Hi, everyone! Wanted to shoutout our Patreon, and our Patrons/KZfaq Members who keep this alive! Big thanks to you! Funding via Patreon is the number one way this channel survives. Consider pledging a few bucks a month to ensure we can keep making these videos! I offer some cool perks as well. Check it out! Patreon: www.patreon.com/epochphilosophy

Your channel is my favorite on KZfaq! Congratulations on your initiative in approaching Lacan and Zizek. These ideas deserve to gain more visibility outside the academy. P.S.: It would be awesome if you made a video about Alain Badiou.

This was really fabulous. One thing I could add, is that Nietzsche already introduces the idea that consciousness is equally predicated on remembering and forgetting. I think it’s in the genealogy of morals.

So glad you covered this. I’ve been doin heavy studies on Lacan and Žižek lately.

Lacan himself was in large part a Hegelian, at least during his own formative years. Nevertheless Zizek is sometimes forcing Hegelian notions or a style of reasoning into Lacans' body of work. Two of Lacans' most important teachers during his own student years in Paris, were both prominent French Hegel specialists: Alexandre Koyre and Alexandre Kojeve. Of course Lacan was kind of an intellectual magpie who borrowed ideas from the most diverse thinkers (Kant, Spinoza, the classic Greeks, Heidegger, Levi Strauss, ...) and sciences of his days (linguistics, mathematics, anthropology, psychiatry, ...), but he never literally copied ideas. He did his own thing with all of it. In that same sense, Zizek never just explains Lacan or Hegel, he invents his own version of a sociopolitical, critical apparatus based on mainly Lacan and Hegel. Therefore if you want to learn about these 2 thinkers themselves, you shouldn't take Zizek for granted as some sort of guide. Just try to read them yourself, Zizek is just another creative reader like some of us are. He will only inform you about Zizek, the thinker, and Slavoj, the (high functioning) neurotic 😉.

I’m mostly interested in applying Lacan’s concepts of the Real and Trauma to horror media like Japanese comics. You’ve got a new patron.

Another brilliant video. Another reason why this channel is my fav on youtube

An amazing video! As someone who has spent so much time reading their works, I honestly think this is the best introduction to Žižekian philosophy and Lacanian psychoanalysis available on KZfaq. Kudos to you!

This was so good! Definitely gave me a passion to learn more.

This is beautiful, brother. Thank you for the great content.

great video! thanks for all the research and work you put into these

I hate when people call philosophers obscurantist, yes some philosophers write in a very complex and hard to read way but that doesn’t mean that they have nothing to say, it is your job to find out what they’re trying to say.

I’m reading the Sublime Object of Ideology now and found this video was quite helpful in establishing more context - thank you so much !

amazing video. think I'm going to need to watch it a few more times tho lmao

Brilliant video, great editing, very well researched as well and visually informing. I would urge and request you to do some videos on Kant and Hegel. Especially, Hegel, for he is the most complex philosopher to understand and you have a good way of breaking down things. Keep up the good work!

Loved the video. Explains it in a descriptive way and ends in philosophical way that is with a quest. 😌

Still an amazing video a, year later. I hope you got plenty of patrons from this. Thank you for your work on this

Your videos are awesome, thanks.

Omg yes, thank you so much for the content!

That is stumbled upon it in my actual situation is a miracle!

Thank you for making this, I know i will return to it again and again

Reading Sublime Object/Zizek in general for the first time rn, this helped a lot, thank you!

Thank you so much! I’ve been struggling with zizek and Lacan lately

Great video! Just a tip - manque is pronounced more like mawnk than mawn-kay. General rule with French is not to pronounce the last letter. Merci quand même, j'adore tes vidéos ^_^

You're paraphrasing titans of thought! And doing it well. Cheers for bringing knowledge back to the village.

Amazing video! Love the visuals

Excellent work, very good analysis.

"The origin of this desire comes from a lack known as monkey." OMG, DESIRE IS ABOUT RETURNING TO MONKE! On a more serious note, great video again, now the two best philosophy channels (Plastic Pills and yourself) both have Lacan videos!

Confusion is something I thought I knew well until now.And yet I'm telling myself I'm ok with it. Thanks for making this available.

Amazing! Thanks for the content! Greetings from Brazil 🥰

this is truly a heroic deed my dude

Really understandable video about a nearly not understandable thinker! Thank you

Great, great, great stuff. I’ve been digging into Lacan for some time now and have a basic understanding, but still am unable to explain his concepts to others.

Wtf I just got Zizeks How To Read Lacan in my postbox yesterday

Great video ! I’ll graduate my therapist (with a Lacanian approach and theorical background) degree in a year, so KZfaq proposed to me this. I’m French btw, and I think your social approach of this is pretty interesting, but it could have been really interesting to get into the philosophical and clinical aspect of it ! But of course it’s pretty impossible to depict it easily so I get why you didn’t get into it :P Anyway great vid man

Great discussion

Great video, thanks

Awesome work buddy

Thankyou master 🌹

What an amazing video! Thank you so much for making this- it clarifies so much for me. I’m going to subscribe to your Patreon!

Brilliant video, I feel much better equipped at approaching Lacan. Some very interesting parallels with him and Mahayana Buddhism, funnily.

Great vid

It's tough to study lacan, because learning is aided so much by dialog, and hardly anyone is willing to read and discuss a work that's "not meant to be understood". Thanks for the video though, good to double check understanding.

Good video. The best way to understand Lacan is by first reading and coming to terms with Freud. Don't bother with Lacan if you know nothing about Freud. Also, it is important to note that many Lacanians do not see Žižek's interpretation of Lacan as correct.

Thanks!

i'm not a psychology student, i wanted to study it but the option wasn't there. So, i apologise for any wrong sayings. So, delved into Lacan on my own (via youtube of course) and it was... quite an experience. i lean more into Freud myself but when i tried to understand Lacan's REAL and how we can only see it when we're fallen apart completely, that itself gave me nightmares. i have experienced some deep traumas and when i think about it in general, i can see and feel the horror that is reality. No rhyme, no reason, no justice, no nothing.

Brilliant

very good

I loved this; How to Read How to Read Lacan.

This is a really good introduction to lacan, I think this is helping me a lot to understand what the hell he's saying

A fun project is trying to produce an economic theory through the precepts of Lacan and of course with the help of Marx and Zizek.

this is a great 101 on lacan

oh hell yeah

Che fottuto capolavoro la scena con Conan O'brien

What do you mean by Split Semiotics in this video? Thank you for this!

Wait.... why is Conan O'Brian in the Mexican Soap Opera?!??!

Maybe you could break a video like this into smaller parts and host it as a playlist? Just to help with the algorithm. Viewers get ad interruptions anyway.

i wish i could find an elegant way to combine Marxism with Lacan, Fanon & Bracha L. Ettinger. Her work on fleshing out not just the Real, but also the connections between the "registers" (Real, Imaginary, Symbolic) are what makes sense to me as someone who's not only experienced catastrophic traumas but also practiced still+silent meditation during the fallout & the lead‐up, and have also "overcome" statistical limits (outcomes) due to being very autistic. i mean, i already combined them and made little charts similar to the chart you showed (voix, signifier, castration, etc), but knowing a better way to talk about it, bc it's my special interest lol. i do ironically get limited in conversation by accessible language bc i KNOW it won't make sense unless i translate it

Heavy.

I can't this one. I just can't.

Name a better duo than zizek and lacan.

hey great video. This might be pedantic, but you keep referring to the 'subconscious'. is the the the right word for the job. Doesn't psychoanalysis talk of the unconscious? I bring this up, because subconscious implies being beneath consciousness; subordinate to it, topologically. Unconscious implies a negation, or lack. Like I said, its a pedantic point. Thanks for the video I really enjoyed it.

The idea of the panopticum has the same reflection of empty power as the big other i think

Desire as the root of humanity... Siddartha was right all along ☸️

Philosophers need to take a course on engineering documentation writing. I swear to god, every time philosophers reinvent already existing terminology and almost purposefully make it a convoluted fucking mess that could've been documented in a much clearer and more coherent, accessible way.

Also, Freud wasn't the first or even one of the first do to any of the things claimed in the video.

The Real seems very buddhist emptiness alike

I see a big collaboration with Plastic Pills . Of Course, He is brilliant just like how you guys are. Great explanations. One objection to these Videos is you center around Zizek too much. As far as I know Fredric Jameson is the God of cultural theory. He has written extensively on Ideology of Theory and Postmodernism using Burke, Baudrillard, Freud, Lacan, Marx .Please try to explain him from his Prisonhouse of Language to his latest essay The Aesthetic of Singularity.

Felt, eidetic, speculatively real

comment for the algorithm

This whole time I thought he was talking about the Spartans (laconic)

Lacan looks like pentti linkola (notorious deep ecologist) in the thumbnail

I have a question. I'm really new to just about all of this, so I'm sorry if this is an obvious question that's been asked before or has an obvious answer. What would we be like if we found a way to sort of, I dunno, "mesh minds"? Instead of using language to communicate? I know our brains aren't actually like computers as some believe; they don't "store" or "retrieve" information, etc. But, like, if they were, or if by some means we could implant chips or something (or find any other way of basically being psychic/telepathic is what I'm asking), what would that do to us as a species? If language is a construct meant to protect us from The Real from birth via the Symbolic and Imaginary, is there any possible way to transcend these protective fantasies? And what's more, would that be better or worse? Are we only evolved enough to handle snippets or interpretations of The Real? If we meshed with other minds in order to communicate, would we be lost in a jumble of subjectivity, fantasy, etc.? Would it be of any help, offer any clarity, or just make things worse? Can we even know, or is a waste of time to speculate? Am I just perpetuating the ideology via Jouissance, enjoying the tension of wanting to escape something and so relying on the thing I want to escape to exist? I guess that's a lot of questions. x) Sorry. I took a lot of notes and this is what I came away with. It seems so unfair, being trapped from birth into ideology. We're still so primitive, and it never really feels that way to me. I am so impatient for the future, just to see what it brings. Like I said, I'm very new to all of this, so I wouldn't be surprised if some sort of plausible "antidote" has already been put forth, perhaps many times over. I wish I could get over my desire for it, though.

7:52 you read the Man right but the que in Manque is not read "keh" it's just read "k".

Sorry to say I believe you have some things incorrect, firstly there is no subconscious in Lacan this is a term that Jungians use. Secondly the signified isn't a thing it's a concept of a thing and although this might seem like nit picking it's not. Nearly everyone who reads this book thinks they understand what he's saying but there will be very little common understanding of the concepts described and exemplified by Zizek amongst readers. Mainly this is because Zizek whilst provoding examples of his abstract paradoxical and often obtuse Lacanian concepts doesn't follow up and explain why and how the example maps on to the concept, instead he moves on to another example and then another and the result is that no one really can fully grasp what he's describing. The other thing is that his explanations lack parsimony. An example of this is his discussion of why people are terrified to actually have their fantasies actualised. His explanation is that it would put people in touch with the kernel of the fantasy and this would be too traumatic (though he doesn't exactly say why this would be too traumatic), a more straightforward explanation would be that fantasies allow for a a certain amount of control whereas actualising them or having them actualised doesn't provide this, just the opposite. In my estimation the book is poor and the fact that Zizek has gained such a lauded position in the world of academia says a lot about the deterioration that has occurred in the humanities over the last fifty years.

😊💟⭐️

From the footage of old Belgrade, to the footage of old San Francisco ... this is wonderful visual collage, (except that Lacan's cigarete, that thing is gross)

Lacan: Manque The English speaking: Ma'n-Kay

there is no how , either you understand or not . People do not search knowledge , they search difficulty , challenge to overcome.

traduzcan plis!!1

big other = "The Man"

Does Marx really help what otherwise is good philosophy?

Is it wrong to say cynicism is a type of false consciousness? I wouldn’t totally throw out what Marx said about that…

No subconscious! Unconscious!

They know it, but they are doing it anyway. As desiring machines. Imagine how easy reading anti-oedipus is after reading Zizek 🥴

Air

You have a great channel with respect to visuals and graphics and style while your analysis of the ideas and thinkers is top notch. The things about these clowns is that I now prefer my thinkers to mean what they say and slay what they mean. I know clowns is a bit extreme but I mean it they are posturing post whatever you like clowns. Do something on someone serious like Evola and do it as a critique. I’m so tired of philosophy meaning post war theory of disenfranchised privileged double speak clowns. There is a perennial philosophy, philosophy did not end with Heidegger just because he said so, so so childish. Anyway have a good day.

So basically just hegemony

Lacan can only be interesting to humanists with no serious training in psychology. Certainly, he's had little or no impact on contemporary psychology or psychiatry.

Pas mal

я на саппорте должна киллы делать животное?

Not real, felt

What the f--k😂😂😂😂❤️🌹🥰😇

How about questioning the "reality" of the Indo-European steppherders' human lifestock keeping techniques, which form the ageold Roman system slavery matrix, all western societies are still deeply enslaved in? Zizek does not go far enough to break free!!!

Oh boy ... this all sounds like such a cultish con.

You say "subconscious" but that word is rejected by psychoanalysis.

Thanks, but I'm okay living perpetually ignorant of how to read, in the words of Chomsky, an "amusing and perfectly self-conscious charlatan."

go and live in some cheaper areas.. keep these videos going. I basically don't care if you sleep on the side walk. just don't whine about living out your dream

Lacan is Very confused guy with a only good idea of desire, everthing else is kinda poopy