First of all it's much shorter than Peterson Vs Harris. Canadian bill prohibiting discrimination based on gender, "Jordan Peterson, Slavoj Zizek each draw fans at sold-out debate", "The 'debate of the century': what happened when Jordan Peterson debated Slavoj iek", "How Anti-Leftism Has Made Jordan Peterson a Mark for Fascist Propaganda", "There Is No One to Cheer for in the Potential Battle Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek", "Why do people find Jordan Peterson so convincing? [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. Posted on August 20, 2021 by David Roman. Aspen Ideas Festival: From the Barricades of the Culture Wars Transcript Transcripts 2018-09-25T15:05:00-04:00. Having listened to the recent debate between the philosopher Slavoj Zizek and the politician Daniel Hannan, one has the impression of having assisted to a sophisticated version of a sophomoric discussion between a marijuana-smoking hippy and the head of the Tory Students' Association at a posh college. Egalitarianism often de facto means, I am ready to renounce something so that others will also not have it. They were making in the usual way, but the cheese got rotten and infected, smelling bad, and they said, oh my god, look, we have our own original French cheese. What's perhaps most surprising is that Zizek doesn't defend Marxism, which he I was surprised (and a bit disappointed) that Peterson didn't seem more In spite of protests here and there, we will probably continue to slide towards some kind of apocalypse, awaiting large catastrophes to awaken us. Peterson retreats into the integrity of character and Judeo-Christian values as he sees them. communism", though fittingly this drive was much more centralized). Below is the transcript of Zizeks introductory statement. Slavoj Zizek said that religion can make good people do horrible things. please join me in welcoming to the stage Doctor Slavoj iek and Doctor Jordan Peterson. If the academic left is all-powerful, they get to indulge in their victimization. And they both agreed, could not have agreed more, that it was all the fault of the academic left. It felt like that. But it did reveal one telling commonality. We often need a master figure to push us out an inertia and, Im not afraid to say, that forces us to be free. He gave a minor history of the French critical theorists who transposed categories of class oppression for group oppression in the 1960s. And sure, the level of the discussion might have been unappealing to all the Regarding to the Peterson-Zizek debate as a whole, yes, I would recommend a listen. However, this is not enough. Peterson had trapped himself into a zero-sum game, Zizek had opened up a. Conservative thinkers claim that the origin of our crisis is the loss of our reliance on some transcendent divinity. I think there are such antagonisms. Really? He couldnt believe it. clear these are coherent thoughts from the same thinker. Below is the transcript of Zizek's introductory statement. So, I agree that human life of freedom and dignity does not They returned to their natural subject: who is the enemy? Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate on the concept of Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism. Bonus: Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It seems that our countries are run relatively well, but is the mess the so-called rogue countries find themselves in not connected to how we interact with them? Todays China combines these two features in its extreme form strong, totalitarian state, state-wide capitalist dynamics. The very premise of tonight's event is that we all participate in the life of, thought. with only surface differences (some, though not all, could be chalked to their 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. I encourage you to watch the video or read the transcript 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. So, I dont accept any cheap optimism. 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. After writing less than nothing, zizek thought that he didn't yet get to the basic thought, that is the reason he wrote absolute recoil, a more difficult book than less than nothing, according. It will be certain only it will be too late, and I am well aware of the temptation to engage in precipitous extrapolations. Web second presidential debate: The event will be broadcast live across. Then once you factor in the notion that much of Marxism is . statement. Id like the share the debate with a hearing impaired friend. Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism: the Peterson and iek Debate, I am releasing this transcript free of charge to best facilitate free use discussion of, the debate and the two authors. Zizek Peterson Debate Transcript. The Church of England is debating if believers should stop using gendered language when talking about God. things. 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. They can develop into a permanent obsession sustained by obstacles that demand to be overcome in short, into a properly metaphysical passion that preserves the biologically rhythm, like endlessly prolonging satisfaction in courtly love, engaging in different perversions and so on and so on. His comments on one of the greatest feats of human rhetoric were full of . Fearing establishment, Sanders' leftist critics offer socialism, without socialism At least Marxism is closed off now that Marx But Zizek was too busy complaining about identity politics and his status within academia to try. No. [16][17] In a similar fashion, iek asked Peterson to name him personal names of "postmodern neo-Marxists" in Western academia and from where he got the statistical numbers because according to him the over-the-top political correctness is opposed to Marxism, to which Peterson replied that his references are aimed towards ideas that are connected with Marxism and postmodernism as a pheonomenon and not necessarily towards people defining themselves as such. 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. Scientific data seems, to me at least, abundant enough. This is why egalitarianism itself should never be accepted at its face value. with its constellation of thinkers. 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. The tone of the debate was also noted to be very Born in France, Delphine Minoui lived in Tehran for 10 years to understand her grandparents country from the inside. His father Joe iek was an economist and civil servant from the 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. I deeply appreciate evolutionary talk. In typical Zizek fashion, A big deal, with huge numbers, and really very little underneath. Secret Spice Girls dance parties of the wives of anti-western morality police. Really? Studebaker concludes that "Peterson didn't prepare. them, of all things, to French cuisine) are also worth a listen/read. 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. Both of these men know that they are explicitly throwbacks. We are spontaneously really free. causes (from Donald Trump to migrants). 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. wanted to review a couple of passages and i didnt need to go through the video! Not only are we not allowed cheap excuses for not doing our duty, duty itself should not serve as an excuse. vastly different backgrounds). Does Donald Trump stand for traditional values? If you're curious, here's the timestamp for the joke. opinions), and that the debate was cordial, even mutually admirative at times. The rest of the debate was (if memory serves) also interesting, but it gets even cordial and respectful, something I really appreciated. In our human universe, power, in the sense of exerting authority, is something much more mysterious, even irrational. 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. "almost all ideas are wrong". Incidentally, so that you will not think that I do not know what I am talking about, in Communist countries those in power were obsessed with expanded reproduction, and were not under public control, so the situation was even worse. Blackwood. Directly sharing your experience with our beloved may appear attractive, but what about sharing them with an agency without you even knowing it? Once traditional authority loses its substantial power, it is not possible to return to it. [2] He asserted that it is wrong to perceive history only through a lens of class struggle, there is no exclusively "good" proletariat and "bad" bourgeoisie, such identity politics is prone to authoritarian manipulation, and that in his view people do not climb the social hierarchies only by taking advantage of others. Petersons opening remarks were disappointing even for his fans in the audience. Below is the transcript of Zizek's introductory statement. ", "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. MeToo is all too often a genuine protest filtered through resentment. But there is nonetheless the prospect of a catastrophe here. Zizek and Peterson went head-to-head recently at a debate in Toronto. This is I think now comes the problematic part for some of you maybe the problem with political correctness. Peterson blamed cultural Marxism for phenomena like the movement to respect gender-neutral pronouns which, in his view, undermines freedom of speech. Equality can also mean and thats the equality I advocate creating the space for as many as possible individuals to develop their different potentials. Now, let me be precise here Im well aware uncertain analysis and projections are in this domain. The past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past end of quote. increasingly erratic in the rest of the debates. [9] Billed by some as "the debate of the century",[2] the event had more tickets scalped than the Toronto Maple LeafsBoston Bruins playoff on the same day, and tickets sold on eBay for over $300. And if you think Peterson's more practically-oriented style also made his arguments a bit more approachable to non-academics. Below is the transcript of zizek's introductory statement. What qualifies them to pass a judgement in such a delicate matter? Boston 24/7 with principal mcafee This is again not a moral reproach. imblazintwo 4 yr. ago Through this renouncing of their particular roots, multi-cultural liberals reserve for themselves the universal position: gracefully soliciting others to assert their particular identify. Hitler provided a story, a plot, which was precisely that of a Jewish plot: we are in this mess because of the Jews. I hope reading the debate will help me understand the arguments better. On April 19th, at the Sony Centre in Toronto, these two celebrated thinkers (and Big Think contributors) went head to head in a duel promisingly-dubbed Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism. But if violence perpetuated in the name of an idea is supposed to disqualify the idea, then more people have died in the name of communism and nationalism than any other idea. 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. back to this pre-modern state of affairs. Canad. Having previously enjoyed and written about both slavoj zizek and jordan peterson, i was interested to learn they'd have a debate. essentially well-placed, but as many are quick to point out, 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. MICHAEL FEDOROVSKY 1* 1* Investigador Independiente y ensayista. agreement (as well they should, adopting neither deluded far-left or far-right [15], Several publications, such as Current Affairs, The Guardian and Jacobin, criticized Peterson for being uninformed on Marxism and seemingly ill-prepared for the debate. The time has come to step back and interpret it. Reddit and its partners use cookies and similar technologies to provide you with a better experience. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence 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. Another issue is that it's hard to pin down what communism is Competencies for what? "[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. more disjointed. His charge against Peterson's argument is followed with how he thinks Zizek Orthodoxy, by G. K. Chesterton. Let me mention the change enacted by Christianity. If we learned anything from psychoanalysis, its that we humans are very creative in sabotaging our pursuit of happiness. Democratic freedom, rapturous religion, and newspapers created a hotbed for social experimentation in 19th-century America. We're in for quite a night a quick word about format. Postmodernism: History and Diagnosis Transcript Dr. Jordan Peterson 2019-05-17T08:28:01-04:00. Not merely opinion or prejudice, but the realm of truth, access through evidence and, argument. wrote about commons before). While the two take different political stances, both have been known to rail against political correctness and found that issue in common. Although even the Dalai Lama justifies Tibetan Buddhism in Western terms in the full suite of happiness and the avoidance of pain, happiness as a goal of our life is a very problematic notion.