Besides Zizek staring at me intensely during a discussion about sexuality, I had a few other problems with this talk ;). Animal mating isnt as simple as he seemed to state, and are not so far removed from our human experience of courting rituals, eroticism and sex itself. Apparently his argument pivots on his Freudian theory of fantasy always being present in human sexuality and its supposedly divergent or illusory eroticism, but I would have to disagree with those premises as well. For some people, fantasy in the way he meant it is always present, for others it is not; and just because something is eroticized does not necessarily relegate it to some abstract or misleading fantasy unique to human individuals. I would go further and say that if his fantasies are always more present for him than the experience itself, consciously or unconsciously, then he is not present for himself or his partners and thus he cannot experience sexuality to its fullest potential of connection and intimacy which can then allow fuller transcendence. In one sense, developing or exercising erotic proclivities or falling in love could be considered an illusion or catastrophe, but only from the perspective of myopic selfishness that characterized the state of being existing before that possibility of transcendence through connection and awareness. What I mean is that I believe that there is a possibility for love, considered as connection with transcendent potential, to outlast and outweigh its obsessive physiochemical states. If it doesn't, then it isn't love and it is only an erotic dead end with very limited transcendent potential. Instead, love is you transcending temporary physical states as well as the more concrete and persistent antecedent modes of selfish being. If you cannot allow yourself and your ways of being to be changed by intimacy and connection through a broadening and deepening of your world, then you remain unnecessarily lonely, isolated and selfish. That is a failure to recognize or experience the possibility of transcendence. Whether in an exercise of eroticism or a state of being in love, a failure to move beyond yourself in order to connect more fully is the real catastrophe; it is a failure of transcending your limited self. Transcendence in sexuality, as well as in its broader sense, is precisely the expansion, change, and perhaps even breakdown of the limited and isolated self. Zizek fails to differentiate between limitations among different states of being. We are always relatively isolated and alone regardless of our position. However, we must breakdown and abandon certain states of being and their limitations as we open ourselves to others and other situations, or we never grow. This does not equate to the loss of potential for transcendence in the Kantian sense or otherwise as Zizek stated (and yes, I find Kant to be incredibly boring). Quite the contrary, only through breaking down and readjusting our limitations through transcendence can we make room for further transcendence or achieve a continuation of a state that transcends that which came before.
Love is probably the most vague and confusing concept to me, because everyone seems to tell you something different about it. Even the terms connected to it are so vaguely used. I decided that I'm going to ignore all these and just find things out on my own (ironically commenting that here). I often found others and myself pursuing someone who we think (not conciously) to have or to give us something that we are missing. And I see this with a lot of people, we are incredibly drawn to people who we can compensate our issues or deficiencies with, sorta like a neediness. From my understanding so far there are three different "levels", first one is a "crush" that contains interest, curiosity, attraction, fantasy, idealisation and lust, the second one is "catching feelings/falling in love" which adds an pervasive presence of the other person in one's mind and feelings that come with a neediness for said person. And lastly the third one is "love" where I agree with you. I believe love happens after a very deep relevation and connection with another person where the flaws don't even matter as much as the person itself. It transcends the neediness and becomes of an higher importances than these mentioned fantasies. A little Disclaimer here, I never experienced it myself and I'm also not a philosopher or deep thinker. I'm just a young person wondering about things and finding interest in your comment.
@@KEinVET I agree with what you are saying. I do not think it is an illusion that we are attracted to people because we both need and want connection, intimacy and partnership. However, that is one reason why illusions/fantasies are built up around other people and our own feelings. I am a philosopher, I am middle-aged and I have been in a lot more relationships than I have felt deep love. The falling in love part is easy, but that is where people are often confused by their feelings/illusions about themselves and the other person. It is why a lot of relationships end within 3 months, when the biochemical maelstrom slows down and fantasies/illusions are dropped. That is when people begin to really assess themselves, the other person, and the parameters of their relationship. If i had to give some advice, I would say don't take yourself and your relationships too seriously if they have problems or end; because they will. When young, it can seem like the end of the world, but it never is. Most of the women I dated through my 20's and even into my 30's didn't really know themselves or what they were looking for in a relationship, and I didn't either. Those did not last, and most relationships don't. Don't rush into relationships and marriage when you are young, or even if you are older and still don't know crucial things about yourself like education, career, if you want to have children, etc. Another caution against rushing into things; don't move in with a person too early. I have literally moved in with people immediately or very soon after meeting them. That can help people to learn about each other and see more of who they are in their daily lives, but it can also damage/destroy the potential of a new and sometimes fragile/tenuous relationship.
If you just negate his premises, as it seems like you did, you're not wrong. Still, I think if you allow yourself to exercise the possibility of the premises being correct, on his terms of transcendentalism, metaphysics and love (as in erotic desire, that is what he meant), you would find his affirmations to be true. I do, however, agree with you that the Freudian perspective might not be the correct one to describe reality in this case, and that although I can see eroticism as being part of the process of transcending, experiencing eroticism is not transcending.
Idk the last few seconds where he talked about losing the “thing” by being 100% honest is opposite to mine and a decent amount of other guys experiences. I’ve always been straightforward with women and 80% of the time they reciprocate my desire to be erotic. I’d be bold to say 100% bc although they’ve agreed to acting out said scenarios, sometimes time doesn’t allow for things to come to fruition. So I’m left with the fantasy of us completing our desires that were previously talked about. Other than that they state they do not want to continue on that path and I continue on to the next woman. That’s just my POV, we all have different experiences. What I’ve come to understand is that women would much rather you express your desires or intentions rather than hide them :) Thanks.
I really wonder what Žižek would say about the increasing sexualisation of aesthetics. More and more I hear phrases like "character X/song Y has a [sexual orientation] energy", especially when that *isn't* explicitly intended. As someone who prefers platonic love over erotic love (a catastrophe indeed), I find this bothersome. Unfortunately, when I express this feeling it is usually taken as homophobic.
About that story with his fat friend, things like that reflects essence of what is wrong with Žižek's ideas and also why Hegel was not a great philosopher. Of course she should lose weight, she must be so fat her lover couldn't kept his mouth shut about it. No wonder he was the last person who saw her naked, and it must have happened a long time ago before she told her story to Žižek, obviously. Don't want to go into obesity, no such thing exist in primitive tribes because they always lack nutrients and must hunt for food trough entire day. People are body and soul, in a sense our body doesn't need conscious instructions to maintain our lives. Soul in a sense of conscious self awareness, how our brains makes sense of the real world. This means we should be able to keep our organism healthy and fit, it's that mind over body thing. But Žižek is like, world is a pile crap, i must eat from the dumpster can, so his mind must find a way to adjust. That's just plain wrong, either we mind our personal fitness or we don't talk about it, why complain about other people's expectations than, when a person willingly give up to depression and obesity? Here's what Žižek doesn't understand, making our body move opens new possibilities, organisms can't stand still or work to much, life energy flow best if we perform at some optimal level. It's so different to fall in love when people feels fit and energized, wish he could do some sports, perhaps stretching or even yoga, he would get it in a month or so of a daily sweat.
I respect his commitment to his wife, however, if I could, I'd be content and satisfied and probably leave my body. This does make me.sad that that this kind of person will never exist anywhere near me. I'm not a stalker, I don't believe in meeting people you admire if you can avoid it. Life is unfair. This dangled a carrot and destroyed my soul.
If you want to get Zizek's 'I WOULD PREFER NOT TO' t-shirt you can do so here:
i-would-prefer-not-to.com
Zizeks philosophy helps me with my relationships
* sniffs seductively *
*sensual cerebral palsy*
Žižek ASMR
@@DellDuckfan313No way that does not exist, and if it doesn't someone needs to make it right now, please!
that last thought was very interesting
Besides Zizek staring at me intensely during a discussion about sexuality, I had a few other problems with this talk ;). Animal mating isnt as simple as he seemed to state, and are not so far removed from our human experience of courting rituals, eroticism and sex itself. Apparently his argument pivots on his Freudian theory of fantasy always being present in human sexuality and its supposedly divergent or illusory eroticism, but I would have to disagree with those premises as well. For some people, fantasy in the way he meant it is always present, for others it is not; and just because something is eroticized does not necessarily relegate it to some abstract or misleading fantasy unique to human individuals. I would go further and say that if his fantasies are always more present for him than the experience itself, consciously or unconsciously, then he is not present for himself or his partners and thus he cannot experience sexuality to its fullest potential of connection and intimacy which can then allow fuller transcendence.
In one sense, developing or exercising erotic proclivities or falling in love could be considered an illusion or catastrophe, but only from the perspective of myopic selfishness that characterized the state of being existing before that possibility of transcendence through connection and awareness. What I mean is that I believe that there is a possibility for love, considered as connection with transcendent potential, to outlast and outweigh its obsessive physiochemical states. If it doesn't, then it isn't love and it is only an erotic dead end with very limited transcendent potential. Instead, love is you transcending temporary physical states as well as the more concrete and persistent antecedent modes of selfish being. If you cannot allow yourself and your ways of being to be changed by intimacy and connection through a broadening and deepening of your world, then you remain unnecessarily lonely, isolated and selfish. That is a failure to recognize or experience the possibility of transcendence. Whether in an exercise of eroticism or a state of being in love, a failure to move beyond yourself in order to connect more fully is the real catastrophe; it is a failure of transcending your limited self.
Transcendence in sexuality, as well as in its broader sense, is precisely the expansion, change, and perhaps even breakdown of the limited and isolated self. Zizek fails to differentiate between limitations among different states of being. We are always relatively isolated and alone regardless of our position. However, we must breakdown and abandon certain states of being and their limitations as we open ourselves to others and other situations, or we never grow. This does not equate to the loss of potential for transcendence in the Kantian sense or otherwise as Zizek stated (and yes, I find Kant to be incredibly boring). Quite the contrary, only through breaking down and readjusting our limitations through transcendence can we make room for further transcendence or achieve a continuation of a state that transcends that which came before.
Love is probably the most vague and confusing concept to me, because everyone seems to tell you something different about it. Even the terms connected to it are so vaguely used. I decided that I'm going to ignore all these and just find things out on my own (ironically commenting that here). I often found others and myself pursuing someone who we think (not conciously) to have or to give us something that we are missing. And I see this with a lot of people, we are incredibly drawn to people who we can compensate our issues or deficiencies with, sorta like a neediness. From my understanding so far there are three different "levels", first one is a "crush" that contains interest, curiosity, attraction, fantasy, idealisation and lust, the second one is "catching feelings/falling in love" which adds an pervasive presence of the other person in one's mind and feelings that come with a neediness for said person. And lastly the third one is "love" where I agree with you. I believe love happens after a very deep relevation and connection with another person where the flaws don't even matter as much as the person itself. It transcends the neediness and becomes of an higher importances than these mentioned fantasies.
A little Disclaimer here, I never experienced it myself and I'm also not a philosopher or deep thinker. I'm just a young person wondering about things and finding interest in your comment.
@@KEinVET I agree with what you are saying. I do not think it is an illusion that we are attracted to people because we both need and want connection, intimacy and partnership. However, that is one reason why illusions/fantasies are built up around other people and our own feelings.
I am a philosopher, I am middle-aged and I have been in a lot more relationships than I have felt deep love. The falling in love part is easy, but that is where people are often confused by their feelings/illusions about themselves and the other person. It is why a lot of relationships end within 3 months, when the biochemical maelstrom slows down and fantasies/illusions are dropped. That is when people begin to really assess themselves, the other person, and the parameters of their relationship.
If i had to give some advice, I would say don't take yourself and your relationships too seriously if they have problems or end; because they will. When young, it can seem like the end of the world, but it never is. Most of the women I dated through my 20's and even into my 30's didn't really know themselves or what they were looking for in a relationship, and I didn't either. Those did not last, and most relationships don't. Don't rush into relationships and marriage when you are young, or even if you are older and still don't know crucial things about yourself like education, career, if you want to have children, etc.
Another caution against rushing into things; don't move in with a person too early. I have literally moved in with people immediately or very soon after meeting them. That can help people to learn about each other and see more of who they are in their daily lives, but it can also damage/destroy the potential of a new and sometimes fragile/tenuous relationship.
what is love baby don’t hurt me don’t hurt me no more 🎶
If you just negate his premises, as it seems like you did, you're not wrong. Still, I think if you allow yourself to exercise the possibility of the premises being correct, on his terms of transcendentalism, metaphysics and love (as in erotic desire, that is what he meant), you would find his affirmations to be true.
I do, however, agree with you that the Freudian perspective might not be the correct one to describe reality in this case, and that although I can see eroticism as being part of the process of transcending, experiencing eroticism is not transcending.
9:12 Basically that's the hypotheisis that Bataille wrote in the 50s. Not a very original idea by Zizek.
I'm searching for videos where Zizek talks about Cronenberg's Shivers. Where can i find it?
0:37 - from which book is this quote ?
it's probably "sex and the failed absolute" by zizek
@@soitoe thanks a lot!
can somebody add subtitles please
I wonder why he describes the conversation with Jordan as unfortunate.
It was a weird debate from what I’ve heard. I didn’t watch the entire thing but idk
Idk the last few seconds where he talked about losing the “thing” by being 100% honest is opposite to mine and a decent amount of other guys experiences. I’ve always been straightforward with women and 80% of the time they reciprocate my desire to be erotic. I’d be bold to say 100% bc although they’ve agreed to acting out said scenarios, sometimes time doesn’t allow for things to come to fruition. So I’m left with the fantasy of us completing our desires that were previously talked about. Other than that they state they do not want to continue on that path and I continue on to the next woman. That’s just my POV, we all have different experiences. What I’ve come to understand is that women would much rather you express your desires or intentions rather than hide them :)
Thanks.
yarp
Your weird generalizations aside, you completely missed what he was talking about there.
@@beth9414 bruh
Where is this clip from?
What he said when he never alone with his partner - that means that he is not present.
I really wonder what Žižek would say about the increasing sexualisation of aesthetics. More and more I hear phrases like "character X/song Y has a [sexual orientation] energy", especially when that *isn't* explicitly intended. As someone who prefers platonic love over erotic love (a catastrophe indeed), I find this bothersome. Unfortunately, when I express this feeling it is usually taken as homophobic.
What ist Comrade Zizek thinking about the Situation in Chile ????
he said *sniff* aprruebo
Necesito esto en español
This is quite dense and difficult to follow
low iq it’s ok
About that story with his fat friend, things like that reflects essence of what is wrong with Žižek's ideas and also why Hegel was not a great philosopher.
Of course she should lose weight, she must be so fat her lover couldn't kept his mouth shut about it. No wonder he was the last person who saw her naked, and it must have happened a long time ago before she told her story to Žižek, obviously.
Don't want to go into obesity, no such thing exist in primitive tribes because they always lack nutrients and must hunt for food trough entire day. People are body and soul, in a sense our body doesn't need conscious instructions to maintain our lives. Soul in a sense of conscious self awareness, how our brains makes sense of the real world. This means we should be able to keep our organism healthy and fit, it's that mind over body thing.
But Žižek is like, world is a pile crap, i must eat from the dumpster can, so his mind must find a way to adjust. That's just plain wrong, either we mind our personal fitness or we don't talk about it, why complain about other people's expectations than, when a person willingly give up to depression and obesity?
Here's what Žižek doesn't understand, making our body move opens new possibilities, organisms can't stand still or work to much, life energy flow best if we perform at some optimal level. It's so different to fall in love when people feels fit and energized, wish he could do some sports, perhaps stretching or even yoga, he would get it in a month or so of a daily sweat.
Not all men share your tastes, BBW is a porn tag for a reason ;)
I respect his commitment to his wife, however, if I could, I'd be content and satisfied and probably leave my body. This does make me.sad that that this kind of person will never exist anywhere near me. I'm not a stalker, I don't believe in meeting people you admire if you can avoid it. Life is unfair. This dangled a carrot and destroyed my soul.