations for what they are, rather than relying on the author as a crutch to give a false sense of authority to their arguments. Maybe that's too harsh. Maybe I'm just being autistic.

[Anonymous No.12913788]

>>12913623
>deeper message
again, not Zizek's point. Kung Fu Panda does the same thing in his eyes.

[Anonymous No.12913791]

>>12913714
why bring up what a musicologist would say if you don't assume he's doing musicology?

[Anonymous No.12913966]

>>12904682

By all accounts, Beethoven himself was a hillbilly, as crude as his music.

[Anonymous No.12914014]

>>12913788
Except again he explitecly says it was Beethoven's intention and even if it is a personnel interpretation if his its a super shitty one

Sorry but zizek has outed himself out as a brainlet

[Anonymous No.12914034]

>>12914014
>I can't deal with his claims about ideology so I'll pick some random battle about Beethoven's intentions for writing the 9th
kek I would literally off myself if my brain was this impaired.

[Anonymous No.12914047]

I had no idea even /lit/ is such a cesspool

[Anonymous No.12914072]

>>12914034
>cant Defend brainlet zizek so try and pretend he never made that argument

Dude just accept hes an idiot, he cant even talk without sounding like a frog

If he wanted to use a model to set his theory he could have taken a better example than completely misrepresenting beeth and making himself look like a brainlet

[Anonymous No.12914105]

>>12914072
The Beethoven story isn't his thesis you absolute brainlet, he uses like two dozen examples to illustrate his point throughout the film. He wrote multiple books on his theory of ideology, do you think the evidence he based all that on was the Beethoven anecdote? Again, it's like trying to defend Plato from someone really hung up on the logistics of chaining people in a cave; you don't understand what he's talking about so you've picked a lower level claim and decided that was the important issue in the argument. You are missing the forest for the one tree carved like Beethoven.

[Anonymous No.12914110]

>>12904682
>>12913966

See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBimK9qhaeY

[Anonymous No.12914124]

>>12914105
Total bs, he states clearly that the march variation is suppose to mock the theme

[Anonymous No.12914172]

>>12914124
the point is that it does. if you watch the film he literally doesn't give a shit about what the filmmakers intended when they made the film. this is a throwaway anecdote among many to demonstrate a larger point about the ontological structures which allow ideology to function. do you have a single argument against his larger point? can you even articulate what he's trying to talk about?

[Anonymous No.12914187]

>>12914172
Lol the cope is real

You cant spin it anyway to make sense

Zizek is just a bullshit artist

[Anonymous No.12914201]

>>12914124
Forget it.

Continentals are all the same, they will defend their pretty little idols until they finally die of exhaustion and acute brainletism.

That's the same thing for all Marxists, psychoanalysts and whatnot. They're just like Christians, and will never accept their personal idol might actually be a fake.

[Anonymous No.12914226]

>>12914187
>>12914201
I can't even tell if this is a troll anymore, now you're just straight up reddit posting

[Anonymous No.12915504]

>>12905452
Unironically. I grew up experiencing life through a screen and smoking weed and living in my head. I've started trying to be active in the world more and it's therapeutic, reality feels real in a way that thinking alone does not capture. Acting things out with your body aids thinking, makes you attatched to the real world. Some tools that I use to increase my attachment with the world: tennis balls. I told my dad they're like vr controls for real life. Gardening: you pull the weeds from the ground, you pull the weeds from your mind. You plant seeds and nurture them into bearing fruit, but it takes time and care and persistence. The world is best encaptured in metaphors that you physically act out.

[Anonymous No.12915522]

>>12915504
>In short: I am projecting.

[Anonymous No.12915617]

>>12915504
I'm the anon you replied to. What you described seems to be a jump from one shadow to another. You've substituted one particular world with a newer one. The big problem here is that the "realness" shared between those two worlds is in fact exactly the same. What difference in nature is there between those two circumstances you described? They are both particular, material in substance, ever-changing, temporal, and most apparently imperfect.

Only that place which really does differ from this world in how it is immaterial, eternal, and perfect can be considered truly "real", or at the very least much more real than any world falling short of it such as the world we occupy in our day-to-day lives no matter how we organize ourselves. This sort of true reality different from the crude imitation we live in can only be accessed by a mind which thinks, so limiting thought can only have the effect of further detaching ourselves from such reality. You might *feel* better, for now, but such feelings have no correlation to the truth of the apparent reality you experience.

[Anonymous No.12915628]

>>12915617
It would be a great work, if you put a negative sign in front of it.

[Anonymous No.12915700]

>>12915617
Please read the Parmenides and stop putting Plato's face on your antimaterialism.

[Anonymous No.12915816]

>>12915700
Are you claiming Plato does not think Forms are more real than particular material? You might think I'm making a stronger claim than I actually am, or maybe you misread Plato as a dualist.

[Anonymous No.12915853]

>>12915816
The whole of the Parmenides is based upon a rejection of the divided line advanced in the middle dialogues. That is what the first half of the dialogue accomplishes. The hypothetical treatment of the One is a treatment of form in itself and an attempt to deduce particulars out of the nature of form, to avoid the problem of participation. Aristotle's later introduction of form as energeia belongs to the same general critique of participation advanced in that dialogue and in other later dialogues like the Sophist. If you are still thinking in terms of form and material participant you have not understood the late Plato.

[Anonymous No.12915873]

>Philosophers
>The Arts
lel

[Anonymous No.12915909]

>>12915853
>If you are still thinking in terms of form and material participant you have not understood the late Plato.
Well shit that's exactly what terms I was thinking in. Time to read I guess

[Anonymous No.12915949]

>>12904402
So you want to talk about a YouTube video rather than his writing on /lit/?

[Anonymous No.12915963]

>>12915873
Trying to explain art comprehensively is like trying to cook shit. Competent philosophers understand this. Most artists can't even explain their art. Look at Tarkovsky, who tried and failed. Lynch completely refuses. And does any of Stockhausen sound good except for his explanations? Critics are the problem, not philosophers.

[Anonymous No.12915965]

>>12915909
The Parmenides is a great and misunderstand dialogue, and has been ever since it was hypostatically reinterpreted by later Platonisms.

[Anonymous No.12915973]

>>12915853
>>12915909
>>12915965

[Anonymous No.12916021]

>>12915973
Heidegger has a great but untranslated lecture series on the dialogue which was preserved only in notes by Herbert Marcuse. Soon there will be a somewhat comprehensive paper published on it, but no translation as yet. He places particular emphasis upon the third hypotheses and the instant. Another scholar, of a more Hegelian bent, named Doull, has also sensed the importance of the instant. It completely re-frames the question of rest, motion, being and time.

[Anonymous No.12916762]

>>12915963
I think it's more of an issue with 20th century art and on. Earlier artwork is generally speaking a lot easier to breakdown. Well, unless it's viewed through the lens of modernity.

[Anonymous No.12916769]

>>12908649

>Leftists

Reddit spacing.

[Anonymous No.12916777]

>>12916769
libtards absolutely BTFO how will they ever recover

[Anonymous No.12916784]

>>12916769

You're "reddit spacing", too, you dumbfuck chud.

[Anonymous No.12916799]

>>12916777
>>12916784

>libtards absolutely BTFO

>chud

Looks like I was right.

>>>/r/ChapoTrapHouse

[Anonymous No.12916808]

>>12916799

Notice how this stormweenie knows about obscure leftist subreddits and even knows how reddit formats their subs with /r/.

>>>/r/The_Donald.

[Anonymous No.12916844]

>>12916808

>knows about obscure leftist subreddits

>knows how reddit formats their subs with /r/.

Just how new are you?

[Anonymous No.12916904]

For me, I like the 1942 Furtwangler version with the genius camera traveling while chorus sings alle Menschen werden Brüder
>https://youtu.be/2itdv1aEpG4

[Anonymous No.12916918]

>>12911274
Beethoven was known for doing that when he improvised, he'd have the audience in tears and then abruptly shatter the mood on a dime for lulz

[Anonymous No.12917096]

>>12916904
It's a decent version, but I honestly think Furt's best wartime recordings were of Bruckner. Especially the 5th and 9th.

[Anonymous No.12918136]

>>12916808
>stormweenie

[Anonymous No.12918224]

>>12904402
>Self plagiarized his own books a billion times
>Constantly on various national TV
>Constantly has the most retarded hot takes on everything, clearly in order to generate scandal and have people buy his books
>Constantly enacting this imagine of Le weird commie philosopher
I can't tell if he's lost any hope in the world and has gone full ride the tiger or he's never been serious in the first place

[Anonymous No.12918237]

>>12918224
he literally ran as the candidate for the liberal party on this country and when push comes to shove he is always on the side of the elites rather than the workers

i think he just plays the communist persona for academic cool points