I have included my method and aims in a Note at the end of the transcript. The event was billed as "the debate of the century", "The Rumble in the Realm of the Mind", and. The paper contains a close reading of the Manifesto. El denominado "Debate del siglo" entre el filsofo y socilogo esloveno Slavoj iek y el psiclogo canadiense Jordan Peterson, fue uno de los eventos intelectuales de mayor trascendencia del ltimo tiempo. In typical Zizek fashion, 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. So, a pessimist conclusion, what will happen? He doesn't do much to defend Communism There was a livestream which people could pay to access that peaked at around 6,000 viewers. 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. It has been said of the debate that " nothing is a greater waste of time ." Tickets to the livestream are $14.95, and admission to the venue itself was running as high as $1,500. In Stalinism, precisely they were not kept apart, while already in Ancient Greece they knew they had to be kept apart, which is why the popular way was even combined with lottery often. We are responsible for our burdens. He's also quite I crunched some numbers to find out", "Best academic steel-cage match ever? If we learned anything from psychoanalysis, its that we humans are very creative in sabotaging our pursuit of happiness. iek asked what Peterson meant by cultural Marxists when postmodern thinkers, like Foucault, werent Marxist at all. [1][10][11] The debate was also broadcast on Croatian Radiotelevision the following week. sticking to "his camp", but I feel like the resulting discussing ended up more Never presume that your suffering is in itself proof of your authenticity. iek didnt really address the matter at hand, either, preferring to relish his enmities. 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. [20] Stephen Marche of The Guardian wrote that Peterson's opening remarks about The Communist Manifesto were "vague and not particularly informed", and that Peterson seemed generally unprepared,[21] while Jordan Foissy of Vice wrote that Peterson was "completely vacuous", making "ludicrous claims like no one has ever gotten power through exploiting people". Elements of a formal debate. And is not the standard, but the true unconstrained consumption in all these creeps here? I think there are such antagonisms. Here is the original video extracted from https://www.jordanvsslavojdebate.com (livestream.com HLS source) using ffmpeg from Akamai CDN with the original audio and custom CC transcribed. This is NOT a satire/meme sub. He is a conservative. Let me now briefly deal with in a friendly way I claim with what became known sorry for the irony as the lobster topic. Studies suggest that meditation can quiet the restless brain. Moderated by Stephen J. Blackwood, it was held before an audience of 3,000 at Meridian Hall in Toronto on 19 April 2019. 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. The recent debate between Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson lived up to the hype. White, left liberals love to denigrate their own culture and claim euro-centrism for our evils. Now, let me be precise here Im well aware uncertain analysis and projections are in this domain. So, I agree that human life of freedom and dignity does not consist just in searching for happiness, no matter how much we spiritualise it, or in the effort to actualise our inner potentials. He said that belief in God can legitimize the terror of those who claim to act on behalf of God. Below is the transcript of zizek's introductory statement. He also denied there is an inherent tendency under capitalism to mistreat the workers, stating you dont rise to a position of authority that is reliable in a human society primarily by exploiting other people. Overall, Peterson appeared to see capitalism as the best, though imperfect, economic model. In this sense, the image of Donald Trump is also a fetish, the last thing a liberal sees before confronting actual social tensions. In the Nazi vision, their society is an organic whole of harmonic collaboration, so an external intruder is needed to account for divisions and antagonisms. El debate entre iek y Peterson se produjo en Toronto, Canad. Really? Ideology, Logos & Belief with Transliminal Media . Press J to jump to the feed. I will correct more when I get more time but I need to get back to work. [9], Writing for Current Affairs, Benjamin Studebaker criticized both Peterson and iek, calling the debate "one of the most pathetic displays in the history of intellectuals arguing with each other in public". You know, its not very often that you see a country's, largest theatre packed for an intellectual debate, but that's what we're all here for tonight. Regarding to the Peterson-Zizek debate as a whole, yes, I would recommend a listen. Zizek expressed his agreement with Petersons critique of PC culture, pointing out that he is attacked as much by the Left that he supposedly represents as the right. Zizek makes many interesting points. They argued whether capitalism or communism would be the best economic and political system. strongest point. In a similar way, the Alt-Right obsession with cultural Marxism expresses the rejection to confront that phenomenon they criticise as the attack of the cultural Marxist plot moral degradation, sexual promiscuity, consumerist hedonism, and so on are the outcomes of the immanent dynamic of capitalist societies. I'd say this reminds me a lot of what I've seen from him Freedom and responsibility hurt they require an effort, and the highest function of an authentic master is to literally to awake in us to our freedom. Refresh the. So, you know the market is already limited but not in the right way, to put it naively. Believers call him God the Father. But can God be called a man? Most of the attacks on me are from left-liberals, he began, hoping that they would be turning in their graves even if they were still alive. Hundreds of millions raised from poverty into middle class existence. Presidential debate 2020 RECAP What happened in the first election from www.the-sun.com. Hitler provided a story, a plot, which was precisely that of a Jewish plot: we are in this mess because of the Jews. "[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. I cannot but notice the [] Ippolit Belinski April 30, 2019 Videos. 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. So, I dont accept any cheap optimism. I think a simple overview of the situation points in the opposite direction. But Zizek was too busy complaining about identity politics and his status within academia to try. I'd say his criticism is A big deal, with huge numbers, and really very little underneath. towards disaster, maybe some catastrophes can shake us out of our ruts. statement. A good criticism is the one made by Benjamin Studebaker. It's also entertaining to watch, and I suspect this was the mode in which most I cannot but notice the irony of how Peterson and I, the participants in this duel of the century, are both marginalised by the official academic community. Happiness is a confused notion, basically it relies on the subjects inability or unreadiness to fully confront the consequences of his / her / their desire. How jelly-like bodies help sea creatures survive extreme conditions, How eccentric religions were born in 19th-century America, Land of paradoxes: the inner and outer Iran with Delphine Minoui. talking about wherever he felt like that was tenuously related rather than : Just a few words of introduction. Can a giant lobster analogy ever replace a sense of humour? In this short passage, which is dropped as quickly as it is picked up by Zizek, you have what's at the center of an entire intellectual life, a life devoted to formalizing a new and unorthodox. List of journal articles on the topic 'Marxism in politics, economy and philosophy / Criticism'. Rules for Life, as if there were such things. Thats what I would like to insist on we are telling ourselves stories about ourselves in order to acquire a meaningful experience of our lives. A warm welcome to all of you here this evening, both those here in the, theatre in Toronto and those following online. I've talked to (which, unfortunately were more fanboys than rigorous this event had the possibility to reach a much wider audience. I call this the tankie-bashing bit. ", "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. Reddit and its partners use cookies and similar technologies to provide you with a better experience. Please feel free to correct this document. But, a danger lurks here, that of a subtly reversal: dont fall in love thats my position with your suffering. And I claim the same goes for tradition. This Was An Interesting Debate. Tonight, "philosopher" Slavoj iek will debate "psychologist" Jordan Peterson in Toronto, ostensibly on the subject of Capitalism vs. Marxism. Everything was permitted to them as they perceived themselves as direct instrument of their divinity of historical necessity, as progress towards communism. The event was billed as the debate of the century, The Rumble in the Realm of the Mind, and it did have the feel of a heavyweight boxing match: Jordan Peterson, local boy, against the slapdash Slovenian Slavoj iek, considering Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism in Toronto. The time has come to step back and interpret it. Instead they often engage in self-destructive behavior. Forced marriages and homophobia is ok, just as long as they are limited to another country which is otherwise fully included in the world market. And sure, the level of the discussion might have been unappealing to all the 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. something wrong was said therein, you ought to engage the content rather than squarely throws under the bus as failed. Id like the share the debate with a hearing impaired friend. He said things like Marx thought the proletariat was good and the bourgeoisie was evil. self-reproducing nature to ("the historical necessity of progress towards And I also think this may be critical to some of you there is a problem with capitalism here for the simple reasons that its managers not because of their evil nature, but thats the logic of capitalism care to extend self-reproduction and environmental consequences are simply not part of the game. Zizek is particularly culpable here, for Its all anyone can do at this point. For more information, please see our he event was billed as the debate of the century, The Rumble in the Realm of the Mind, and it did have the feel of a heavyweight boxing match: Jordan Peterson, local boy, against the slapdash Slovenian, Jordan Peterson, Canadian psychology professor and author. Posted on August 20, 2021 by David Roman. Peterson's opening remarks were disappointing even for his fans in the audience. Related research topic ideas. One hated communism. However, I would like to add here a couple of qualifications. First of all it's much shorter than Peterson Vs Harris. At one point, he made a claim that human hierarchies are not determined by power because that would be too unstable a system, and a few in the crowd tittered. 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. 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 havent caught and corrected (I didnt expect this to come out to be over 20 pages and how Petersons (native speaker of English) has been the harder one to transcribe. and our Far from pushing us too far, the Left is gradually losing its ground already for decades. Peterson stated that although capitalism produces inequalities, it is not like in other systems, or even parts of the world compared to the so-called Western civilization as it also produces wealth, seen in statistical data about the economic growth and reduction of poverty worldwide, providing an easier possibility to achieve happiness. Secret Spice Girls dance parties of the wives of anti-western morality police. They returned to their natural subject: who is the enemy? Todays China combines these two features in its extreme form strong, totalitarian state, state-wide capitalist dynamics. 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. Studebaker wrote that "Zizek read a bizarre, meandering, canned speech which had very little to do with anything Peterson said or with the assigned topic. Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate on the concept of Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism. Answer (1 of 5): Well, that 'debate' occurred in April of 2019. EL DEBATE DEL SIGLO: Slavoj iek y Jordan Peterson Disfrut la discusin filosfica entre Michel Onfay y Alain Badiou , pesos pesados del pensamiento alternativo, y qued satisfecho. I am not making just a joke here because I think it is exactly like this and thats the lesson psychoanalysis, that our sexuality, our sexual instincts are, of course, biologically determined but look what we humans made out of that. If you're curious, here's the timestamp for the joke. Is there, in todays United States, really too much equality? In totalitarian states, competencies are determined politically. And we should act in a large scale, collective way. Somehow hectoring mobs have managed to turn him into an icon of all they are not. The idea that people themselves should decide what to do about ecology sounds deep, but it begs an important question, even with their comprehension is no distorted by corporate interests. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence They didnt understand what is happening to them with military defeat, economic crisis, what they perceived as moral decay, and so on. 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. Maybe that's why last night I finally caved and watched Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson take on Slovenian quasi-Marxist psychoanalyst and cultural theorist Slavoj Zizek. Zizek called out for the necessity of addressing climate change while also focusing on such issues as Bernie Sanders, whom he called an old-fashioned moralist. Zizek sees Sanders as being unfairly portrayed as a radical. His comments on one of the greatest feats of human rhetoric were full of expressions like You have to give the devil his due and This is a weird one and Almost all ideas are wrong. Zizek was hard to follow in his prepared statement, he becomes He sees the rejections of some systemic failures of capitalism onto external His thoughts on social constructionism vs evolutionary psychology (comparing 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. Two Teams Per Debate Argue For Opposing Positions On An Issue. 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. 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 It was billed as a meeting of titans and that it was not. In our human universe, power, in the sense of exerting authority, is something much more mysterious, even irrational. So, how to react to this? This I think is the true game changed. should have replied to defend communism. your opponent's ideas. Peterson opens with a 30-minutes speech where he criticizes the communist The two professors had both argued before against happiness as something a person should pursue. They are not limited to the mating season. interrupts himself to add "I will finish immediately" before finishing the joke. The debate, rightly or wrongly, permanently situated iek as Peterson's opposite in the war for young minds. almost sweating from concentration trying to discern a thread. They are both highly attuned to ideology and the mechanisms of power, and yet they are not principally political thinkers. 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. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. attacking the manifesto isn't perhaps attacking Communism or even Marxism as its Aspen Ideas Festival: From the Barricades of the Culture Wars Transcript Transcripts 2018-09-25T15:05:00-04:00. Peterson had trapped himself into a zero-sum game, Zizek had opened up a. ", 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). Studebaker concludes that "Peterson didn't prepare. [15][16] On the example of China, he tried to connect happiness, capitalism, and Marxism as well criticize China itself[16] and asserted that "less hierarchical, more egalitarian social structure would stand to produce great amounts of this auxiliary happiness-runoff". Good evening and welcome to the Sony Center for Performing Arts. It is todays capitalism that equalizers us too much and causes the loss of many talents. The Zizek Peterson Debate 18 May 2019 Having previously enjoyed and written about both Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson, I was interested to learn they'd have a debate. [15], Peterson's opening monologue was a reading and critical analysis of The Communist Manifesto. What I Learned at the 'Debate' Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek iek was less a cognizant thinker and more a pathological sacred cow tipper while Peterson was a bard for the. Both of these men know that they are explicitly throwbacks. 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. No his conservatism is a post-modern performance, a gigantic ego trip. it, or in the effort to actualise our inner potentials. But there is nonetheless the prospect of a catastrophe here. The pathological element is the husbands need for jealousy as the only way for him to sustain his identity. They dont mention communism to legitimise their rule, they prefer the old Confucian notion of a harmonious society. Key Agile Release Train stakeholders, including Business Owners, What can occur as a result of not having an Innovation and Planning Iteration? google, pretty well on the center-right, and pretty badly on the left (broadly). Die Analyse dieser Figur findet mit starkem Bezug zur Etablierung Error type: "Forbidden". The mere dumb presence of the celebrities on the stage mattered vastly more than anything they said, naturally. And its important to note they do it on behalf of the majority of people. opinions), and that the debate was cordial, even mutually admirative at times. The Master and His Emissary: A Conversation with Dr. Iain McGilchrist Transcript . And here applies the same logic to Christ himself. Now, let me give you a more problematic example in exactly the same way, liberal critics of Trump and alt-right never seriously ask how our liberal society could give birth to Trump. Aquella vez me parecieron ms slidos los argumentos del primero. White, multi-culturalist liberals embody the lie of identity politics. But when youve said that, youve said everything. interesting because of it. The two generally agreed on. 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. China in the last decades is arguably the greatest economic success story in human history. With anti-Semitism, we are approaching the topic of telling stories. 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. He did voice support for free education and universal health care as necessary for people to reach their potentials and pointed to the economic success of China, a quasi-capitalist system without democracy. And, incidentally Im far from believing in ordinary peoples wisdom. 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. One interesting point Zizek and Peterson both seemed to agree on is the opinion that humans arent strictly rational beings. 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. Peterson's more practically-oriented style also made his arguments a bit more approachable to non-academics. And that was basically it. The cause of problems which are, I claim, immanent to todays global capitalism, is projected onto an external intruder. So it seems to me likely we will see tonight not only deep differences, but also surprising agreement on deep questions. Really? Then once you factor in the notion that much of Marxism is . Peterson blamed cultural Marxism for phenomena like the movement to respect gender-neutral pronouns which, in his view, undermines freedom of speech. Finally, the common space of humanity itself. Scientific data seems, to me at least, abundant enough. Should we then drop egalitarianism? Still, that criticism would be salutary for most "communists" officially desire. Error message: "The request cannot be completed because you have exceeded your. The second threat, the commons of internal nature. Did we really move too much in the direction of equality? The experience that we have of our lives from within, the story we tell ourselves about ourselves, in order to account for what we are doing is and this is what I call ideology fundamentally a lie. Because the left doesn't have its own house in order", "Is 'cultural Marxism' really taking over universities? Peterson: Otherwise, the creative types would sit around and see them again. Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. It felt like that. A democracy this logic to the political space in spite of all differences in competence, the ultimate decision should stay with all of us. Credits for this section should go to the hard work of Xiao Ouyang and Shunji Ukai //, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rUhYdqB2Jh7CU5Le0XgktKaoXQmnTdbv0-_kE5BQL6Q/edit?usp=sharing, Thank you so much for this, I had trouble understanding Zizek's pronunciation of the book on Christ's Atheism on the cross. [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. April 20, 2019. Does Donald Trump stand for traditional values? First, of all, the commons of external nature, threatened by pollution, global warming and so on. communism", though fittingly this drive was much more centralized). Having previously enjoyed and written about both slavoj zizek and jordan peterson, i was interested to learn they'd have a debate. I cannot but notice the irony of how Peterson and I, the participants in this duel of the century, are both marginalised by the official academic community. We live in one and the same world which is more and more interconnected. Jordan Peterson itching to take on Slavoj Zizek - 'any time, any place' -", "Slavoj Zizek vs. Jordan Peterson: Marxist gewinnt philosophenduell", "Happiness is watching a brawl between iconoclastic philosophers", "Has Jordan Peterson finally gone too far? The true opposite of egotist self-love is not altruism a concern for the common good but envy, resentment, which makes me act against my own interests. I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. If Peterson was an ill-prepared prof, iek was a columnist stitching together a bunch of 1,000-worders. By rejecting non-essential cookies, Reddit may still use certain cookies to ensure the proper functionality of our platform. This largely contrasts Peterson's viewpoint who admittedly has never used that term to refer in any way to the associated conspiracy theory, but only to raise critique about cultural phenomena that are, according to him, directly associated with postmodern thought. The rest of the debate was (if memory serves) also interesting, but it gets even Hitler was one of the greatest storytellers of the 20th century. They passionately support LGBT, they advocate charities and so on. Email: mfedorovsky@gmail.com Resumen: La presente colaboracin es una resea sobre el debate llevado a cabo entre los intelectuales de izquierda y derecha, First, on how happiness is often the wrong Transcript of Zizek vs. Peterson Discussing "Happiness, Capitalism vs. Marxism" April 23, 2019 April 25, 2019 Emily I present a transcript of the Zizek vs. Peterson discussion. He's the sort of aging quitter we all hope to never be. Directly sharing your experience with our beloved may appear attractive, but what about sharing them with an agency without you even knowing it? Having watched it (video), I regret to inform you it was neither of those It didn't help Peterson's case that he came into a debate about Marxism with . However, this is not enough. But, nonetheless, deeply divided. MICHAEL FEDOROVSKY 1* 1* Investigador Independiente y ensayista. Again, even if there if the reported incidents with the refugees there are great problems, I admit it even if all these reports are true, the popularist story about them is a lie. It came right at the end of ieks opening 30-minute remarks. SLAVOJ IEK: . So as I saw it, the task of this debate was to at least clarify our differences."[24].

New York Knicks Draft Picks 2022, What Cars Have Electric Power Steering, Andraya Carter Engaged, Is Andrew Miller Related To Christa Miller, Articles Z