Debate on Mahler Seeking God
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2011
- Nexus Conference ‘The Questor Hero. Gustav Mahler's Ultimate Questions.’
With Constantin Floros, Adam Zagajewski, George Klein, Slavoj Zizek, Allan Janik and Lewis Wolpert, at the Muziektheater in Amsterdam. nexus-instituut.nl/en/activit...
Join our membership: nexus-instituut.nl/en/members...
Follow us on Facebook: / nexusinstituut
and Twitter: / nexusinstituut
Holy shit I can’t imagine looking at the world through such dull eyes as Wolpert
you're delusional
For a scientist, that Wolpert fellow makes proclamations as if he were the Pope. I think he intends to win debates on the basis of personal authority. Very glad to see Zizek not take crap from this tiny imagination.
Its sad but under the microscope and on the petri dish he's right, except only the least accommodating minds dwell entirely on a slide. Must be fun I guess.
@@Kobe29261 who is righteous, Wolpert? Do read much more on the history of philosophy and sciences, then. What he said is c...p
He's an Saffer-Anglo Professor at King's College. He thinks the world should stop and listen every time he farts; he's full of himself because he wrote a book or two.
@@thewolfPrince Mf is dead
10:13 Zizek: "What am I doing sitting around these stupid people here"
“I’m a scientist, metaphysics is junk” bruh we’re talking about music and God why are you here?
He is an idiot
@@lakiog1938 he truly is. A smart idiot.
when a redditor enters the chat
@@bun197 lmao
you want a positive echo chamber then?
"There's no relationship between art and science." That is not the statement of a scientist. That is the statement of a stupid edgy teen who hates art class because his mom told him "it won't get him a job."
lol that's very cute. But seriously, what relationship is there between art and science beyond an extremely superficial and pedantic sense?
What actual relationship can you identify?
@Radev4 That's only a superficial relationship with physics.
IE music is a type of sound, and physics has models for sound, so music is covered by physics.
You might as well say that painting is chemistry because chemists make pigments. Only in that pedantic sense is there a relationship between physics and music.
In reality, there is no physical insight to be gleaned no matter how many hours you spend listening to music. While musicians may be influenced by the things physicists tell them, the converse relationship is entirely unlike this.
@Radev4 I read, and it was irrelevant. :)
@Radev4 Correct. There's a relationship as I had said, that is utterly unilateral. The physicists do physics, and they talk about physics, then the musicians feel and try to put their feelings into the form of music.
Meanwhile physicists don't get theorems from music, they don't get experiments from music, and they don't listen to music to decided what kind of physics to do.
This is not a real relationship. A real relationship is bilateral, not unilateral like this. If there was a real relationship between music and physics, then physicists would have to study music to be better physicists.
@@antoniolewis1016 First of all, i believe the word "art" no longer refers to anything. But "good art" in a 19. century sense, and good science both deeply move a subset of people who withness it.
Zizek never fails to make me laugh. Just looking at him in his t shirt with all these stuck up professors in suits is fucking brilliant
yes
How much you are a professor, a scientist or a philosopher cannot and should not be judged by how nice your suit or clothes are.. ;) that would open opportunities for all sorts of cheap opportunisms..
Suits bad. Aesthetics bad. Snobbery bad. Only slob true artist.
And his underboob sweat getting our unconscious to think of his milky udders of safety and protection.
@@Raakiszh literally true
Wolpert; “metaphysics is junk”, is itself inherently a metaphysical statement. It presupposes a “rule”, and a procedure based on a rule. His is also a conceptual orientation however impoverished.
No it isn't, metaphysics means it's beyond the physics, something that is unnatural and that cannot be examined by any logical or rational or experimental means in this universe. It truly is the epitome of meaningless babble EVEN if there were to be metaphysics.
Anyways, Wolpert is a complete imbecile, even though he is spot on with this statement.
Shit is so true some idiots need elementary lessons before they talk!
Exactly. But that's the sate of atheists nowadays. "Intellectuals" and laymen alike. It's insanity and blind worship of science.
Dazzlingly intellectual as he always is, professor Zizek stands out also for his rebelliously informal dress code amongst the suits and ties.
"There is no relationship between music and physics"
Sound waves travelling through the air: ARE YOU SURE?
lol that's very cute. But seriously, what relationship is there between art and science beyond an extremely superficial and pedantic sense?
What actual relationship can you identify?
Are you comfortable turning art into soundwaves, putting it in purely physical terms? Most artists would hesitate to say that.
Antonio Lewis I notice you used this exact reply on at least one other comment so my response should should address both. I think in the superficial sense both art and science are manifestations of the human desire for truth and are in fact mechanisms to achieve that truth, one an outer truth of the physical world (science) and the other a more intimate inner truth (art). I agree this type of relationship is not very interesting and could be regarded as idealistic, but there are more objective ways in which art and science inform each other. Art is in a constant state of change and much of that change occurs according to how we see the world which has been shaped by the scientific and intellectual evolution that is also happening in parallel. A great book that discusses this throughout history with music is The Music of the Spheres by Jaimie James. Outside of that, there are many artists who intentionally try to experiment with their art and propel it to new creative terrains by probing and understanding the medium very similarly to how a scientist probes nature. Examples of this in music are the school of spectral composers, the great Iannis Xenakis, electro acoustic composers, and many many others. The art of today and of the last 50 years is considerably more advanced than perhaps you are aware, and with that advancement comes technique that, in my opinion, brings it closer to science.
Antonio Lewis sorry I just realized that your comments are slightly different, so my apologies there. Also, another example of an organization dedicated to the collaboration between art and science is IRCAM in Paris, which is just an example of a much larger field. Take care, I hope you find some of my thoughts useful
@@kingofstringz1000 There's a couple of things here:
1) Scientists give artists better tools
2) Art and science both are seeking the truth.
I agree with 1. I disagree with 2. I agree that when scientists invent photography and computers, artists can play with those tools. But for point 2, what is true is different from what is pleasurable. Science seeks to know what is true, and art seeks to find pleasure.
Science is about making clear predictions using accurate models.
Art is just about entertainment and pleasure. It's interested in feelings, and feelings are not a form of truth. Not unless you're discussing it in a biological sense.
Antonio Lewis In my humble opinion you have a fundamental misunderstanding as to the nature of art and I couldn’t disagree with you more. Rather than try to engage you on a platform as this and convince you otherwise I think it’s a journey you will have to embark on your own. Do some research in some of the things I mentioned in my initial comment and do some research in what has happened in art in the past 50 years. Pleasure has almost nothing to do with art. Many art of today and of the modern era is very challenging and at times extremely intellectual. When you start to engage these possibilities of art then perhaps we can begin a conversation
I always love to hear Zizek's thoughts, it's like an intellectual roller coaster, always thrilling!
Sergio Lobato its also worthless
NeoLogical Positivist1936 Ha, I can see what you're saying. Listening to a great philosopher is like digging a deep hole then filling it up again then trying to remember why you started digging in the first place.
Only if they don't rely on real world empirical data and adductive / scientific inductive theory, to babble on and on about existence and all that is very fun don't get me wrong, but our species has greater problems to worry about, and the respect given to sophist entertainers like zizek as opposed to strictly empirical and humanist intellectuals like Noam chomsky, is hurting our society a lot.
NeoLogical Positivist1936 What do you attribute to Zizek's popularity? Outside of Chomsky, no other philosopher comes to mind as being known by the general mainstream population.
He talks quickly and has an aura of excitement, he is very vulgar which entertains college kids who watch him, he touches on topics that most people would consider to be very interesting I,e sex and the unconscious, desire suppressed, however he speaks with a lacanian/Freudian authority, which is at best guessing, and lastly he practices self effacement, be is known to agree with his ideological enemies and then retort them only partly I.e " I agree with you on the view of woman, I share it myself a bit... But you must understand" worst of all, he spends most of his time harping on the left, but provides no alternative, and also calls himself a leftist for some reason, the true reason I hate him, is due to how much of an embarrassment he is, for the left, and how he convinces a generation of children to waste their time on speculative bullshit like Freud, Lacan and writing about things you have no empirical authority over.
Love Zizek alluding to the metaphysical basement of science.
yess
I know right! Don't those "scientists" know the basis and presuppositions of science? They really should read some philosophy to know how to avoid sounding like complete morons.
Always feel sorry for Zizek. Can't shake off the feeling he's very much like an alien among men - who understands him? Case in point the arrogant physicist with his ultra-certainty is so unsophisticated he entirely missed the trajectory of Zizeks reasoning. "There is no connection between art and physics!" Wow! At that point might have just gotten up and left; his patience with the unsophisticated is saintly.
+Anogoya Dagaati Yes, my God! The sheer pedantry of that twerp Wolpert. Breathtakingly stupid. I was very glad to see Zizek smack him back.
Anogoya Dagaati 100%
Anogoya Dagaati philosophers tend to be out on their own
Wolpert isn't even a physicist. But nonetheless, his remarks were utterly idiotic.
lol that's very cute. But seriously, what relationship is there between art and science beyond an extremely superficial and pedantic sense?
What actual relationship can you identify?
poor zizek is too young and cant stand his house-mates in the senior housing
Dude, I just witnessed the fossils speaking about the eternal
Also a Hobo resumed the German musical tradition for some reason and made jew jokes
Ten years listening to Schönberg, and now, thanks to Zizek I finally understand why I like him
Zizek is like a caricature of himself. SO entertaining to have a genius in that form ^_^
I was really thrilled when Zizek said Berg is his favorite.
definetly adorno influenced, read "philosophy of new music", love that book
@@johnmulligan455 he said both, listen again:)
@@johnmulligan455 i search BERG, it s with hair on youtube.
@@johnmulligan455 me neither
Our boy Žiž here rocking a T-shirt amongst the suits! :)
There’s absolutely a relationship between music and science
I looked it up, myself. It wasn't suggested to me by an stupid UA-cam logarithmic machine.
Mahler seeking god is a way for him to look for hope and lament the fact that he was one of the last ones in those times. While Nietzsche said god is dead, Mahler was trying to show that he was one of the few ones, looking for god in a world where he is dead.
Please don't dogmatize the science
The last speaker said something that truly resonantes with me. I don't believe that I know, neither do I know that I believe. I am searching. I'd say it is a good attitude to have in life.
We need the whole conference. Or at least the parts where Zizek speaks
bumped so someone can come to the rescue.
maybe its on their website, trasury membership starting at 50 eur/year or so
JUST SOME FACTS: I think that claiming *"There is no relationship between music and physics"* as he does at 8:14,
is one of the dumbest things a physicist coul say about music as sound is physics.
Actually you have worldwide spread universities and academies focused on sound physics and engeneering.
Plus both acustic and electronic instruments are all based on studies around the physics of sound.
And we could keep adding things to the list for days.
If you take the technical aspects, I'd say music in itself is part of physics. It's kinda the science of creating, controlling and modulating sound waves. However, if you look at the purely artistic side of music, you'd have to ask questions like "Why are we putting notes in these specific orders?", "Why do we perceive some orders as good and others as bad or why do we attach emotions to them?", or even more fundamental: "Is there even order in music?" Imo all these questions still partly go back to physical phenomena. So yeah, saying there's no connection is pretty dumb.
As one comment I saw metioned, if this is the case, there is also connection between painting and chemistry as painting uses pigment which is studied by chemist. But is this really a meaningful and direct relationship? Simply the tool of making arts is invented or studied by science already implies a true sense of relationship between science and arts? Painting is no merely pigment just like music is no merely sound
Is there any possibility to watch this full panel somewhere? This is really good!
No relationship between music and physics? What is a musical note but a collection of frequencies?
I love that Slavoj Zizek is dressed casually
The problem with science is that, in its strict empirical approach, it is unable to grasp any concept of the unity of spirit that Hegel talks about, any idea of what he would call the 'speculative' or rational. It is a discipline devised by the miserable cold fish which is the Anglo Saxon mind, devoid of any sense of grand designs and dealing only with the disparate elements of our makeup.
Imagine science took the Hegelian Wissenschaft path. Dude, science would be fucking sublime 🤤
"science is unable to grasp the concept of a spirit" sounds much better than "my superstitions conflict with observable reality"
@@Zerenko battery no I prefer yours :)
Wolper hasn't even listened to Mahler's symphonies. The 2nd, 3rd, 8th and Das Liede are full of sung words.
and 4th
I love how Zizek edgily hates Mahler lmao. Literally everytime his name mentioned you can see him holding back a groan
where is the entire debate?
My daughter cached up a little and asked me
Is this Donald Duck🤣
You will find the scientists to always be the most religious of their perceived "truth".
I love how at some times Zizek himself looks like Marx
where is a full version of this?
Mr. Wolpert should try the discipline of history, and read some of the very existential, metaphysical musings Mahler left in every single one of his scores.
Lewis Wolpert: ideologue of the dominator culture.
So much talk !
I think I'll just put on my headphones, lie back and listen to the last movement of symphony # 9.
Ahhhhhhh
I prefer to think of us being channels of both good or bad and make choices about what we act out. I also prefer to think that we can never understand where that comes from. Some are channels for amazing music, such as Mahler, and some are listening to the wrong channel.
There isn't a relationship between music and physics? Ok I guess it's something otherwordly then
Where can we see this in full?
am searching for it too.
You must have a taste for masochism.
Where is the full debate? Or do we have to pay to watch the full thing?
There is no relationship between music and physics !!
And this comes from a scientist !!
A meaningless discussion to me, a mere listener of music. Everything that was important he left us in his art.
"Metaphysics is junk" - I no longer have any interest in anything this man has to say.
He said it as a response to the previous speaker. He said I get it Metaphysics is junk, wich was what he interpreted the previous speaker was saying.
Is there even any point to discussing metaphysics any more? Philosophers have done so time and time again and are still doing it, and the consensus is that we still know nothing about the first state of things. Don't be so close-minded just because this guy isn't trying to be profound. You should be glad he is taking a more scientific approach, which would be the most progressive approach. And this isn't a new thought. Wittgenstein (and probably people before him) found metaphysics to be a waste of time because it's almost impossible to prove and is mostly speculation.
Matthew Lol, Wolpert owned the humanitards big league.
That is a gross misrepresentation of what Wittgenstein thought. I advise you and others reading me to read his conversations with Drury on that topic, as well as his letters with Frege and Anscombe.
Agreed. This Wolpert guy is a typical materialist & reductionist who has made science itself into his God. A pure manifestation of Scientism at its worst. Because he can't find God or Spirit in the material world, he assumes nothing exists beyond the material.
Wolpert maybe has got a point - can we actually interpret music through metaphysics? Does music transcend the linguistical circle?
Maybe?
I remember an Adam Neely video in which he shows how one people's music (rythm, music, tempo etc.) is connected with their language - and language is concept. So, maybe Wolpert made a good point - but not good enough. Music is linguistical, probably, and as such, is metaphysics.
where to watch the full discussion?
Žižek's take on Mahler is abysmal. Did he only hear the last movement of the 5th? And not get that the ending is a joke? There would be no Schoenberg without Mahler, who paved the way for precisely the modernism Žižek is describing, Schoenberg having been a colleague and admirer of Mahler, and even the piece mentioned, Gurre-Lieder, owing a great deal to Mahler, not least the vast ensemble it requires much like Symphony 8. Žižek would have spoken very differently if it had been the 6th or the 9th he was hearing the end of, and perhaps wouldn't be so dismissive of the composer's metaphysics if he'd heard and read Das Lied Von Der Erde, or the 3rd symphony with a good well curated program (that utter moron Wolpert notwithstanding). Mahler very much foresaw the dark vision of the 20th century and his entire output is a personal journey of finding ever more ingeniously contrived ways to stave off that eventuality as best he can, each work another desperate search for a new kind of monument to hope, to continuation, and therefore to God (in which he did believe, Gnostically I believe, as a secular perennialist/pantheist. The day he converted to catholicism for his career he reportedly stepped out of the chapel and said "I've just changed my coat"). Žižek speaks so disparagingly and condescendingly of the classical canon, of which Mahler knew he was the last and so agonised over, without properly understanding the musical language they used and were at the time still developing, endlessly towards Mahler concluding that development and Schoenberg and Stravinsky starting theirs anew. The vitriol towards the culture surrounding the classical viennese school is well grounded, and the Art does reflect that culture, but the ways in which that reflection may in fact be a less than favourable one can be subtle and complex, because that's what Art is all about and because it was still trying to show that reflection to the masses of its time and be accessible enough to them that they may even learn something from it. I think Žižek very much fails to find that nuance in his analysis of works of that period much to his detriment. I don't think any of the panelists here seem to be in any position to make any assertions about a composer half as complex and philosophically oriented as Mahler without having studied him and the philosophy of music as a whole a great deal more.
Which one is John Cleese? This was really Pythonesque
GO ZIZEK, GO!!
Floros is the only musicologist here . The others don't really have any understanding of music.
i wish we could listen to him just speaking in his mother tongue
@@akemdam9824 my thoughts exactly. Floros has some brilliant work on Mahler and he would otherwise be a perfect guest for the debate
Mahler is my favourite composer and I'm sure if I lived in his day I'd feel the same way. However I live today and am an atheist. It doesn't mean I like Mahler any less (or Steve Vai for that matter)
Interestingly enough, I am also an avowed atheist but the last movement of the Resurrection symphony always brings me to tears....Why?
@@hillcresthiker Best symphony by the best composer. I love Simon Rattle Rattle w Birmingham.
@@Paolo8772 Without a doubt- love Rattle, Bernstein and Abbado
where i can find the complete debat?
He unironically said "metaphysics is junk" which in itself is a metaphysical statement that is unverifiable empirically.
I don't know about you all, but I am tempted to go with the guy on the panel who isn't a clone.
What a weird event
true that. the opening guy takes 1:14 to say 10 seconds worth of information.
This is a strange debate. I understood every point and it had no actual overall point. Just people arguing
Zizek acts like a big sneeze has been coming for the last 20 years
4.01 'you know, like in Annie Hall' - as if that old dolt in the right has ever done anything remotely fun like watching a film
Nice to see intelligent debate by intelligent people.
However, I was prepared to give that Wolfert guy time of day until he said music and science doesn't overlap... what a clown.
Everyone who is on this stage while not occupying the same exact space as Zizek seems to be suffering from the effects of some sort of senility ray. Must be all that rapid gesturing. Hard target.
Bravo, last guy talking!
another much more mature debate..
Britain: Land of shopkeepers and scientists. No mystics need apply.
Music, and Art is currently full of distortion; with fetishism, also we must not forget that knowledge is interconnected.
lol, 0:00 - 1:10 that dude tried sooo hard to get thoughts to come out, but ended up speaking the most vague nonsense
That dude is the leading Mahler scholar xD
It's not his mother tongue but out of everyone there he's the one that knows the most.
Zizek is the best thing to happen to philosophy since Nozick. This panel of meandering buffoons (Zizek being the exception) is what put me off the entire discipline.
Slavoj Žižek is Jan Žižka reincarnated. A true warrior in his field .. kinda looks like him, too
wolpert, who she? so glad they have zizek instead of a bunch of pompous experts.
Worth?
Did they invited any musicians?
human is a label that inaccurately labels us beings of this form, at least the general idea of what humanity is, or that we are the ideals or ideas derived since birth in the form of a mutated monkey... but in truth this is an illusion, for in truth we are the awareness, the ideas/ideals can be changed and our physical form has continued to evolve, yet the chimps have not turned into hairless monkeys or humans :P many equate feelings with humanity but animals have feelings too.
love and light
Physicists are so annoying
youre annoying
Someone likes snow.
Zizek and Janik are best
Or just 10 seconds of information. Semantics. ha
Sheldon Cooper looks like this.... Feeling old yet.
I think Lewis Wolpert is a sweet and passionate man, who despite his lack of in-depth knowledge in philosophy and metaphysics, is still arguing for something unique in modern scientific attitude and praxis. Atleast he has quite rigorous empirical knowledge of his own domain of expertise, unlike Žižek who is a clown that has learnt how to dance around in every universe and yet really knows nothing but philosophical sophistry to appear as a sophisticated fellow. It's sad that people are so enamored by the performer rather than educators.
Lewis Wolpert was a hack, so is Žižek
@@eccotom1 any particular reasons for saying that? Which specific works/arguments of his (Wolpert's) do you find disingenuous?
@@lokayatavishwam9594 you only said that to provoke some reaction's. So here u have it and now go back to the swing where u came from
Truth Event
Haha!
Plot twist : this is the NWO round table
😂
Wubba lubba dub dub
- Lewis wolpert
let the man talk
Scientists certainly have a metaphysical assumptions.
Slavoj Zizek's time perspective is apocalyptic. His attitude may differ from human psychology regarding attitudes to time perspectives in general. While human psychology is mechanical, Zizek's framework is wonderfully constructed if not by multiple synthesis; by a dialectic process without opportunist jumps. So does human psychology appropriate opportunism, or is such a charge not empathetic to fact?
There is no connection between art and science? woah where do we begin? lol
NO RELATIONSHIP???
Pigments to paint with...?
Sound?
Fractals?
VIDEO GAMES?
:|
there is no relationship between music and physics??!!! who let this guy in
To what story is Zizek referring in the Talmud?
He's referring to a joke about talmundists.
In the end, my bet is that Zizek’s personal life is much more interesting and fun than that crone Wolpert’s.,
Dr Floros still alive
Language is metaphisical... All concepts are that also. First is an idea f.e. of transplantation of organs, etc.
then came covid and closed the discussion...
""There's no relationship between music and physics" for a scientist he seem to dont know about sound waves for example, and the importance of hertz frequency for the differention of the notes and audio engineering, resume: wolpert = dumb
Please someone call Sadguru.
science is metaphysics
... Why does Slavoy dress like that? He looks so out of place :P
Wolpert, DESPITE being a scientist, doesn't understand the magic in the world and the great mystery of existence itself. Sad for him.
And how can he say physics has nothing to do with music? Both are factualy happening in reality, both are described with the language of mathematics, music, or sound to begin with is physical. Then sound invokes distinct emotions so music is even an obvious connection between physical forces and the unseen, emotion, mind, consciousness. All of which is part of existence itself. Which is metaphysics. Is this dude dense?