I feel the same way as you. I really feel like Zizek helps to free the whole generation of sick individuals of imperatives our culture, economy and politics imposes on us. Afte hundrets of minutes listening to Zizek many years now, somewhere in the middle of this lecture I suddenly had that wierd smile on my face, feeling deep sympathy for what Zizek is doing and the sincerity of his enterprise. Sympathy towards someone who does not only understands your experience of reality but also brings some order into it, showing some path in it.

Hey great comment, could you please tell me what that word wich is in quotations means?

@@no_special_person "Buchstabensuppe" is a soup of letters. I don't know if you have that in your country but it's quite literally a soup where the noodles in it are formed like various letters :D

Wonderful comment.

@@henrix999 Same. After a couple of years of listening to his lectures and being so lazy/busy not to read his books he's had a few key lectures that had brought me clarity to the depth of his thinking and I feel so glad I'm finally understanding this less than nothing.

+Daniel Gustafsson I agree

This was once true, but some of his recent lectures really nail down his understanding of universality. I'm thinking of Populism as a Way to Disavow Social Antagonism and especially A Plea for Bureaucratic Socialism.

link or it didn't happen

Yeah. Definitely the best.

Yeah, could use inflation but also development.

Do the research yourself

It is indeed one of „his“ most fundamental and difficult concepts

It is indeed one of „his“ most fundamental and difficult concepts

todestrieb

+youcreatea lol yea he just didn't wanna let go

yes i also want to know which of his books details this thesis the most. maybe parallax view?

chapter 6 of civilization and its discontents by sigmund freud talks explicitly about this

@@minhanhbui3955 yes, thank you. What I meant was Zizek’s interpretation, since it differs quite markedly from Freud’s

Restlessness

rossyy94 cocaine

@rossyy94 29:12 - 30:48 "This is why Lacan's motto, _'there is no Big Other',_ (the Big Other doesn't exist) brings us to the very core of the _'ethical problematic'._ What Lacan excludes is precisely this perspective of _'the last judgement':_ The idea that somewhere, there must be a standard (universal) that allows us to take measure of our acts and produce their true meaning; their true ethical status _(even if it will be as a truly virtual point of reference, even if we concede that we cannot ever occupy this place)._ Even Jacques Derrida's ethical notion of deconstruction as justice I think relies on a Utopian hope which sustains the _'specter of infinite justice'_ -forever postponed, but nonetheless kept as the ultimate horizon of our activity. This idea that, even if it is _defacto_ inaccessible we must _act_ as if there is a final point where retroactively there will be an objective judgement on the status of our acts. The harshness of the Lacanian ethics is that it demands us to relinquish this reference and its further thesis is that: *'not only does this abdication not deliver us to an ethical insecurity, or relativism-but that renouncing the guarantee of some Big Other is the very condition of a Truly autonomous ethics.'"*

rossyy94 Good question!

Zizek is psychoanalytical in the Lacanian sense-hence the "quilting" of our various ideologies, a lifting of the veil to show us the _polysemous figure of our desire._ We are hysterical subjects $plit by a nonconsciousness gap (void) which haunts our being irreducibly and eternally. Zizek believes in love because he believes in death (nothing).

I can recommend Todd McGowans lecture on Death Drive found here on youtube - he answers this question directly.

@@Stereotype23 Thanks

I don't think Zizek is against religion, he often calls himself a Christian Atheist, and criticizes the New Atheists for being naive. The question he poses to Buddhism (at least, insofar as he understands Buddhism proper) is: why do we first fall into believing our false selves? In other words, If the idea of Buddhism is that underneath the facade of the self is a void, Zizek is asking a basic question: how is it that we come to believe in this facade in the first place? What is the facade? Of course it is not real (in some sense)-- perhaps it's an appearance, but what does that mean? What is appearance? Even if he gets Buddhism wrong in asking the question (I wouldn't know), I think it displays quite nicely what *his* thought is about.

@@TheRandomBiscuit This is the same question in Buddhism as well. In fact Buddhism deals with the same 'incompleteness' in a similar ish way. The way buddhists understand it though is more than just rejection of understanding of a material world but rather in the context of karma and rebirth.

Matt K . 19:00 onward

Matt K. 24:00 too

Matt K 128:00

My Christian mom was extremely disappointed when I told her that Christmas was never a pagan holiday, probably because in that moment, she got what she desired. Christmas symbolically represents the second coming of Christ and the rebirth of the Church, which is followed by the Epiphany and a repetition of the cyclical calendar of the church. The Puritans did not celebrate Christmas, because they argued that Scripture provides no evidence that Jesus was born on December 25th. Traditionally, before the Industrial Revolution, Christmas was celebrated as a public revelry where participants would get drunk and party in the streets for 12 days- the Puritans also condemned Christmas as an excuse for disorder. The US did not recognize Christmas as a national holiday until the mid-19th century. By that time, the middle class started to push Christmas celebrations from the public streets into the safe spaces of private homes, while making children the central focus of the holiday and a reason to increase consumer demand. The Christmas that is celebrated by a majority of Americans today is a capitalist, world-affirming redirection of the Christian drive. It’s not the big Other ordering us to excessively consume stuff around Christmas, it’s the Superego demanding that we enjoy. Like Buddhism, Christianity is also world-rejecting, but contextually very different from Buddhism because it emerges from the Western canon where mankind creates, destroys, and worships god(s). Growing up, my mom used to warn me by saying “I brought you into this world and I can sure as hell take you out too.” My grandma used to say it to my mom, and I never really understood what it meant until I started to learn more about Early Christianity and the philosophy of Plato, more specifically Socrates. This Jewish woman in my photography studio used to joke that all the Christians in the room were actually pagans, implying that we worship a false god. She did not understand, nor would I ever try to force her to understand, that Christianity killed God and polytheism thereafter. I would not categorize Buddhism as a religion nor a philosophy in the Western sense, because it has no ties to theism nor Platonism nor orthodoxy. Everyman falls.

@@one-sidedrationalization1091 only if man ever rose, he could fall. When did he rise ? You're also well informed about your universe. Thanks for sharing 1091

seeget his essays are better, and the comparison is more to Lacan

He does differentiate "Western" Buddhism.

He jacks Lacan like Lacan jacked him some good Heidegger who jacks Buddhism. It's a co-jack, but Kojak jacked-off on lollipops. Still, we should remember that Eminem said that Daniel-san wax off

The social thing happens all across language regardless of whether YOU are doing it for health reasons or not

and very often his point is the smoke screen

i Neeraj Lohchab

relax

You entirely missed his exact point which is that it's a time to think and not to do

And lol Zizek has done plenty for me, Bill Gates hasn't done aaanything why should I care about some random rich guy who does good things for the world over someone who makes me think? The rich guy who does good things can continue with or without me being there but I wouldn't think this much if Zizek doesn't exist. So yeah Bill Gates is as irrelevant to me personally as the country of Angola is what do you think of that