Slavoj Zizek: The Reality of the Virtual
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 сер 2012
- In this tour de force filmed lecture, Slavoj Žižek lucidly and compellingly reflects on belief - which takes him from Father Christmas to democracy - and on the various forms that belief takes, drawing on Lacanian categories of thought. In a radical dismissal of today's so called post-political era, he mobilizes the paradox of universal truth urging us to dare to enact the impossible. It is a characteristic virtuoso performance, moving promiscuously from subject to subject but keeping the larger argument in view.
Transcript: pastebin.com/LhnajViV
You know its Zizek when Hegelian dialectics, chocolate laxatives, and concentration camps are all used to illuminate each other.
For those who are desperately trying to catch up on what Zizek says, I recommend 'Zizek and Politics: A Critical Introduction', by Sharpe and Boucher. The authors advocate a break in Zizek's work: there are basically two (altough interwoven) Zizeks. The first Zizek goes from the publication of his first English book, The Sublime Object of Ideology, appeared in 1989. Up to mid 90s Zizek is a commited supporter of what is called 'radical democracy', which is strictly related to his view on the subject as subject of desire. Nonetheless, in some point of the 90s he radicalized his standpoint and all his theory became commited to a Marxist revolutionary project, which in this case is related to his novel view on the subject as a subject of the death drive and his re-reading of Schelling's work. I think it is clarifying to realize that the Zizek we are here listening to is the second Zizek, the revolutionary one, and not that moderate radical democratic Zizek.
> implying marxism and democracy are contradictory
Provide an example that shows otherwise then.
This is the best zizek video I have seen in a long while, clear, concise and without him regurgitating the same jokes / points incessantly. Thanks for uploading it, interesting ideas.
One of my favourite talks by him.
Professor Zizek was ahead of his time - in 2003, very few people talked about Virtual Reality
The matrix.
I succest you take a look also at Baudrillard's work, especially "Simbolic exchange and death" (1976) and the quite more famous "simulacra and simulation" (1981).
We truely do stands on giant's shoulder, only if you allow yourself to study the history of discipline you'll be able to see It.
desire is a result of the mode of production, Zizek is basing his ideas on a belief that can be explained without referring to itself
At times he seems to come close to Manuel de Landa. or is it Delueze meets Lacan. How I would love a meeting of Zizek and Delanda and exploration of differences.
Plus a few great jokes ; I bet.
Well well well, look who's borderline comprehensible!
Please develop on it young padawan
Fantastic
The big antagonism is (with) the big universal Other. The big Other then is the static/synchronic virtual space that systematically operates as the logical reference. The way station like the intermediary steps in the process of solving the rubix cube- a mobile space that one uses to keep from painting oneself into a corner.
Great. After the first five minutes of this lecture I had to listen to the rest of it while picturing him sweating on the toilet.
You think? He describes Real Real in two parts - the first one being the 'obscene' shadow side of the Symbolic Real (the "unknown knowns" etc.) and thus resembling it in many ways, while the other half is the 'core' Real Real.
He makes the distinctions quite clear, just the explanations are lengthy.
what he says from 2:26 to 2:54 definitely reminds me of Martin Creeds works...
The reality of the virtual. I personally think that Lacan deserves ten Nobel prizes in let's say, medicine.
In the beginning,Feels like rephrasing of Ervin Goffman presentation of the self .....
I swear that what Slavoj Zizek doesn't realise (possibly), and that I have also never realised, is that Slavoj Zizek is basically a mad man desperately trying to communicate his own raw experience while everyone else is only able to perceive a frequency of virtual, symbolic reality... But, is that not just all of us?
+Nicki Minaj I mean, is he really going to get any real proof that he is not just on his own in there, or does he just want it so much he just keeps going on past hope that someone will hear him?
+David Waters i was on LSD when I wrote this comment. I also felt like I totally understood what he was saying, but there was also a feeling that he was trying to explain aspects of his inner life that were totally incommunicable
I thought LSD what a dissociative. Were you coming off of it? in the final stage of it?
Lude in the Sky with Diamonds
Lude you shouldn't think about his experience of explaining his experience, instead you should interpret his words as if they are real even in your world and experience.
Zizek is the best but you have to know howe to listen him
Reality in a Virtual way.
Every "and so on and so on" is replaced with "etc. etc." in the captions and it is deplorable.
Zizekian philosophy in one video :)
I need to contact Ben Wright, the director of the film. Does anyone has an email, or even a phone number? Thank you
remind's me of Sloterdijk's constat a the end of spheres III
What is Zizek trying to explain with the example of the military song? Can anyone please explain? Why is the song a shadowy virtual reality? And why is it necessary to accompany a military discourse?
As he said the songs are often 'vulgar chants' in contrast to the brutal military discipline they adhere to.
A better example he gives elsewhere is of religions like how pedophilia is an obscene underbelly of the institution of church and the practice it's folks engage in. Same could be said about very highly sexually disciplined, restrained societies, where pedophilia, incest, bestiality is found to.
Zizek should be a president of the world. It would be cool if he a least replaced Castro for example. I imagine him in this green cap with his beard, angry poker face and anger in eyes. Perfect motherfucker! I love you Slavoy!
52:48 - Truth Procedure (Badiou)
I find myself struggling to agree with his critique of postcolonial critical theory that he makes around the 30 minute mark. Much later, somewhere before or around 50 mins, I agree with that critique: multicultural capitalism functions to undermine class struggle, and perhaps class consciousness in general. I too fear a continuous recognition of differences (an unending operation of recognition) is to the service of liberal capitalism. However, standing against this position is much easier when you do not feel the pressure accompanied from remaining without that recognition.
Interesting talk, nonetheless.
No I'm not implying that it's genuinely less racist but rather they realize that any form of discrimination is bad for business. Political correctness for the most part is simply a sort of tool used to solidify the inclusiveness that's required to maintain consumer capitalism.
Maximizing the size of your customer base
IMDB: 7,6
I wanna do a video essay on this
Yes please! Keep up the good work!
Do it.
Marvellous as always. In his regulary emphasised notions on de-essenceised pleasures he never adds the condom and the pill as the superb and first example. Sex with the usage of condom or the pill is an act of reproduction deprived of its essential reproductive function, without any danger, reduced to simple pleasure. Thus it can be enjoyed in limitless and endless quantity.
Because Sex isnt as easy to enjoy as He always Points out. We need phantasma to do so, unlikely with Coffee without caffeine.
2003 was a long time ago, Before Chains, (BC)
What you're failing to grasp about militant groups is that while survival, i.e. profit is their ultimate goal and drive they arent fully aware of it nor are they capable of admitting it. Many (but not every) militant group needs a certain amount of complexity behind its reasons to justify its lifestyle. From my experience theres a certain ineffable quality to this rhetoric--which is to say its not always logically sound enough to make sense, but it always appeals to emotion
15:15 Isn't that from Full Metal Jacket?
yep
the first part is great, everything else is a dumpster fire
can someone give me some more info on what Zizek is talking about Einstein reversing the general theory of relativity? I thought space-time is bent because of the planets.
It sounds like quantum physics .. that there is matter created by empty space or that matter is a fluctuation of the quantum field or space
Space directs matter,instead of matter curving space.
Türkçe altyazı lazım :/
kungfu panda nın altyazısı var böyle şeylerin yok. Biri yaparsa ya da zizek in alt yazılı videolarını paylaşırsa haber verirse minnettar olurum.
İlhan Acar www.turkcealtyazi.org/sub/587605/slavoj-zizek-the-reality-of-the-virtual.html
Is there a way i can a get a trasncript of this?
Juan Andrés Carderera Carderera I dont think it is complete but may help you
www.lacan.com/zizbenbrother.html
This has a full transcript
myheartwillgoonandsoonandsoon.blogspot.com/2019/04/slavoj-zizek-reality-of-virtual.html
Anyone knows if this looong talk has been transcrypted in a book?
www.douban.com/group/topic/40114729/#!/i!/ckDefault
Akhyan Vaidya thank you, very useful
OOGIE BOOGA
Is that impossible,that we consciously avoid primordial REAL,with miss perception,but unconsciously we want to meet with him,in a way that we create the field,of cause to virtual effect(traumatic scene,some figure of antagonism)
I apologize for my bad English.
Very interesting insight !
Šta si hteo reći Luka sa drugim delom 'of cause to virtual effect'? Do you mean to say that it's impossible to engage with the primordial real, but our desire to do so stages the virtual real? And the traumatic antagonisms are placed there by ourselves, by virtue of us creating virtual real?
56:10
Speaking as a male, of course. Though I find it hard to believe women ordinary engage in sex with images of motherhood foremost in their minds while the act is ongoing. I suspect that even for the desperately hopeful couple trying the rhythm method, the intrusion of children as an aim only increases anxiety, and actually acts against the interests of reproduction.
Was his voice deeper?
I thought the same thing, there are older talks where he seems to again have the higher voice! Maybe a cold?
He gets so sloppy when he starts talking about the Real. He says Real Real and then apparently starts talking about the Symbolic Real.
BrunoJA exactly.
Forreal
If you watch enough vids of his, you’ll find he’s not the greatest teacher of Lacan out there, it’s more like he knows enough to use it as supporting evidence, if you will, but not enough to illuminate someone who knows little to nothing of Lacan. How much of that has to do with Žižek shortcomings and how much has to do with Lacan being naturally difficult to learn, I’m not sure.
Interested in making a profit. I won't argue against the notion that inclusiveness could potentially be a historical inevitability associated with human "progress." The point I was making was about political correctness specifically and it's underlying implications in general as well as within the "sex positive" ideology. As to your latter sentiment that mainstream American politics has become dogmatic, I fully agree. I would add that it's not just American politics but world wide politics...
Reality huiality
whats the difference between virtual and fantasy?
its quite standard if you just replace fantasy with virtual
he's just tryna be sexy
Why does he mix up the "real Real" and the "imaginary Real" in this? Or why does he mix it up in his book On Belief, where Zizek states the following:
"so that we have the “real Real” (the horrifying Thing, the primordial object, like Irma’s throat), the “symbolic Real” (the signifier reduced to a senseless formula, like the quantum physics formulae which can no longer be translated back into - or related to - the everyday experience of our life-world), AND the “imaginary Real” (the mysterious je ne sais quoi, the unfathomable “something” that introduces a self-division into an ordinary object, so that the sublime dimension shines through it)."
I might be stupid but the video and that excerpt seem to contradict.
Yes, there seems to be a contradiction here, but it is arising from your quote. In the passage you quoted, I would have interchanged "real Real" with "imaginary Real". Then it all makes sense.
is it genuinely less racist though if its doing business with them towards the end of accruing the capital to betray and destroy them? sometimes while groundfighting i will allow opponents to gain ground so to speak to set them up for submission or otherwise attack. Sociological studies may need to be undergone before conclusions can be met
In your first comment you state that a possibility of the more inclusive nature regarding the Aryan Brotherhood can be concluded to be an intentional ploy to destroy minority communities. Just out of interest do you study cultural studies? It seems as if you are attributing a sort of complex theory to a phenomena which has quite a simple explanation. I.e they have simply come to the realization that any form of discrimination is bad for business and the members of the Brotherhood are simply...
So, did he ever explain what is that famous ‘real real’?
I don't think so.
Yes he did xd
The real real is basically the meta structure from where you derive your particular and personal narratives (the left/right example is clear) to perceive the design antagonisms of the systems (ideological, political, social,..) its like a virtual chess table (virtual because non substancial) that always stay immutable despite all the range of plays u can make (real, symbolic, imaginary, you name it)
Level 1 Close to the symbolic. All that accompanies the symbolic level as its obscene shadow. Example, perverse marching songs somehow required to sustain military reality.
We can also consider the subtext of the Sound of Music. Austrians are small- is-beautiful provincial fascists and invading Nazis are exquisitely dressed bureaucrats who resemble caricatures of decadent, cosmopolitan Jews.
Level 2
Unknown Knowns. They are part of our identity and determine our activity, but we don’t know that we know them..Unconscious fantasies, prejudices.
Example, Iraqi Minister of Information was asked if it is true that Americans already control part of the Baghdad Airport, he said “Not true, Americans don’t control even themselves.”
its the objet petit a, the excess of every symbolization and at the same time it's starting point
@@recoilAbs that matches with the definition “that which resists symbolization absolutely”
hahahaha, he was so worried about being mad at the concept, that he kinda forgot that the pourpose of VR has way less incisive goals... hopefully it's only because he could not project the implications of it to a near future without being so dramatic
Pâmela Martini or just because it's a great jumping off point to talk about the way people perceive the current reality. That's kinda the way talks like this go... You're not meant to take the discussion as saying this is literally what people are inventing VR for.
Also you came back and edited your comment and still didn't manage to correct how you spelled "purpose".
So what was the real real? I didn't quite catch it and then got lost after that. I think sadly to understand this essay one has to have profound knowledge of Hegel, Marx, Lacan, Deleuze... Or pretty much everything Zizek knows about. Which is to say, the blame is on him.
Level 1 Close to the symbolic. All that accompanies the symbolic level as its obscene shadow. Example, perverse marching songs somehow required to sustain military reality.
We can also consider the subtext of the Sound of Music. Austrians are small- is-beautiful provincial fascists and invading Nazis are exquisitely dressed bureaucrats who resemble caricatures of decadent, cosmopolitan Jews. Microsigns
Level 2
Unknown Knowns? They are part of our identity and determine our activity, but we don’t know that we know them..Unconscious fantasies, prejudices.
Example, Iraqi Minister of Information was asked if it is true that Americans already control part of the Baghdad Airport, he said “Not true, Americans don’t control even themselves.”
its object petit a
sub spanish!!!!!!
I wouldn't consider anything Zizek expounds on as "lucid". I can't understand the core of what he presents, whether it's about our perception of reality or about ideology and how it relates to the human condition. Nevertheless I still attempt to understand.
Noone Yes it's about how humans behave and perceive the world
Noone he's also diving into what is real.
communication is persistence my friend
HE DOESN'T RAISE ANSWERS, JUST MORE QUESTIONS
@@balloonsballoon what's an answer but a question.. Uh. This ain't math.
¹ There are known Known's
(There are thing's we know that we know).
²There are known Unknown's
(There are thing's that we know, we don't know).
³ There are unknown Unknown's
(There are thing's we don't know, that we don't know).
IV There are thing's that are unknown Known's
(There are thing's that we know, but we don't even know that we know them).
THiS iS iDEOLOGY ❗️
IVa Things we believe without believing.
The crucial problem of believing :
When our act's do not match our
conviction's and/or believe's.
animist african and brazilian relegions are religios materialism...
...germanic or nordic witchkraft also used to be, before christianity came and wiped out reality from them and gave us the unreachable relation with utopian behaivorism and impossible loveble virtues
you also speak as if this were all planned from the perspective of facilitating consumerism, when in fact we have no way of knowing if consumerism is not in fact the socioeconomic product of a the historical trend towards greater inclusiveness. MY problem with this attitude, aside from its jumping the gun on any data born conclusion, is that its an example of the sort of oppositional and uncompromising approach to politics that characterizes the mainstream dogma of American politics
Would The Donald then be the expression of a primordial utopia as the return of an impossible for the real - for REAL?!
Normality is just successful version of psychosis.
Since the line of zero (i.e. normal) shifts anyway incessantly, albeit not in a more promising direction, why not having a Psychopomp on top of worlds leading nations. Same holds for China and Russia and them Arab Kings still in power, u name them. . .
i feel like i just got red pilled
Im not standing here for the case of catholic or krishnian sex conditioned by reproduction, which is in its essence an extremely primitive way of conditioning sex. Im speaking about the žižek's view on modern hedonism, pleasures without any limitations or dangers deprived of their elemental essences where he usualy, but not always, forgets to mention the modern pill-condom sex as a prime example.
you should tell a psicoanalist
Aren't you implicitly arguing for Catholic: "Correct" (human) sex = reproduction? Which is ironically the 'animal' fact of sex, and not human.
Subjectivity always requires something more, there is no "turn on" in making babies qua functional procedure. If humans were all "ordered" to only have sex reproductively, we'd prolly die out. We have sex for lots of reasons, and may well be hoping for a family, but babies are very far from the mental space in which copulation can function physically.
cocaine is a hell of a drug
Unknowing is even viral and unstoppable😂
Lol at 3-4 min he’s alluding to Joyce’s fart fetish. Very few probably got that.
practical utopia vs imaginary utopia: nice trope
Lacan wouldn't be able to follow most of what this guy says. He's gonna die without ever having made a point.
Or you're going to die without ever having understood him. I sympathize with a lot of the misunderstandings about Zizek though -- without an understanding of Hegel, Marx and Lacan, Zizek's spontaneity will appear impenetrable. I encourage those who have difficulty appreciating his lectures to at least investigate some of his writings before dismissing him as nebulous. His first book, The Sublime Object of Ideology, is the best place to start.
Zach Bagnell Yeah, I made that comment when I was having trouble getting into Zizek. I understand him better now, just through excerpts of his papers online. I might read his books someday. I still have trouble with his accent though.
Thanks for the direction toward some writing. I realize this video was made a decade ago but it isn't great for his image as a serious thinker that we all see him swiping his nose incessantly. It's obvious enough at least that no one intolerant of coke addicts will have paid as close attention as a lecturer would hope for. I hope his writings obscure some of the symbolical realities for me.
+HHayes88 - so he has a few tics, does it really detract that heavily from what he says
I also like the most sublime hysteric (rather hard) and "looking awry" which is a better introduction for lacan than "reading lacan"
The subject matter is tough, the accent is almost incomprehensible...not fun :-(
If you listen to him enough you will come to love his accent, his lisp and his tick. Now if I read zizek I read it with his accent in mind
and so on and so on
Slavoj Zizek is just interesting to look at, uses animated expressions, and has an accent. That seems to be the only attraction. The words he uses just get lost in the background. He has an ego complex and it is not clear what he actually contributes to human knowledge.
Man shut the hell up. This was extremely incisive.
learn to read and look at the transcript of the video
I'll give you an 8/10 on trolling. Good effort.
I believe he can see the beginning. First person to see the beginning? Mr. Badiou says to start at the beginning. Cause he ain't talking about what he's talking about. Someone tweet @Mr.Zizek, #firsttotheegg.
BLA-BLA-BLA SISEK WANT TO teach you on bad English!!!!!!!!