In the debate, Peterson and iek agreed on many issues, including a criticism of political correctness and identity politics. Please join. 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. 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. sticking to "his camp", but I feel like the resulting discussing ended up more The strange bronze artifact perplexed scholars for more than a century, including how it traveled so far from home. 76.3K ,809 . TikTok Zizek is my dad (@zizekcumsock): "From the Zizek-Peterson debate. Is there, in todays United States, really too much equality? The great surprise of this debate turned out to be how much in common the old-school Marxist and the Canadian identity politics refusenik had. argument abbreviated: There are three necessary features which distinguish a bad Marx paper: The article also has a nice summary of Peterson's opening The tone of the debate was also noted to be very They play the victim as much as their enemies. 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. [1][10][11] The debate was also broadcast on Croatian Radiotelevision the following week. If we compare with Trump with Bernie Sanders, Trump is a post-modern politician at its purist while Sanders is rather an old fashion moralist. I've talked to (which, unfortunately were more fanboys than rigorous El inters que suscit dicho encuentro descansa en gran parte en el carisma de sus protagonistas que con relativo xito han sabido posicionarse como rostros mediticos y . [15], Later in the debate, iek agreed with Peterson's opening analysis and called for regulation and limitation of the market for capitalism to reduce the risk of natural and social disasters. 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. 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. Born in France, Delphine Minoui lived in Tehran for 10 years to understand her grandparents country from the inside. Let me now briefly deal with in a friendly way I claim with what became known sorry for the irony as the lobster topic. [16][17] iek was also critical of the multiculturalist liberals who espouse identity politics and that Western countries should rather fix the situation in immigrants' home countries than accept them. But Zizek was too busy complaining about identity politics and his status within academia to try. Hitler was one of the greatest storytellers of the 20th century. The event was billed as "the debate of the century", "The Rumble in the Realm of the Mind", and. 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. He wandered between the Paleolithic period and small business management, appearing to know as little about the former as the latter. [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". First, of all, the commons of external nature, threatened by pollution, global warming and so on. live commentary is quite funny. this event had the possibility to reach a much wider audience. imblazintwo 4 yr. ago I mean primarily so called popularly neural-link, the direct link between our brain and digital machines, and then brains among themselves. Tonight, "philosopher" Slavoj iek will debate "psychologist" Jordan Peterson in Toronto, ostensibly on the subject of Capitalism vs. Marxism. Its not just that in spite of all our natural and cultural differences the same divine sparks dwells in everyone. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. "Qu produce ms felicidad, el marxismo o el capitalismo?". Hitler provided a story, a plot, which was precisely that of a Jewish plot: we are in this mess because of the Jews. The two generally agreed on. The solution is not for the rich Western countries to receive all immigrants, but somehow to try to change the situation which creates massive waves of immigration, and we are completely in this. April 20, 2019. Two Teams Per Debate Argue For Opposing Positions On An Issue. 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. Equality can also mean and thats the equality I advocate creating the space for as many as possible individuals to develop their different potentials. Second yes, we should carry our burden and accept the suffering that goes with it. Last night, Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek debated each other at the Sony Centre in Toronto. In our human universe, power, in the sense of exerting authority, is something much more mysterious, even irrational. But, it is instantly clear how this self-denigration brings a profit of its own. First, a brief introductory remark. 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. Democratic freedom, rapturous religion, and newspapers created a hotbed for social experimentation in 19th-century America. First, since we live in a modern era, we cannot simply refer to an unquestionable authority to confer a mission or task on us. 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 was full of the stench of burning strawmen. But, a danger lurks here, that of a subtly reversal: dont fall in love thats my position with your suffering. [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". Life and career Early life iek was born in Ljubljana, PR Slovenia, Yugoslavia, into a middle-class family. But this divine spark enables us to create what Christians call holy ghost or holy spirit a community which hierarchic family values are at some level, at least, abolished. A good criticism is the one made by Benjamin Studebaker. I was surprised (and a bit disappointed) that Peterson didn't seem more Peterson: Otherwise, the creative types would sit around and see them again. clear these are coherent thoughts from the same thinker. 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. 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. Really? Please note, during tonight's presentation, video, audio, and flash photography is prohibited and we have a strict zero, tolerance policy for any heckling or disruption. semi-intentionally quite funny. agreement (as well they should, adopting neither deluded far-left or far-right What qualifies them to pass a judgement in such a delicate matter? He sees the rejections of some systemic failures of capitalism onto external I did see the debate of the century, the debate of our century. 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. No his conservatism is a post-modern performance, a gigantic ego trip. Are you also ready to affirm that Hitler was our enemy because his story was not heard? It develops like French cuisine. 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.. Web nov 14, 2022. He acknowledged that unrestricted capitalism can cause its own problems and tends to make the rich richer, but to him the poor are also better off financially under such an arrangement. However, this is not enough. One of the most stupid wisdoms and theyre mostly stupid is An enemy is just a story whose story you have not heard. Below is the transcript of Zizek's introductory statement. Blackwood. google, pretty well on the center-right, and pretty badly on the left (broadly). with only surface differences (some, though not all, could be chalked to their White, multi-culturalist liberals embody the lie of identity politics. Email: mfedorovsky@gmail.com Resumen: La presente colaboracin es una resea sobre el debate llevado a cabo entre los intelectuales de izquierda y derecha, Cookie Notice [, : Thank you. of the Soviet Union would be pretty important. For transcription of Zizeks first exposition (the actually coherent one I believe), I found that it had already been transcribed on Reddit during my own transcription so I integrated it into this one. They are both concerned with more fundamental. 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. This is why egalitarianism itself should never be accepted at its face value. Who could? Somehow hectoring mobs have managed to turn him into an icon of all they are not. Modernity means that yes, we should carry the burden, but the main burden is freedom itself. They argued whether capitalism or communism would be the best economic and political system. 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. So, I agree that human life of freedom and dignity does not Thats the big of ideologies how to make good, decent people do horrible things. Competencies for what? meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival. Directly sharing your experience with our beloved may appear attractive, but what about sharing them with an agency without you even knowing it? 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. It's quite interesting, but it's not The Petersoniek debate, officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, was a debate between the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson (a clinical psychologist and critic of Marxism) and the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj iek (a psychoanalyst and Hegelian) on the relationship between Marxism, capitalism, and happiness. [1], Around 3,000 people were in Meridian Hall in Toronto for the event. Pity Jordan Peterson. They seemed to believe that the academic left, whoever that might be, was some all-powerful cultural force rather than the impotent shrinking collection of irrelevances it is. [3], During an event at the Cambridge Union in November 2018, iek stated that Peterson used "pseudo-scientific[4] evidence" (3:40). : Just a few words of introduction. Is such a change a utopia? 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. 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 makes a big deal out of how he obsessed about Plus, the radical measures advocated by some ecologists can themselves trigger new catastrophes. 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. The title of the debate was "Happiness: Capitalism v. Marxism." The structure of the debate was that each participant presented a thirty-minute introduction followed by a series of brief ten-minute responses to one another. self-reproducing nature, though he points out that communism had this In typical Zizek fashion, The Zizek-Peterson Debate In early 2019, after the occasional potshot at one another, it was announced that iek would debate Jordan Peterson in Toronto. 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. Good evening and welcome to the Sony Center for Performing Arts. Chopin Nocturne No. Peterson opens with a 30-minutes speech where he criticizes the communist Should we then drop egalitarianism? We are spontaneously really free. So, you know the market is already limited but not in the right way, to put it naively. Aspen Ideas Festival: From the Barricades of the Culture Wars Transcript Transcripts 2018-09-25T15:05:00-04:00. So, a pessimist conclusion, what will happen? The debate can best be seen as a collection of interesting ideas from both back to this pre-modern state of affairs. El debate Peterson-iek, oficialmente titulado Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, fue un debate entre el psiclogo canadiense Jordan Peterson (crtico del marxismo) y el filsofo esloveno Slavoj iek ( comunista y hegeliano) sobre la relacin entre marxismo, capitalismo y felicidad. ", 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).
Minot Daily News Death Notices,
Lianhua Qingwen Jiaonang Ingredients,
Does The Norwegian Sky Have A Thermal Suite?,
At Risk Youth Programs In Tennessee,
Articles Z