Gotta disagree here to be honest. I'd argue that certain things can change what we "want" or that is to say, limit the things we "want"/like etc... You actually can teach yourself to like or want things. Contrary to popular belief it's quite doable. So in a sense breaking free of your wants or desires is true freedom I'd argue. Cause then doing almost anything becomes easier/blissful
@@teamgab7432 That’s the point of the statement. You aren’t always going to get what you want or you will and realize it was empty desire that can change and you’re on to chasing the next want. Learning to want what you are doing at a given moment in your life is teaching yourself and breaking free from want like you said. It’s the same point worded differently.
Amazing lecture, very accessible for someone like me who tends to get lost in the complexity of modern philosophy, but full of information and super engaging!! I'm re-watching it for the second time now, taking some notes. Thank you for creating these lectures for free, you're doing something great here! Big thank you from me watching here in Spain :) Definitely subscribing here on youtube and on Patreon! Excited to see what you guys come up with next :))!!
At one point you said that to be happy we need to become positive nihilist. And you talked about how Sisyphus takes happiness into carrying the rock. It made me think about a recent Mélenchon speech after he got third in the french elections. He said that even if we lost we have to keep carrying the rock like Sisyphus. The fight for social change is our rock and thats how we become happy, connect with people and spread the most love in the world. Thanks for the free lectures 😌
I hate to keep saying it, but while I learn an incredible amount from these videos, Freud’s death drive is different and was conceptualised to solve issues such as self-sabotage and is not an issue of mere repetition but why such repetition was not in the service of mastery but something else something that would bring a “negative therapeutic reaction”. It was theoretically vague and did lend itself to all your mentioned views on death drive - hence Melanie Klein essentially interpreted it as an aggression, while others interpreted it as a drive toward homeostasis or various other things.
The feeling of repetition is the result of extreme abstraction from the experience of life and immersion in the world of ideas - not cool philosophical ideas, but those which are so familiar, that we don’t even notice. In particular, the idea of time, taken seriously and not as a basis for some calculations, is the greatest factor of alienation from life as a process in which there is no repetition at all, not at any moment.
Just a thought I want to share. I think when you stressed that death drive is not self-sabotage, wanting to become nothing etc, you failed to mention that that's the lacanian/zizekian development/reinterpretation of death drive. For Freud, the conservative understanding does seem to me to be closer to his original thought. When he says in BTPP "the aim of all life is death" and where he goes on about the drive to want to return to an inorganic state or nirvana principal as some have put it, that is the Freudian death drive. Then he seems to fall into this manichean binary of Eros vs death drive in CAID, which still has death drive as this primal tendency to sabotage or repeat failure. Todd McGowan explains this very well. Of course later developments did seem to diverge from this understanding of death drive. I think we can find some truth in both interpretations.
So the Epiphany is realizing that (A)(B) which can seem like two separate terms that are at odds, is really one term (AB)? Thus the realization that change isn't from identifying with (A) or (B), rather embodying (C) is the true overcoming because any conception of either (A) or (B) necessitates the other. Idk, I think I have that right .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There is an assertion , I assume on behavior of Zizek?, not sure whether on behalf of our speaker guy, that the biggest dread is to stop desiring. That cannot be true. People who are seriously into Buddhism work all their lives to stop desiring.
Sure we born into a environment that can inform our thinking, to rewire our brains, its been proved we can rewire our brains. Thats why in a marriage situation you work and work to provide for the needs. We become immune to our own personal needs.
"Truth manifests in its lowest" Recently i heard a podcast, which makes a direct link between hegels dialectic principle and identity politics today. May there us a point in it: What can you say, when minorities say, we are the holder of an essence you are not able to perceive, because you are part of the privileged? What you privileged guy are saying is false, because you are not in position of holding (or perceiving) the essence? So be quiet. What would you or Hegel say?
This is an excellent question. We kinda discussed it in the bonus recording afterwards and went into more detail on why Zizek is critical of identity politics and postmodernism. But since that I’d paywalled, I’ll try to also address it in the next class.
@@low_vibration No it does not. But even I as someone that comments too much for my sanity don't regard it as worth my time to point out why that comment is so ridiculous. But here's the short answer I'm nevertheless willing to give: It's possible to criticise a system that one is currently living in.
hate that annoying ass grin. My problem with Marxism is that it doesn't matter. Who cares if you have the means of production if you aren't happy. All a perfect revolution would do is make you have less suffering. Life is constant suffering. Marxism is no answer to this suffering. Marxism won't solve that suffering. As Camus said "Christianity is mans greatest hope" if Christianity is true then we ought to follow its precepts over Marxism which is essentially materialist, nihilistic, and hedonistic. My sister would say "convenient that christianity tells you your suffering has meaning so that you don't do anything about it" to which I would respond. If you do something about it its still there it wont go away suffering is a constant. either it has meaning beyond matter ("we will all be dead in a million years") or not. The meaning is pointless if its neurons. Hey Julian why does any of this shit matter? (if you are a materialist)
What your describing is the antithesis of materialism so I'm unsure why you bring it up. A materialist would be concerned with the changing degrees of suffering over time (as are most people across the political spectrum? see pinker and co?). The position you are taking is the radical, nihilistic one.
@@MyNameIsNotDamien suffering may change in degree but it is always there. Materialism gives no inherant meaning to suffering except get less suffering
@@watsonblack7481 Are you seriously this pitiful and lazy? If you want to engage Marxism seriously as opposed to making some bland, nihilistic, and reductionist statement on "suffering," then you might want to know what exactly its critiquing and challenging. It'll save you an embarrassing digital footprint.
@@CeramicShot we agree that life is meaning-less without religion! and Marxism doesn't do shit bc life is meaning less. we also agree that suffering can't be solved! What ought we do then with this life since you call the religious answer "deluded" and I'm glad you think we should just chill with suffering, your more honest than most.
"Freedom isn't doing what you want, but instead wanting what you do." That was a very observant statement.
There is a nice book from Frank Ruda about Fatalism
Gotta disagree here to be honest.
I'd argue that certain things can change what we "want" or that is to say, limit the things we "want"/like etc...
You actually can teach yourself to like or want things. Contrary to popular belief it's quite doable.
So in a sense breaking free of your wants or desires is true freedom I'd argue. Cause then doing almost anything becomes easier/blissful
@@teamgab7432 That’s the point of the statement. You aren’t always going to get what you want or you will and realize it was empty desire that can change and you’re on to chasing the next want. Learning to want what you are doing at a given moment in your life is teaching yourself and breaking free from want like you said. It’s the same point worded differently.
@@casso24k Ah now I see what you mean. That appears to make sense
Ehh positive freedoms and negative freedoms. The US is very much about negative freedom
Amazing lecture, very accessible for someone like me who tends to get lost in the complexity of modern philosophy, but full of information and super engaging!! I'm re-watching it for the second time now, taking some notes. Thank you for creating these lectures for free, you're doing something great here! Big thank you from me watching here in Spain :) Definitely subscribing here on youtube and on Patreon! Excited to see what you guys come up with next :))!!
Thank you so much 😊👍 greetings back to Spain! We’re so glad you find the classes valuable. It’s such a pleasure 🙏
At one point you said that to be happy we need to become positive nihilist. And you talked about how Sisyphus takes happiness into carrying the rock. It made me think about a recent Mélenchon speech after he got third in the french elections. He said that even if we lost we have to keep carrying the rock like Sisyphus. The fight for social change is our rock and thats how we become happy, connect with people and spread the most love in the world. Thanks for the free lectures 😌
Wooo🙌🙌watching from the workingclass barrios of the south of BuenosAires Argentina.
I hate to keep saying it, but while I learn an incredible amount from these videos, Freud’s death drive is different and was conceptualised to solve issues such as self-sabotage and is not an issue of mere repetition but why such repetition was not in the service of mastery but something else something that would bring a “negative therapeutic reaction”. It was theoretically vague and did lend itself to all your mentioned views on death drive - hence Melanie Klein essentially interpreted it as an aggression, while others interpreted it as a drive toward homeostasis or various other things.
Nine inch nails - Every Day is Exactly the same... The song featured in Wanted Film.
Yes!
The feeling of repetition is the result of extreme abstraction from the experience of life and immersion in the world of ideas - not cool philosophical ideas, but those which are so familiar, that we don’t even notice. In particular, the idea of time, taken seriously and not as a basis for some calculations, is the greatest factor of alienation from life as a process in which there is no repetition at all, not at any moment.
Howdy from Clarksville, TN
Hegel had 2 schools of thought from his philosophical ideas, mark against his ideas but the economic influences of historical materialism.
Loved that lecture, thank you for doing this :)
Thats obvious technological gadgets influences do rewire young minds. I see young couple's sit together and texting oblivious of each .
But the real question is who's this beautiful actress ?
Awwwhh yeah I used to watch you on IG live 🥰🥰🥰🥰
As he says “for some people this could be drugs” as he points to his friend on his left. What?
0:21 tortoise trip
Just a thought I want to share. I think when you stressed that death drive is not self-sabotage, wanting to become nothing etc, you failed to mention that that's the lacanian/zizekian development/reinterpretation of death drive. For Freud, the conservative understanding does seem to me to be closer to his original thought. When he says in BTPP "the aim of all life is death" and where he goes on about the drive to want to return to an inorganic state or nirvana principal as some have put it, that is the Freudian death drive. Then he seems to fall into this manichean binary of Eros vs death drive in CAID, which still has death drive as this primal tendency to sabotage or repeat failure. Todd McGowan explains this very well. Of course later developments did seem to diverge from this understanding of death drive. I think we can find some truth in both interpretations.
Tudo isso por um menino que não sofreu com uma agonia interminável e teve direito à infância? É incrível que tenha sido assim
Brilliant 🧠
So the Epiphany is realizing that (A)(B) which can seem like two separate terms that are at odds, is really one term (AB)? Thus the realization that change isn't from identifying with (A) or (B), rather embodying (C) is the true overcoming because any conception of either (A) or (B) necessitates the other.
Idk, I think I have that right .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There is an assertion , I assume on behavior of Zizek?, not sure whether on behalf of our speaker guy, that the biggest dread is to stop desiring. That cannot be true. People who are seriously into Buddhism work all their lives to stop desiring.
the desire of not desiring is still a kind of desire
Sure we born into a environment that can inform our thinking, to rewire our brains, its been proved we can rewire our brains. Thats why in a marriage situation you work and work to provide for the needs. We become immune to our own personal needs.
It may not be self-sabotage, but that is exactly the reason Freud posited it.
Never knew Daenerys had such a smart boyfriend
Hi, Jenaline and Julien, what Zizek book best covers the topics covered in this video and Zizek's Marxism in general?
in the forst moment i thought you were jim amd pam
Is the Nine Inch Nails song ur thinking of "Copy of a"?
"Truth manifests in its lowest"
Recently i heard a podcast, which makes a direct link between hegels dialectic principle and identity politics today. May there us a point in it: What can you say, when minorities say, we are the holder of an essence you are not able to perceive, because you are part of the privileged? What you privileged guy are saying is false, because you are not in position of holding (or perceiving) the essence? So be quiet. What would you or Hegel say?
This is an excellent question. We kinda discussed it in the bonus recording afterwards and went into more detail on why Zizek is critical of identity politics and postmodernism. But since that I’d paywalled, I’ll try to also address it in the next class.
Are these guys famous because they look like Jim and Pam
Bourgeois ideology is fine if it's more critical and the culture isn't garbage too disconnected from reality.
lmao because communists are all about accepting reality
why arent all of you in cuba, china, or north korea?
Thank God this is not a serious comment. Nobody in their right mind would make such an argument.
@@schadowizationproductions6205 no i am serious. the fact that you elected to make fun of me rather than prove me wrong means you have no rebuttle
@@low_vibration No it does not. But even I as someone that comments too much for my sanity don't regard it as worth my time to point out why that comment is so ridiculous.
But here's the short answer I'm nevertheless willing to give: It's possible to criticise a system that one is currently living in.
@@schadowizationproductions6205 true but using the marxist critique is retarded
hate that annoying ass grin. My problem with Marxism is that it doesn't matter. Who cares if you have the means of production if you aren't happy. All a perfect revolution would do is make you have less suffering. Life is constant suffering. Marxism is no answer to this suffering. Marxism won't solve that suffering. As Camus said "Christianity is mans greatest hope" if Christianity is true then we ought to follow its precepts over Marxism which is essentially materialist, nihilistic, and hedonistic. My sister would say "convenient that christianity tells you your suffering has meaning so that you don't do anything about it" to which I would respond. If you do something about it its still there it wont go away suffering is a constant. either it has meaning beyond matter ("we will all be dead in a million years") or not. The meaning is pointless if its neurons. Hey Julian why does any of this shit matter? (if you are a materialist)
What your describing is the antithesis of materialism so I'm unsure why you bring it up. A materialist would be concerned with the changing degrees of suffering over time (as are most people across the political spectrum? see pinker and co?). The position you are taking is the radical, nihilistic one.
@@MyNameIsNotDamien suffering may change in degree but it is always there. Materialism gives no inherant meaning to suffering except get less suffering
@@watsonblack7481 Are you seriously this pitiful and lazy? If you want to engage Marxism seriously as opposed to making some bland, nihilistic, and reductionist statement on "suffering," then you might want to know what exactly its critiquing and challenging. It'll save you an embarrassing digital footprint.
@@CeramicShot well said.
@@CeramicShot we agree that life is meaning-less without religion! and Marxism doesn't do shit bc life is meaning less. we also agree that suffering can't be solved! What ought we do then with this life since you call the religious answer "deluded" and I'm glad you think we should just chill with suffering, your more honest than most.