Come here for focussed discussion and debate on the Giant of Ljubljana, Slavoj iek and the Slovenian school of psychoanalytically informed philosophy. "Qu produce ms felicidad, el marxismo o el capitalismo?". The Peterson-iek encounter was the ultra-rare case of a debate in 2019 that was perhaps too civil. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. enjoy while Zizek is his tick-ridden idiosyncratic self. Get counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday. The very premise of tonight's event is that we all participate in the life of, thought. Zizek will suit up for Team M and Peterson will wear the "C" on his hometown jersey. Because the left doesn't have its own house in order", "Is 'cultural Marxism' really taking over universities? Finally, the common space of humanity itself. ", Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window), Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window), Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window), Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window), Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window), Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window), Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window), Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window), Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window). The wager of democracy is that we should not give all power to competent experts, because precisely Communists in power who, legitimise this rule, by posing as fake experts. He said that belief in God can legitimize the terror of those who claim to act on behalf of God. intellectuals). Todays China combines these two features in its extreme form strong, totalitarian state, state-wide capitalist dynamics. By the end of his half-hour he had not mentioned the word happiness once. Studies suggest that meditation can quiet the restless brain. Two Teams Per Debate Argue For Opposing Positions On An Issue. Its not just that in spite of all our natural and cultural differences the same divine sparks dwells in everyone. What appears as its excesses its regulatory zeal is I think an impotent reaction that masks the reality of a defeat. Zizek and Peterson sell books for cash, but cash is just what you need for the real prize: the minds of men. Both Zizek and Peterson transcend their titles, their disciplines, and the academy, just as this debate we hope will transcend purely economic questions by situating those in the frame of happiness of human flourishing itself. But it did reveal one telling commonality. 76.3K ,809 . TikTok Zizek is my dad (@zizekcumsock): "From the Zizek-Peterson debate. Cookie Notice Never presume that your suffering is in itself proof of your authenticity. [19] Harrison Fluss and Sam Miller of Jacobin reported that Peterson made many factual errors, such as misunderstanding the labour theory of value, incorrectly associating Marx broadly with identity politics, and denying the existence of a Marxist philosophy of nature. They passionately support LGBT, they advocate charities and so on. 2 define the topic, if . "[1][6] According to Matthew Sharpe writing for The Conversation, .mw-parser-output .templatequote{overflow:hidden;margin:1em 0;padding:0 40px}.mw-parser-output .templatequote .templatequotecite{line-height:1.5em;text-align:left;padding-left:1.6em;margin-top:0}, the term 'cultural Marxism' moved into the media mainstream around 2016, when psychologist Jordan Peterson was protesting a Canadian bill prohibiting discrimination based on gender. Email: mfedorovsky@gmail.com Resumen: La presente colaboracin es una resea sobre el debate llevado a cabo entre los intelectuales de izquierda y derecha, communism", though fittingly this drive was much more centralized). more disjointed. a.Teams are iterating, but the system is not b.Conflict and disagreement on processes and practices are difficult to, Program Increment (PI) Planning is a major event that requires preparation, coordination, and communication. [12][13], The debate was divided into two thirty-minute introductions from each participant, followed by shorter ten-minute responses and time at the end for additional comments and answers to questions posed by the moderator, Stephen J. knowledgeable about communism. But, nonetheless, deeply divided. Below is the transcript of Zizeks introductory statement. The threat of ecological catastrophe, the consequence of new techno-scientific developments, especially in biogenetics, and new forms of apartheid. He is a dazzling. If we learned anything from psychoanalysis, its that we humans are very creative in sabotaging our pursuit of happiness. The two generally agreed on. If the academic left is all-powerful, they get to indulge in their victimization. please join me in welcoming to the stage Doctor Slavoj iek and Doctor Jordan Peterson. vastly different backgrounds). Peterson and Zizek Debate - transcribed by John Li - johnmhli@berkeley.edu - 916 623 5512 - https://chicago.academia.edu/JohnLi - // I used both voice to text software and then a manual read through - there are still plenty of transcription errors I haven't caught and corrected (I didn't expect this to come out to be over 20 pages and how Zizek versus Peterson Peterson argues against the postmodern neo-Marxist position held by, in his terms, "the radical left." This position emerged during the '60s but was initiated by the Frankfurt School, which emerged after World War II as a response to the rise of fascism in Europe. Tonight, "philosopher" Slavoj iek will debate "psychologist" Jordan Peterson in Toronto, ostensibly on the subject of Capitalism vs. Marxism. Pity Jordan Peterson. To cite this article: Ania Lian (2019): The Toronto Debate: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek on Ethics and Happiness, The European Legacy, DOI: 10.1080/10848770.2019.1616901 iek is also defined, and has been for years, by his contempt for postmodern theory and, by extension, the more academic dimensions of political correctness. Kierkegaard, mine and everybodys favourite theologist, wrote If a child says he will obey his father because his father is a competent and good guy, this is an affront to fathers authority. Instead they often engage in self-destructive behavior. But, a danger lurks here, that of a subtly reversal: dont fall in love thats my position with your suffering. I always thought that neoliberalism is a fake term. Furthermore, I think that social power and authority cannot be directly grounded in competence. Id like the share the debate with a hearing impaired friend. The cause of problems which are, I claim, immanent to todays global capitalism, is projected onto an external intruder. In Peterson's defense, he did manage to stay much closer to the actual topic of the debate, while Zizek jumped wildly between a dizzying number of subjects. Along the same lines, one could same that if most of the Nazi claims about Jews they exploit Germans, the seduce German girls were true, which they were not of course, their anti-Semitism would still be a pathological phenomenon, because it ignored the true reason why the Nazis needed anti-Semitism. It's hard not to crack up when out of time for either, but points a problem with capitalism on what Marx called "commons" (I By rejecting non-essential cookies, Reddit may still use certain cookies to ensure the proper functionality of our platform. Why do I still cling to this cursed name when I know and fully admit that the 20th century Communist project in all its failure, how it failed, giving birth to new forms of murderous terror. More than a century ago in his Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky warned against the dangers of godless moral nihilism if god doesnt exist, then everything is permitted. ", "Video: Analizirali Smo 'Filozofsku Debatu Stoljea': Pred prepunom dvoranom umove 'ukrstili' iek i Peterson, debata ostavila mlak dojam", "The Jordan PetersonSlavoj iek debate was good for something", "Why Conservatives Get Karl Marx Very, Very Wrong", "What I Learned at the 'Debate' Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek", "How Zizek Should Have Replied to Jordan Peterson", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Petersoniek_debate&oldid=1142515270, This page was last edited on 2 March 2023, at 21:02. Key Agile Release Train stakeholders, including Business Owners, What can occur as a result of not having an Innovation and Planning Iteration? Deep underwater, temperatures are close to freezing and the pressure is 1,000 times higher than at sea level. He seemed, in person, quite gentle. Jacques Lacan wrote something paradoxical but deeply true, that even if what a jealous husband claims his wife that she sleeps with other men is all true, his jealously is nonetheless pathological. Like I said before, I appreciated immensely that both men seemed pretty much on Marxism: Zizek/Peterson: Official Video Jordan B Peterson 6.5M subscribers Subscribe 86K 4.3M views 3 years ago I posted this yesterday, but the volume was too low, so now it's been raised.. : Just a few words of introduction. Does Donald Trump stand for traditional values? Not merely opinion or prejudice, but the realm of truth, access through evidence and, argument. Let me now briefly deal with in a friendly way I claim with what became known sorry for the irony as the lobster topic. It projects, or transposes, some immanent antagonism however you call it, ambiguity, tension of our social economic lives onto an external cause, in exactly the same way. I was surprised (and a bit disappointed) that Peterson didn't seem more I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. And if you think It's funny to see Peterson We are spontaneously really free. There was a livestream which people could pay to access that peaked at around 6,000 viewers. History and diagnosis transcript dr. Peterson discussing "happiness, capitalism vs. Extracto del debate realizado el 19 04 19 entre el psiclogo clnico y crtico cultural jordan peterson y el filsofo y psicoanalista slavoj . Peterson is neither a racist nor a misogynist. Peterson has risen to fame on the basis of his refusal to pay the usual fealties to political correctness. I did see the debate of the century, the debate of our century. This is how refugees are created. back to this pre-modern state of affairs. Christ was justified by the fact of being Gods son not by his competencies or capacities, as Kierkegaard put it Every good student of theology can put things better than Christ. The size and scope of his fame registers more or less exactly the loathing for identity politics in the general populace, because it certainly isnt on the quality of his books that his reputation resides. He wandered between the Paleolithic period and small business management, appearing to know as little about the former as the latter. I mean primarily so called popularly neural-link, the direct link between our brain and digital machines, and then brains among themselves. For more information, please see our I cannot but notice the [] Ippolit Belinski April 30, 2019 Videos. Im far from a simple social constructionism here. His charge against Peterson's argument is followed with how he thinks Zizek What qualifies them to pass a judgement in such a delicate matter? By accepting all cookies, you agree to our use of cookies to deliver and maintain our services and site, improve the quality of Reddit, personalize Reddit content and advertising, and measure the effectiveness of advertising. It is often claimed that true or not that religion makes some otherwise bad people do good things. You can find a transcript of it here. So, let me begin by bringing together the three notions from the title Happiness, Communism, Capitalism in one exemplary case China today. The pathological element is the husbands need for jealousy as the only way for him to sustain his identity. First, a brief introductory remark. Tonight, "philosopher" Slavoj iek will debate "psychologist" Jordan Peterson in Toronto, ostensibly on the subject of Capitalism vs. Marxism. IQ, Politics, and the Left: A Conversation with Douglas Murray Transcript Nina Paley: Animator Extraordinaire Transcript Aspen Ideas Festival: From the Barricades of the Culture Wars Transcript Can we even imagine how the fragile balance of our earth functions and in what unpredictable ways geo-engineering can disturb it? That the debate will be live-streamed and more than 1,400 people have already dropped $14.95 for. Both of these men know that they are explicitly throwbacks. already. agreement (as well they should, adopting neither deluded far-left or far-right What are two key areas a Release Train Engineer should focus on to support a successful PI. Im Zentrum der Dissertation steht die Typologisierung des homme fatal, des verhngnisvollen Verfhrers innerhalb der englischen Erzhlliteratur von der Romantik bis ins fin de sicle. It's also entertaining to watch, and I suspect this was the mode in which most Scientific data seems, to me at least, abundant enough. google, pretty well on the center-right, and pretty badly on the left (broadly). This page has been accessed 35,754 times. The two professors had both argued before against happiness as something a person should pursue. Canad. The people who laugh might do it that way, he replied. Press J to jump to the feed. Capitalism won, but today and thats my claim, we can debate about it the question is, does todays global capitalism contain strong enough antagonisms that prevent its indefinite reproduction. He doesn't do much to defend Communism In totalitarian states, competencies are determined politically. But, it is instantly clear how this self-denigration brings a profit of its own. In our daily lives, we pretend to desire things which we do not really desire, so that ultimately the worst thing that can happen is to get what we officially desire. First of all it's much shorter than Peterson Vs Harris. He makes a big deal out of how he obsessed about and our (or both), this part is the most interesting. MeToo is all too often a genuine protest filtered through resentment. this event had the possibility to reach a much wider audience. The debate, titled "Happiness: Marxism vs. Capitalism," pitted Jordan Peterson against Slavoj iek, two of the West's reigning public intellectuals. It's quite interesting, but it's not Or, they were making wine in the usual way, then something went wrong with fermentation and so they began to produce champagne and so on. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. But I nonetheless found it interesting. But when youve said that, youve said everything. And sure, the level of the discussion might have been unappealing to all the Below is the transcript of zizek's introductory statement. Watching him, I was amazed that anyone had ever taken him seriously enough to hate him. And here applies the same logic to Christ himself. This page was last edited on 12 August 2019, at 11:41. But there is nonetheless the prospect of a catastrophe here. [15], Peterson's opening monologue was a reading and critical analysis of The Communist Manifesto. meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival. Hundreds of millions raised from poverty into middle class existence. And that was the great irony of the debate: what it comes down to is that they believe they are the victims of a culture of victimization. But there was one truly fascinating moment in the evening. Both rejected happiness as a primary goal for individuals and societies. The twentieth century left was defined by its opposition to the truth fundamental tendencies of modernity: the reign of capital with its aggressive market competition, the authoritarian bureaucratic state power. Conservative thinkers claim that the origin of our crisis is the loss of our reliance on some transcendent divinity. I cleaned up the Zizek's second turn speaking, since that section seemed to contain many errors: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qs7mNIUsYt9kWcdO785ec_dEWmEHLo92yTso0CVtxNk/edit?usp=sharing. China in the last decades is arguably the greatest economic success story in human history. [16] Due to lack of defence for Marxism, at one point Peterson asked iek why he associates with this ideology and not his philosophical originality, on which iek answered that he is rather a Hegelian and that capitalism has too many antagonisms for long-term peaceful sustainability. He is now a, Professor at the Institute of Sociology and Philosophy at the University of Ljubljana, and the Director of, the Birbeck Institute for the Humanities at the University of London. But Zizek was too busy complaining about identity politics and his status within academia to try. And we should act in a large scale, collective way. Blackwood. Peterson and iek represent a basic fact of intellectual life in the twenty-first century: we are defined by our enemies. Slavoj Zizek said that religion can make good people do horrible things. But market success is also not innocent and neutral as a regulatory of the social recognition of competencies. On the Zizek-Peterson 'debate' Some folks have been complaining that the debate was disappointing because it wasn't a debate, or because the debaters don't have sufficient intellectual. Learn how your comment data is processed. In the 1920s many Germans experienced their situation as a confused mess. {notificationOpen=false}, 2000);" x-data="{notificationOpen: false, notificationTimeout: undefined, notificationText: ''}">, We all get monkey mind and neuroscience supports the Buddhist solution, The mystery of New Zealands Tamil Bell, an archaeological UFO. It felt like that. No his conservatism is a post-modern performance, a gigantic ego trip. So, the term Cultural Marxism plays that of the Jewish plot in anti-Semitism. Competencies for what? They are both highly attuned to ideology and the mechanisms of power, and yet they are not principally political thinkers. If you look closely, you will say that state plays today a more important role precisely in the richest capitalist economics. something wrong was said therein, you ought to engage the content rather than essentially well-placed, but as many are quick to point out, Read the full transcript. Zizek makes many interesting points. Another summary of the Peterson/iek debate. Bonus: Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. He has published more than three, dozen books, many on the most seminal philosophers of the 19th and 20th centuries. cordial and respectful, something I really appreciated. Among his points was that Marx and Engels focused too much on class struggle being the primary feature of modern society while ignoring the existence of hierarchy as a fact of nature. The second threat, the commons of internal nature. So, a pessimist conclusion, what will happen? argument abbreviated: There are three necessary features which distinguish a bad Marx paper: The article also has a nice summary of Peterson's opening Modernity means that yes, we should carry the burden, but the main burden is freedom itself. Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate on the concept of Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism. Share Highlights of the debate of the century: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek on Facebook, Share Highlights of the debate of the century: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek on Twitter, Share Highlights of the debate of the century: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek on LinkedIn, Subscribe for counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday, Slavoj iek vs Jordan Peterson Debate Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism (Apr 2019), Why winning isnt the real purpose of arguing. So it seems to me likely we will see tonight not only deep differences, but also surprising agreement on deep questions. Rules for Life, as if there were such things. Orthodoxy, by G. K. Chesterton. Equality can also mean and thats the equality I advocate creating the space for as many as possible individuals to develop their different potentials. Last nights sold-out debate between Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek and Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson at the Sony Centre was pitched as a no-holds-barred throw down . He is a conservative. Are you also ready to affirm that Hitler was our enemy because his story was not heard? [3], During an event at the Cambridge Union in November 2018, iek stated that Peterson used "pseudo-scientific[4] evidence" (3:40). We're in for quite a night a quick word about format. Before you say, its a utopia, I will tell you just think about in what way the market already functions today. We will probably slide towards apocalypse, he said. I have a hard time understanding Zizek, and am admittedly completely out of my depth when it comes to philosophy and Marxism and all the nitty gritty. If we are left to ourselves, if everything is historically conditioned and relative, then there is nothing preventing us from indulging in our lowest tendencies. Billed as "The Debate of the Century", its official title was "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism". Therefore they retreat. [2][16] The monologue itself was less focused as it touched many topics and things like cultural liberalism, Nazism, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Fyodor Dostoevsky, and xenophobia, among others;[2][15] and against the expectation of the debate format did not defend Marxism. He said things like Marx thought the proletariat was good and the bourgeoisie was evil. Another issue is that it's hard to pin down what communism is live commentary is quite funny. The recent debate between Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson lived up to the hype. Born in France, Delphine Minoui lived in Tehran for 10 years to understand her grandparents country from the inside. So, I agree that human life of freedom and dignity does not Debate is a process that involves formal discourse on a particular topic, often including a moderator and audience. They play the victim as much as their enemies. MICHAEL FEDOROVSKY 1* 1* Investigador Independiente y ensayista. self-reproducing nature to ("the historical necessity of progress towards Regarding to the Peterson-Zizek debate as a whole, yes, I would recommend a listen. Peterson noted at the outset that he'd set a personal milestone: StubHub tickets to the debate were going for more money than Maple Leafs playoff ticketsa big deal in Toronto. I would like to refer to a classic Daniel Bell, Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism written back in 1976, where the author argues that the unbounded drive of modern capitalism undermines the moral foundations of the original protestant ethics. The statement has some interesting ideas though, including the statement that Other commentators opted for snide, which I think is sad although the linked It can well secretly invert the standard renunciation accomplished to benefit others. sticking to "his camp", but I feel like the resulting discussing ended up more Furthermore, I find it very hard to ground todays inequalities as they are documented for example by Piketty in his book to ground todays inequalities in different competencies. Regarding how the debate was receiving, judging from Twitter and some quick This is a pity, because Peterson made an argument I have seen many times, one which is incredibly easy to beat." Petersons opening remarks were disappointing even for his fans in the audience. Good evening and welcome to the Sony Center for Performing Arts. I crunched some numbers to find out", "Best academic steel-cage match ever? Please join. If I visit your debate with Jordan Peterson it's on YouTube I felt you won that debate, and it's striking to me, the discussion between 1 hour 10 minutes and 1 hour 18 minutes. In intellectual circles, the recent debate of the century between the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson and Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek was a real heavyweight bout. causes (from Donald Trump to migrants). It can be watched on Jordan Peterson's channel here. Related research topic ideas. Secret Spice Girls dance parties of the wives of anti-western morality police. iek is more or less a Gen X nostalgia act at this point, a living memento from a time when you would sit around the college bar and regale your fellow students about the time you saw that eastern European prof eating a couple of hot dogs in the street. iek asked what Peterson meant by cultural Marxists when postmodern thinkers, like Foucault, werent Marxist at all. White, left liberals love to denigrate their own culture and claim euro-centrism for our evils. So, its still yes, biologically conditioned sexuality, but it is if I may use this term transfunctionalised, it becomes a moment of a different cultural logic. It was officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, and was drummed up thoroughly. Second yes, we should carry our burden and accept the suffering that goes with it. I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. One interesting point Zizek and Peterson both seemed to agree on is the opinion that humans arent strictly rational beings.