if he would focuse his energy into thinking about of he is saying istread of fidgeting and senseless moves he could contribute us with some interresting ideas. He is talking just how his mood is floating ... childishly, without thinking. There is nothing racional in it. This is just a mental masturbation...jerking off is more useful than this :)
haha this man's whole career is (supposedly) dedicated to understanding the world and all he can come up with a relationship between the world that's somewhere in between hatred and indifference. Fail
oh dear, oh dear... poor chap. he hasn't really got the idea behind life, the universe and everything. from what i've seen and read of him, he's one of those people who live to tear existing structures down, but who then have nothing to put up in their place. a bit like Dawkins w.r.t. religion.
@TheMoQingbird Dawkins strives to explain religion as a natural phenomenon. he doesn't have to put anything there, if you explain bipedality, you don't have to put anything in its stead, either.
@Mynnia Explaining bipedality doesn't change bipedality; explaining religion, though, dispels religion. Dawkins tears down religion (quite rightly IMO!) but has nothing to put in its place by way of moral guidance or provision of comfort. I've just finished the first part of Living in the End of Times, and so far Zizek, too, is merely tearing things down. It's so easy to destroy things, but so much harder to build new ones.
What? Build more lies and delusions for people to spend their lives running after? Because that is what religion has caused. Sure, religion isn't harmful, it just causes people to waste an entire lifetime building a mental framework that is pure nonsense. Oh, well. At least they won't go to hell. lol But seriously, if you are concerned with what is actually true, why would you concern yourself with how "pretty" it is? No one promised you that reality & truth would be pretty.
@TheMoQingbird They only go so far as tearing things down so that they will make us actualize that no one else other than ourselves will discover and provide each of our own moral comforts.
@jxcca I've heard the 'no one other than ourselves' philosophy before, and even tried to live it. It doesn't work. In fact, it's 180 degrees wrong. We are social primates wired for addiction to others. What matters is, are we giving/taking from others (in which case we'll always be disappointed) or contributing to whole. I challenge you to remember any time that you were happy that didn't have something to do with other people.
@TheMoQingbird I didn't imply that we had to become happy without other people but that no one single person or idea set can tell us what exactly to do for even the quotidian. Rather, it all happens through our own "choice" of a combination of people and ideas with whom we wish to associate. The vastness of choice we have depends on our ability to meet more people instead of hoping someone will provide the be-all and end-all of moral guidance.
@jxcca Okay, that I can (mostly) agree with. Someone else who sees Zizek's problem:
"Zizek.. definitely encourages people to rubberneck the situation and do nothing" -- Prof. Timothy Morton, in The Diet Soap Podcast #115 : Our Beautiful Speech Bubbles.
Morton is a fan of Zizek, but he warns us off 'the unconscious attitude that [Zizek] codes for' - everything is crap, always has been, always will be, and aren't we clever for knowing that. Of course, this attitude also codes for inaction.
The scary thing about the human race is the ingenious way in which we can deceive ourselves: "I love the world"; "I'm a great person." The lack of insight, the void where a self-reflective mirror should be is terrifying. Think of how many people believe words because the words are positive, encouraging, put them in a good light. Thinking has become an inconvenience. We want the quick fix of a heaven in the sky, a positive word. We don't want to look at ourselves and the condition of this world.
I have to disagree with this idea. Yes, to love something implies to picking it out from the rest and and pay more care ( it is in fact a much more complicated action, but this is how Zizek refers to it ), but it in no terms means to hate everything else; on contrary, the ideal love leads to loving yourself that enormously much, that you love everything around yourself, and I mean everything and everyone. Any step we take, to reach this state is an effort to make this world a better place.
@sarkaralmasov he talks of "total love" and if you are a marxist its easy understand, being madly in love with someone means in 90% of cases is that you will have people saying that, "well my chick is better than yours" but that is beacuse he psycologialy blocks the other women out, therefor Marxism is kind of like polygami, do it dosent have to, lets call it like picking one girl out of the polygami bunch, and you will make her a "dictator" for the others, being the only women in love with him
@sarkaralmasov Bull. Its hyprocritical to say you love everyone and everything, be true to yourself and you will know what he means, this struggle to like stuff and people, even when we don't agree with them, is what makes us like cattle for the global elite. Learn to hate, cherish hate.
No. Hate is seeing this doomed planet for what it is. Covering one's eyes only stops reality for the person who chooses to be blind. Do you think we've been placed in the garden of Eden? Here to expand indefinitely? Or to collapse upon ourselves?
eh, cynics always think their view is somehow the most perceptive. But its actually quite biased and skewed towards the negative. You are ignoring all the hope and potential in the world. Your world view leads only to misery.
(Market economy becomes the market society and humans start to see themselves as both the seller and commodity, etc, etc. This psychology is brought to the social sphere and relationships become "interchangeable commodities"). So, essentially, Fromm would say that our friendly neighborhood capitalism has fucked you up beyond recognition, crud!
@SteelCityEcologist Gee thanks :) I thought it was women who fucked me up beyond all recognition but I'll blame capitalism! LOL The last two relationships have been a tad rocky in a heroin shooting prostitution behind my back kinda way. A good way to get AIDS. Love is AIDS. (I'm not being serious)
Hmm, I don't think the Frankfurt guys wrote any analysis of heroin shooting prostitute-girlfriends in the market society. You're on your own on that one, mate. Lol. On a serious note, though, your anecdotes get me all depressed. Don't you have some where you rescue puppies and kittens?
And Canada only exists because of the US military. You would understand this if you weren't brainwashed into thinking western capitalism can exist without the US military's global adventures in plunder. Canada is what it is because Canada doesn't have to spend trillions of dollars every year on it's military to protect the interests of global capitalism. Canada is a remora and the USA the shark.
Žižek likes to be a clown? Great. This is exactly what is wrong with recent Theory. Everyone tries to be a clown or a revolutionary, from Baudrillard (RIP) to Eagleton...
@mgk81 Everyone should just quietly accept capitalism because we all know capitalism is the end of history right? How post modern of you. Go buy stuff. Have sex with a donkey...do something other than being a whinny little bitch.
@crud4 Whoa there, Jimmy! How'd you get all this "capitalist clusterfuck" from my sentence about Žižek's flamboyance?! Anyway, there are many things wrong about your own statement, because you make many assumptions. If we're talking about "capitalism" now, I can readily certify that it *does* work. (cont'd)
@crud4 Anyway, I was born in Soviet Russia, where everything was backwards and the government tried to fuck you in the ass as often as possible, and now I live in Canada, where we moderate our "capitalism" with rational decisions about government, healthcare, and education (some times more successfully than at other times). A functioning, self-examining capitalism has nothing to do with "being postmodern," although the word has certainly become associated with "pretensiosness" recently. (cont'd)
@crud4 Come to think of it, "capitalism," or, really, reasonable democracy allows me to have sex with donkeys (if I wanted to) within the boundaries of the law. Finally, I *will* do something other than being a "whinny" bitch--I will correct your spelling and move on. Life is good. Žižek is an abnormality that profs like to teach in grad school to seem "cool." Oh, and love is not evil. Pretentious intellectualism is.
@mgk81 cap·i·tal·ism /ˈkæpɪtlˌɪzəm/ Show Spelled[kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.
@mgk81 Whats "reasonable democracy"? Is that the system where Goldman Sachs and or whichever top fortune 500 corporation/bank runs the show? You're a fucking idiot if you think the US is actually practicing democracy.
@crud4 Nah. If you actually *read* what I write instead to listening to yourself, you'll see that I'm talking about Canada. Yes, Canada is that reasonable democracy. This is why Canada is the best place to live in the world. We know how to balance so-called "socialist" security nets with realistic market demands. You poor man. ;)
And if you had a half way decent education you'd know Russia was never communist- the point of communism is to get rid of the state and class eventually- Russia was the product of Stalin's idiocy, WW2 and western capitalism "stunting" the evolution of state socialism (state CAPITALISM really) into communism via the cold war. Industrial communism has never existed here on earth.
@crud4 True enough...but what this definitely proves is that is whatever-THAT-was *doesn't* work, then whatever remains (i.e. the current state of "capitalism")--DOES work.
@mgk81 I'm not sure if you noticed but global capitalism is currently in crisis and depends on perpetual war/plunder for it's continued existence. I don't give a shit what degree you're working on you're still an idiot. Someone has thrown away a lot of money on your half ass education (in your case I'll call it indoctrination).
@crud4 Well, I wasn't trying to appeal to authority--really. Maybe I'm just saying that I'm trying to make the msot of the situation. (Also, do examine your own angry, angry ad hominem "rhetoric" before you call me an idiot.) Finally, yes, it is indoctrination--to an extent--but I am learning how to be a better person while getting ahead. I harbour no illusions about what I need to do to--as the rappers say--get paid.
@mgk81 "I harbor no illusions about what I need to do to--as the rappers say--get paid" There in lies the problem. Greed has a way of creating tunnel vision doesn't it and I never said I wasn't angry :)
@crud4 Greed? No, man. I need my $85,000 to $100,000 a year to be able to buy a house and have a family. Do you know what living comfortably costs these days? Anyway, it's a zero-sum game, so instead of being idealistic, I work towards making those I love (and myself) comfortable. How about you? Do you live in a cardboard box and preach the gospel to the birds out of principle?
And if your lame ass attempt to correct my spelling wasn't a weak ass attempt at "pretentious intellectualism" then I'm not sure what is. CAPITALISM....spell it with me....
@crud4 Oh, I didn't say I'm not pretentious. As a current M.A. student (and soon-to-be Ph.D. candidate) I am taught to master precisely this sort of bullshit. At least I'm not a hypocrite, right? ;) Anyway, I'll gladly spell "capitalism" with you: R-E-A-L-I-T-Y
Love can also be a psychological tug of war. A game of control. Rarely have I seen a relationship based on equality - not just financial equality but emotional equality. Love doesn't exist- I'd even go as far as to say when people die we mourn only our own eventual death- it makes us face the futility and pointlessness of existence.We don't really love the person who died we're simply afraid of death. This all sounds rather pessimistic :)
"love is a violent act" I think it's a selfish act- look at Mother Teressa, do you think she actually loved people? Fuck no, she enjoyed what people did for her image. The same can be said of relationships...what can you do for my ego. As soon as a person becomes indifferent to your ego or as soon as the social or financial benefits of that person wear off so too does the "love". Be suspicious of people who say they love you because in the next sentence they may try to slit your throat.Control
"The same can be said of relationships...what can you do for my ego."
I've just been reading Fromm's "Man for Himself", where he describes a character orientation, the "exploitative orientation", which describes the psychology behind this sentiment. From what I can gather, I haven't finished it yet, all of the "Non-productive characters", to which the former belongs, stem, in one way or the other, from the "Marketing orientation" ....
"I think it's a selfish act- look at Mother Teressa, do you think she actually loved people? Fuck no, she enjoyed what people did for her image.
Although this may be true of Mother Theresa, everyone and their grandmother knows that psychological egoism (what you describe here) is a joke even as a descriptive position. By the by, Abraham Lincoln was a psychological egoist. You have something in common with a former President. ;)
(continued from my previous comment)... and come to enjoy the mystery and wonder of it all. I never said anything about loving each individual thing or action but rather that I love the world as a whole. For some reason, this upsets people like ajcics who suggested that I "go watch something easier to understand like Sesame Street." Maybe I will go watch that now. I loved it as a kid.
I think some people commenting here are being literalistic (and in truth, superficial) to the point of being uncomprehending.
He is asserting an alternative to the normative moral-cosmos that most traditions (old and new) suggest where life & love are portrayed as being the qualities of the primeval stillness (God?) RATHER than symptoms of its discord.
IOW love is "luciferian", a disturbance, not the original state (which is not living, but dead and insentient.)
To love is "to will the good of another", and evil is a lack of good, so saying that "love is evil" is a linguistic contradiction. You can say that "one loves evil" since he wants evil to come to its fruition, but that's not quite the same thing. His beliefs are ridiculous, which goes to show what happens when you snob good philosophy in favor of ridiculous anomalies.
@LightSpect I don't think you should be so quick to disregard what he says; indeed, I don't find the point very concise or articulate, but I find [what I can see of] the implication solid (even if obscure); I think he's implying that by picking out one part that you love, relatively speaking you wish evil upon the rest. He says he doesn't understand how people can love everything/one (from what I understand, dismissing such a notion), and therefore the only real love, is actually, quite immoral.
@milekrizman I reckon he doesn't care about it from an intellectual, 'objective' standpoint. Just like if you believe there's no free will, you subscribe to that notion 'intellectually', but you still enjoy preforming 'good' deeds, reaching new heights in your career, et cetera, because the emotional core is still there, and it feels nice to fulfill it's desires (even if you understand that there's no intrinsic 'value' in anything you do, nothing to be 'proud of' or 'regretful of').
I'm indifferent to your love because I don't think it is real, just sanctimonious. As far as God is concerned, a lot of religious people claim he/she/it exists, but I find that is usually a result of what they have been taught rather than what they have experienced personally. Not saying that God does or doesn't exist; I just notice that people are pretty good at parroting and living by other people's assumptions.
so sentiment is defined by experience upon its completion.
one must have been loved to feel it- but when that fails... the bALANCE can be realigned by a leap pf faith and a random kindness to benefit a stranger: that too starts the ball rolling..... good luck! It's worth knowing!
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed"
Zizek is echoing Buddhism (and many other religions) here: "love" for another person is just training wheels to remind you that we ALL are mortal, we ALL are fragile, foible, and suffering. Even the rich megalomaniacs are suffering. It's true Universal Love that we should be striving towards. Love your enemy, etc.
@jfkoudelka I think Sartre was explaining "bad faith" when he said that- how it's hard to be your authentic self around other people. I may be wrong....who cares? Not me. I have a massive hangover.
@jfkoudelka I believe Sartre said "Hell is other people," and Zizek is not an existentialist. He's a Marxist-psychoanalyst (with more Lacan than anything else)... Sartre said that the act of loving other people causes ourselves suffering and imprisons us to them. Zizek is saying that loving other people is selfish and chaotic. What he's saying is actually closer to Plato in the Symposium or Phaedrus than Sartre...
Love is not a 0 sum game. You can hate everything then decide to love one thing, you still hate everything else just as much as you did before but now you love that one thing on top of that, it's a step up. This guy failed middle school math. Why is he famous again?
I listen to this over and over again and still can't fully grasp what he means. How is love a cosmic imbalance and how is it accepting the mistake and going to the end? I really want to comprehend what Slavoj is saying. Please anyone who gets it, explain to me, I have only recently gotten into philosophy.
if Love means to particularly care for just one creation, and this one 'thing' was born out of a 'catastrophy', love is evil, because you embrace the imbalance, even more, you want the world to be out of balance.
I don't find it too offensive.. he is really being personal here, which comes through for me, and he pretty much narrowed it down to the idea that 'creation is imbalance'.
Let's say creation is Coincidence.. what would follow up..:)
@chefshitpiece He's just fucking around. Zizek sometimes says things that are deeply insightful. Other times, in cases like this, he's just yanking your chain.
@chefshitpiece Actually, I do find it uplifting. There's a lot of depression around from saying the world is so great that if we don't feel happy all the time then we're awful. This duty to be happy is like a great weight around the shoulders of our culture, and the mental health stats back that up. To hear somebody articulate so well the idea that the world is a mistake, or that those of us without a love in our life aren't lacking anything that great or noble, is relief, liberation. Oxygen.
@lewisrain I agree that a lot of mental health disorders are due to the idealized image of life that Hollywood tries to shove in our face is. I hate those Norweigen bastards that are all in charge of Hollywood. What a bunch of fucking assholes. Personally, I don't believe in love, strictly in terms of definition. I am considering doing a video on it.
But just because you might find his conclusions depressing or unsettling, doesn't mean they are wrong. Am I to infer that you believe that any "true" idea or philosophy must be uplifting, to confirm some value or importance to life/existence?
@twentyarms Everyone should have their opinion aired and respected. But there are philosophers out there who have something a little more positive and socially constructive to say, and, might I add, have better structures to back up thier theories. THOSE are the ones we should be respecting, not this guy.
And please pardon my "French" (Chill out, it's a figure of speech) and for commenting.. But here's a bit of philosophy I picked up from somewhere, I wonder who stated this ..“Once we understand that the integrity of our personal existence depends on the integrity of everything else in our world, we have truly understood the meaning of unconditional love, for love is extensionality & seeing everything as you, as everything can have no conditionality, for in fact we are all everything at once.”
Oh and as for 1:18, you use the word "Love" as if it were some kind of arrogant behavior and maybe you should lay low when it comes to speaking about the act of love. Not the sexual, obscene or compulsive side but try to analyze more about the motivational side.. Ever asked yourself why we have philanthropies inside various fucked up industries that toy with their creations? Maybe it's not the people that are fucked up... Maybe something else around here is fucked up.. I blame the "System"
1:05 damn yo someone's pissed >_> Anyways dude, my notion is "Hate is such a weak word. See.. Me, I don't hate. I disagree, an it take's more critical thought to explain why you disagree that to just say 'Oh I hate it, yadah yadah..' " Here's another personal opinion of mine, I think you use the word quantam to make yourself sound smart lol =P
The meaning of love for most is an emotion that stimulates their own selfish wants. Love = Evol/Evil
True love is actually compassion for others needs and wants. Love is lost to most of the world. It seems evol projected from ego is the way of the world today.
@wiseyeffect I actually wrote a book comparing the two, if you are at all interested it is called COMPASSION BEATS LOVE...I guess you can pretty easily determine which side I am on. I do not believe the two are synonomous, and as soon as i write my exams i will be doing research into how the brain processes attraction and empathy differently.
Zizek is so, so, so highly overrated. Have any of you even read any of his works, let alone comprehended one of them? Do you need your intellectual food handed to you in the form of a whacky slovenian youtube personality before you'll pay any attention?
I despise this new breed of faggy pseudo-intellectuals the internet is churning out; people who haven't read a book in their lives, yet see themselves as an authority on anything. Go and namedrop Zizek to your hipster friends you failures.
@Intelectual95 Who is he overrated by? Yeah, I've read a book of his. People who like Zizek are failures? You couldn't even spell Intellectual right in your username, you dumbshit. Fuck off.
"I've read a book of his." - which one, you namedropping half-wit?
I didn't say that people who like Zizek are failures. Get some reading comprehension, you tard. I'm saying that mediocre-minded fucktards (like you) watch his videos cause it makes them feel like they're fucking intellectual (they're not, you're not). I'm talking about pea-brained youtube namedroppers (like you).
"I've read a book of his." - no you haven't, liar. Tell me which one. Tell me your thoughts on it.
It's stunning how little thought you show. After 15 minutes of seething anger and desperation all you could cook up is "get a life" and a Zizek book title you managed to google? You conveniently avoided telling me your thoughts on that book you lied about reading, btw.
@Intelectual95 If I start discussing it you'll say I just read the reviews.As if I care if you believe me! I hope this has been everything you wanted and you now feel like you can carry your opinion as if it's valid. You didn't even criticize anything he discusses and then say I'm showing little thought. Don't respond to me because I won't read it. For the second time, fuck off and get a life.
I say most obviously because those are "IN" that experience of profound Love, Freedom, Acceptance, cannot do anything but rejoice in it totally. It's like an orgasm of the mind. It's the ignorant, close minded people who seem to never try to experience this, because it destroys their sense of Selfhood, their sense of personality and security as a person named Matthew. Thoughts?
I don't quite understand him here. I don't think he's bashing the feeling of Love as an impersonal experience is he? The sensation of accepting reality as it is, giving your self to it, totally without resistance. This is LOVE to me. This is the natural void of which he speaks, the Harmony. The particular love, I love my sister, that dog, this Ipod. Are these the love he says are evil? Or is love, always, evil? Love in the sense of which I spoke, most obviously cannot be evil.
He's an interesting guy and I've been fascinated with almost everything I've heard him say, but I feel sorry for him in a way. I guess for all his intelligence he doesn't have the faith or understanding to love the world and life.
@habde I'm sure one of the smartest men in the world values your opinion of him very much. If you halfway understood anything he said you would be too busy being affected by the weight of these brave assertions to this kind of stupid comment. Faith is a paralysis of critical reason and universal love is a sado-masochistic, ignorant and naive way to understand what love really is. You fail, go watch something easier to understand like Sesame Street
@ajcics Late response, I know, but I don't check the email address this account is linked to. Apparently, I upset at least a couple people with my comment earlier saying that while he's interesting, I feel sorry for his lack of "faith or understanding to love the world and life." I understood what he said, I see where he's coming from, but my thought differs from Zizek's. The world is this incomprehensible place of disorder. (continued...)
(continued from my previous comment) Phenomenologists such as Schütz, Berger and Luckmann as well as ethnomethodologists like Garfinkel, share a similar belief that the world has no inherent meaning. Garfinkel examined how people jointly define the world and attribute meaning to it. I agree with this type of thinking except I believe in God, Who is the only absolute and is beyond human comprehension. I try to be at peace with the fact that the world is not rational, accept it, (continued...)
@habde I'm sure one of the smartest men in the world values your opinion of him very much. If you halfway understood anything he said, you would be too busy being affected by the weight of these brave ideas to have time to post this kind of stupid comment. Faith is a paralysis of critical reason and universal love is a sado-masochistic, ignorant and naive way to understand what love really is. You fail, go watch something easier to understand like Sesame Street
@habde Well really faith doesn't enter this issue. The recognition, of what the 'world' and reality is, is two things: Visceral and reasonable. By this I mean no amount of 'faith' in any direction can just make you 'love the world and life'. As in, faith in what? God? Faith in the idea that life is a thing to love? That doesn't work. And it doesn't work because this recognition is visceral: our reaction reality is provoked without the neccessity of deliberation. I can't choose to think this/that
haha i love this man:) his accent is so funny and so sharply slovenian lol:) and im sooo proud that at least one of us is making an impact and is known internationally...love his cinema books..thank you zizek for making me proud to be slovenian:))
@MrBulgarash would you love a poor man? a sick man?
you only "love" according to some set, predictable criteria, you choose. that's the essence of his point, your choice is an unconscious elevation of somebody above the norm. Love in the modern world is akin to a false deification of another person. it's insane.
thats garbage, there is too many assumptions, first love, actual love doesn't make you care for other things less, lust maybe, love no, and if we take it as a running hypothesis that love is a form of inclusion into our selves, ignoring the fact exclusion would be evil, inclusion in the sense that we care for x as much as we care for ourselves, they become in a sense
"something fragile" ? whooops - cut....Make up !...anyone seen Make Up out of all of his videos this deemed the others more entertaining.
EilidhBradley 3 weeks ago
Lunacy makes money to put food on the table. That is my conclusion.after watching ZZZZZZZZZizEZKKKK.
RuddODragonFear 1 month ago
Chomsky- "I can't tell you what it is, but life's empty without it". I kind of prefer this idea to Zizek's...
debaser181 1 month ago
Comment removed
debaser181 1 month ago
wish i could cut some cards from this to put in my cap K shell...
rennpasquinelli 1 month ago
I keep being surprised at how anthropocentric he is. I would have thought he would be sophisticated enough to realize that...
tanchongkee 1 month ago
you have to love yourself first before you can love the world!.one love is what will save us on our beautiful planet!
ronpaul21550 2 months ago
if he would focuse his energy into thinking about of he is saying istread of fidgeting and senseless moves he could contribute us with some interresting ideas. He is talking just how his mood is floating ... childishly, without thinking. There is nothing racional in it. This is just a mental masturbation...jerking off is more useful than this :)
Petrhrabal 2 months ago
Does he not get enough pussy?
TiikerinKarva 2 months ago 2
@TiikerinKarva
'Does he not get enough pussy?'
I'm sorry, have you seen his wife? She's a 30 year young model.
Traiannnn 1 month ago 6
ok enough zizek gotta switch back to chomsky, lol
mrzipdisk 3 months ago 26
@mrzipdisk thank you utube for this kinda cyclical behavior, right? haha
carlo88moe 1 month ago
haha this man's whole career is (supposedly) dedicated to understanding the world and all he can come up with a relationship between the world that's somewhere in between hatred and indifference. Fail
stonem001 4 months ago 3
@stonem001 If I study the rise of Nazism, am I supposed to love Nazis?
ipwnorcs 3 months ago
@ipwnorcs
the world isn't Nazis brah
stonem001 3 months ago
@stonem001 exactly.
he's letting his mind run amok, some meditation might help.
shpritzer 2 months ago
This video doesn't make any fucking sense. Philosophy is bullshit.
PhoenixDerHamster 4 months ago
@PhoenixDerHamster did you "think" of that all by yourself? lol
SaZooCaballero 3 months ago in playlist interesting information
@SaZooCaballero
Um. Yeah.
PhoenixDerHamster 3 months ago
Nonsense.
Firebiird 4 months ago
oh dear, oh dear... poor chap. he hasn't really got the idea behind life, the universe and everything. from what i've seen and read of him, he's one of those people who live to tear existing structures down, but who then have nothing to put up in their place. a bit like Dawkins w.r.t. religion.
TheMoQingbird 6 months ago
@TheMoQingbird Dawkins strives to explain religion as a natural phenomenon. he doesn't have to put anything there, if you explain bipedality, you don't have to put anything in its stead, either.
Mynnia 4 months ago
@Mynnia Explaining bipedality doesn't change bipedality; explaining religion, though, dispels religion. Dawkins tears down religion (quite rightly IMO!) but has nothing to put in its place by way of moral guidance or provision of comfort. I've just finished the first part of Living in the End of Times, and so far Zizek, too, is merely tearing things down. It's so easy to destroy things, but so much harder to build new ones.
TheMoQingbird 4 months ago
@TheMoQingbird
What? Build more lies and delusions for people to spend their lives running after? Because that is what religion has caused. Sure, religion isn't harmful, it just causes people to waste an entire lifetime building a mental framework that is pure nonsense. Oh, well. At least they won't go to hell. lol But seriously, if you are concerned with what is actually true, why would you concern yourself with how "pretty" it is? No one promised you that reality & truth would be pretty.
thepostnihilist 4 months ago
@TheMoQingbird They only go so far as tearing things down so that they will make us actualize that no one else other than ourselves will discover and provide each of our own moral comforts.
jxcca 4 months ago in playlist Metazizek
@jxcca I've heard the 'no one other than ourselves' philosophy before, and even tried to live it. It doesn't work. In fact, it's 180 degrees wrong. We are social primates wired for addiction to others. What matters is, are we giving/taking from others (in which case we'll always be disappointed) or contributing to whole. I challenge you to remember any time that you were happy that didn't have something to do with other people.
TheMoQingbird 4 months ago
@TheMoQingbird I didn't imply that we had to become happy without other people but that no one single person or idea set can tell us what exactly to do for even the quotidian. Rather, it all happens through our own "choice" of a combination of people and ideas with whom we wish to associate. The vastness of choice we have depends on our ability to meet more people instead of hoping someone will provide the be-all and end-all of moral guidance.
jxcca 4 months ago
@jxcca Okay, that I can (mostly) agree with. Someone else who sees Zizek's problem:
"Zizek.. definitely encourages people to rubberneck the situation and do nothing" -- Prof. Timothy Morton, in The Diet Soap Podcast #115 : Our Beautiful Speech Bubbles.
Morton is a fan of Zizek, but he warns us off 'the unconscious attitude that [Zizek] codes for' - everything is crap, always has been, always will be, and aren't we clever for knowing that. Of course, this attitude also codes for inaction.
TheMoQingbird 4 months ago
There is LITERALLY nothing!
MrGreen428 6 months ago
He becomes poet whom love touches-- Plato
07Aristotle 6 months ago
LOVE IS EVIL? I dont agree. Probably because i dont understand, but still :-PPPP :-)
SamuelRust 6 months ago
"i love carpet. i love desk."
"brick, are you just looking at things in the office and saying that you love them?'
"i love lamp."
"do you really love the lamp or are you just saying it because you saw it?"
deluxe937 6 months ago 24
@deluxe937 Funny, and spot on.
Alexanduhr 5 months ago
@deluxe937 thats really nice. did u write that you're self?
paddymourinho 4 months ago
@deluxe937 you sir have a good sense of humor, too bad it doesn't apply to the the world
MrRumcoke 4 months ago
@deluxe937 I love lamp... I love lamp!
mrzipdisk 3 months ago
Not surprising, Communists always hated love and happiness.
TheGoldenKing20 6 months ago
@TheGoldenKing20 Yeah, we "communist" prefer mental stability and shared peace.
albyvideo 6 months ago
The scary thing about the human race is the ingenious way in which we can deceive ourselves: "I love the world"; "I'm a great person." The lack of insight, the void where a self-reflective mirror should be is terrifying. Think of how many people believe words because the words are positive, encouraging, put them in a good light. Thinking has become an inconvenience. We want the quick fix of a heaven in the sky, a positive word. We don't want to look at ourselves and the condition of this world.
thepostnihilist 7 months ago 3
The first step is to be able to love yourself, the second, that can come only after the first, to start loving your closer ones.
sarkaralmasov 7 months ago 3
I have to disagree with this idea. Yes, to love something implies to picking it out from the rest and and pay more care ( it is in fact a much more complicated action, but this is how Zizek refers to it ), but it in no terms means to hate everything else; on contrary, the ideal love leads to loving yourself that enormously much, that you love everything around yourself, and I mean everything and everyone. Any step we take, to reach this state is an effort to make this world a better place.
sarkaralmasov 7 months ago 5
@sarkaralmasov
Good one, Mr. Idealist!
GnomesAmok 5 months ago
@sarkaralmasov he talks of "total love" and if you are a marxist its easy understand, being madly in love with someone means in 90% of cases is that you will have people saying that, "well my chick is better than yours" but that is beacuse he psycologialy blocks the other women out, therefor Marxism is kind of like polygami, do it dosent have to, lets call it like picking one girl out of the polygami bunch, and you will make her a "dictator" for the others, being the only women in love with him
Trillios 5 months ago
@sarkaralmasov Bull. Its hyprocritical to say you love everyone and everything, be true to yourself and you will know what he means, this struggle to like stuff and people, even when we don't agree with them, is what makes us like cattle for the global elite. Learn to hate, cherish hate.
"Hate is a gift." Malcolm X
Konicava 3 months ago
@Konicava
what nonsense. Look into Malcom X's life and you'll see that near the end he grew and re-evaluated those beliefs.
stonem001 2 months ago
@stonem001 I don't care about it, he was enlightened when he said that, and in darkness when refuted it.
Konicava 2 months ago
@Konicava
Hate is darkness, not light
stonem001 2 months ago
@stonem001
No. Hate is seeing this doomed planet for what it is. Covering one's eyes only stops reality for the person who chooses to be blind. Do you think we've been placed in the garden of Eden? Here to expand indefinitely? Or to collapse upon ourselves?
thepostnihilist 2 months ago
@thepostnihilist
eh, cynics always think their view is somehow the most perceptive. But its actually quite biased and skewed towards the negative. You are ignoring all the hope and potential in the world. Your world view leads only to misery.
stonem001 2 months ago
Comment removed
thepostnihilist 2 months ago
@stonem001 Hate is usefol when fighting, struggling, and the time is now.
Konicava 2 months ago
@Konicava
A revolution of hatred leads to a society of hatred. Open your mind and expand beyond dualistic opposition and reaction.
stonem001 2 months ago 4
@crud4
P.2
(Market economy becomes the market society and humans start to see themselves as both the seller and commodity, etc, etc. This psychology is brought to the social sphere and relationships become "interchangeable commodities"). So, essentially, Fromm would say that our friendly neighborhood capitalism has fucked you up beyond recognition, crud!
SteelCityEcologist 7 months ago
@SteelCityEcologist Gee thanks :) I thought it was women who fucked me up beyond all recognition but I'll blame capitalism! LOL The last two relationships have been a tad rocky in a heroin shooting prostitution behind my back kinda way. A good way to get AIDS. Love is AIDS. (I'm not being serious)
crud4 7 months ago
@crud4
Hmm, I don't think the Frankfurt guys wrote any analysis of heroin shooting prostitute-girlfriends in the market society. You're on your own on that one, mate. Lol. On a serious note, though, your anecdotes get me all depressed. Don't you have some where you rescue puppies and kittens?
SteelCityEcologist 7 months ago
@SteelCityEcologist In a prior life maybe. I joined the dark side of the force long ago. No puppies and kittens here.
crud4 7 months ago
@crud4
Well, at least you get those cool eyes and the not so cool pasty skin.
SteelCityEcologist 7 months ago
quit babbling while on cocaine... the more ludicrous the point, the more enthusiastic are the Zizekites
82emilia 7 months ago
Adam and Eve were the first revolutionaries, all for the love. "Love is like hydrogen"... The love is so crazy ..
TheGranGuardian 7 months ago
I want to have the soundtrack
MissisDiggiloo 7 months ago
@MissisDiggiloo u go gurl
vampki 7 months ago
And Canada only exists because of the US military. You would understand this if you weren't brainwashed into thinking western capitalism can exist without the US military's global adventures in plunder. Canada is what it is because Canada doesn't have to spend trillions of dollars every year on it's military to protect the interests of global capitalism. Canada is a remora and the USA the shark.
crud4 8 months ago
Žižek likes to be a clown? Great. This is exactly what is wrong with recent Theory. Everyone tries to be a clown or a revolutionary, from Baudrillard (RIP) to Eagleton...
mgk81 8 months ago
@mgk81 Everyone should just quietly accept capitalism because we all know capitalism is the end of history right? How post modern of you. Go buy stuff. Have sex with a donkey...do something other than being a whinny little bitch.
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Whoa there, Jimmy! How'd you get all this "capitalist clusterfuck" from my sentence about Žižek's flamboyance?! Anyway, there are many things wrong about your own statement, because you make many assumptions. If we're talking about "capitalism" now, I can readily certify that it *does* work. (cont'd)
mgk81 8 months ago
@crud4 Anyway, I was born in Soviet Russia, where everything was backwards and the government tried to fuck you in the ass as often as possible, and now I live in Canada, where we moderate our "capitalism" with rational decisions about government, healthcare, and education (some times more successfully than at other times). A functioning, self-examining capitalism has nothing to do with "being postmodern," although the word has certainly become associated with "pretensiosness" recently. (cont'd)
mgk81 8 months ago
@crud4 Come to think of it, "capitalism," or, really, reasonable democracy allows me to have sex with donkeys (if I wanted to) within the boundaries of the law. Finally, I *will* do something other than being a "whinny" bitch--I will correct your spelling and move on. Life is good. Žižek is an abnormality that profs like to teach in grad school to seem "cool." Oh, and love is not evil. Pretentious intellectualism is.
mgk81 8 months ago
@mgk81 cap·i·tal·ism /ˈkæpɪtlˌɪzəm/ Show Spelled[kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Great. You can use a dictionary. Give this man a hand!
mgk81 8 months ago
@mgk81 Whats "reasonable democracy"? Is that the system where Goldman Sachs and or whichever top fortune 500 corporation/bank runs the show? You're a fucking idiot if you think the US is actually practicing democracy.
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Nah. If you actually *read* what I write instead to listening to yourself, you'll see that I'm talking about Canada. Yes, Canada is that reasonable democracy. This is why Canada is the best place to live in the world. We know how to balance so-called "socialist" security nets with realistic market demands. You poor man. ;)
mgk81 8 months ago
And if you had a half way decent education you'd know Russia was never communist- the point of communism is to get rid of the state and class eventually- Russia was the product of Stalin's idiocy, WW2 and western capitalism "stunting" the evolution of state socialism (state CAPITALISM really) into communism via the cold war. Industrial communism has never existed here on earth.
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 True enough...but what this definitely proves is that is whatever-THAT-was *doesn't* work, then whatever remains (i.e. the current state of "capitalism")--DOES work.
mgk81 8 months ago
@mgk81 I'm not sure if you noticed but global capitalism is currently in crisis and depends on perpetual war/plunder for it's continued existence. I don't give a shit what degree you're working on you're still an idiot. Someone has thrown away a lot of money on your half ass education (in your case I'll call it indoctrination).
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Well, I wasn't trying to appeal to authority--really. Maybe I'm just saying that I'm trying to make the msot of the situation. (Also, do examine your own angry, angry ad hominem "rhetoric" before you call me an idiot.) Finally, yes, it is indoctrination--to an extent--but I am learning how to be a better person while getting ahead. I harbour no illusions about what I need to do to--as the rappers say--get paid.
mgk81 8 months ago
@mgk81 "I harbor no illusions about what I need to do to--as the rappers say--get paid" There in lies the problem. Greed has a way of creating tunnel vision doesn't it and I never said I wasn't angry :)
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Greed? No, man. I need my $85,000 to $100,000 a year to be able to buy a house and have a family. Do you know what living comfortably costs these days? Anyway, it's a zero-sum game, so instead of being idealistic, I work towards making those I love (and myself) comfortable. How about you? Do you live in a cardboard box and preach the gospel to the birds out of principle?
mgk81 8 months ago
@mgk81 I live in a studio apartment in the Tenderloin shacked up with a prostitute with one leg.
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Good. There will be more for the rest of us.
mgk81 8 months ago
And if your lame ass attempt to correct my spelling wasn't a weak ass attempt at "pretentious intellectualism" then I'm not sure what is. CAPITALISM....spell it with me....
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4 Oh, I didn't say I'm not pretentious. As a current M.A. student (and soon-to-be Ph.D. candidate) I am taught to master precisely this sort of bullshit. At least I'm not a hypocrite, right? ;) Anyway, I'll gladly spell "capitalism" with you: R-E-A-L-I-T-Y
mgk81 8 months ago
Love can also be a psychological tug of war. A game of control. Rarely have I seen a relationship based on equality - not just financial equality but emotional equality. Love doesn't exist- I'd even go as far as to say when people die we mourn only our own eventual death- it makes us face the futility and pointlessness of existence.We don't really love the person who died we're simply afraid of death. This all sounds rather pessimistic :)
crud4 8 months ago
"love is a violent act" I think it's a selfish act- look at Mother Teressa, do you think she actually loved people? Fuck no, she enjoyed what people did for her image. The same can be said of relationships...what can you do for my ego. As soon as a person becomes indifferent to your ego or as soon as the social or financial benefits of that person wear off so too does the "love". Be suspicious of people who say they love you because in the next sentence they may try to slit your throat.Control
crud4 8 months ago
@crud4
P.1
"The same can be said of relationships...what can you do for my ego."
I've just been reading Fromm's "Man for Himself", where he describes a character orientation, the "exploitative orientation", which describes the psychology behind this sentiment. From what I can gather, I haven't finished it yet, all of the "Non-productive characters", to which the former belongs, stem, in one way or the other, from the "Marketing orientation" ....
SteelCityEcologist 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@crud4
"I think it's a selfish act- look at Mother Teressa, do you think she actually loved people? Fuck no, she enjoyed what people did for her image.
Although this may be true of Mother Theresa, everyone and their grandmother knows that psychological egoism (what you describe here) is a joke even as a descriptive position. By the by, Abraham Lincoln was a psychological egoist. You have something in common with a former President. ;)
SteelCityEcologist 1 month ago
(continued from my previous comment)... and come to enjoy the mystery and wonder of it all. I never said anything about loving each individual thing or action but rather that I love the world as a whole. For some reason, this upsets people like ajcics who suggested that I "go watch something easier to understand like Sesame Street." Maybe I will go watch that now. I loved it as a kid.
habde 8 months ago
I think some people commenting here are being literalistic (and in truth, superficial) to the point of being uncomprehending.
He is asserting an alternative to the normative moral-cosmos that most traditions (old and new) suggest where life & love are portrayed as being the qualities of the primeval stillness (God?) RATHER than symptoms of its discord.
IOW love is "luciferian", a disturbance, not the original state (which is not living, but dead and insentient.)
OuTofJoY 8 months ago
To love is "to will the good of another", and evil is a lack of good, so saying that "love is evil" is a linguistic contradiction. You can say that "one loves evil" since he wants evil to come to its fruition, but that's not quite the same thing. His beliefs are ridiculous, which goes to show what happens when you snob good philosophy in favor of ridiculous anomalies.
LightSpectra 8 months ago
@LightSpect I don't think you should be so quick to disregard what he says; indeed, I don't find the point very concise or articulate, but I find [what I can see of] the implication solid (even if obscure); I think he's implying that by picking out one part that you love, relatively speaking you wish evil upon the rest. He says he doesn't understand how people can love everything/one (from what I understand, dismissing such a notion), and therefore the only real love, is actually, quite immoral.
ExEverest10 8 months ago
He says that he doesn't care about the world. So, why does he bothers writing books and giving speeches?
milekrizman 8 months ago
@milekrizman I reckon he doesn't care about it from an intellectual, 'objective' standpoint. Just like if you believe there's no free will, you subscribe to that notion 'intellectually', but you still enjoy preforming 'good' deeds, reaching new heights in your career, et cetera, because the emotional core is still there, and it feels nice to fulfill it's desires (even if you understand that there's no intrinsic 'value' in anything you do, nothing to be 'proud of' or 'regretful of').
ExEverest10 8 months ago
May be he is talking about relative love.
Absolute Love is no Evil.
Love is Light.
He is probably missing the real mean of Love.
dudufigueiredo 9 months ago
@dudufigueiredo
What makes you think that absolute love exists?
thepostnihilist 9 months ago
@thepostnihilist I know God exists. God is Absolute Love.
I like and admire Žižek, but he is confused about the meaning of Love.
dudufigueiredo 9 months ago
@dudufigueiredo
So you are sure that God exists? Interesting.
thepostnihilist 9 months ago
@thepostnihilist I belive in God (The Source) the same way I belive that, soon, you will remember Him too. =)
All my Love for you.
dudufigueiredo 9 months ago
@dudufigueiredo
I'm indifferent to your love because I don't think it is real, just sanctimonious. As far as God is concerned, a lot of religious people claim he/she/it exists, but I find that is usually a result of what they have been taught rather than what they have experienced personally. Not saying that God does or doesn't exist; I just notice that people are pretty good at parroting and living by other people's assumptions.
thepostnihilist 9 months ago
Comment removed
YinPisces 9 months ago
love must be introduced first as an action,
so sentiment is defined by experience upon its completion.
one must have been loved to feel it- but when that fails... the bALANCE can be realigned by a leap pf faith and a random kindness to benefit a stranger: that too starts the ball rolling..... good luck! It's worth knowing!
misselissisme 9 months ago
basically what this guy's saying is... love is imba omg :))
raynorman 9 months ago
@raynorman what is imba?
yupiie 8 months ago
@yupiie imba is short for imbalanced ;)
raynorman 7 months ago
Comment removed
yupiie 8 months ago
this is where alcohol leads the mind, someone should give him some different drugs so he can learn what love is and feels like. just saying.
kaiagavin 9 months ago
Love relies on the absence of love, to be defined.
landgabriel 9 months ago
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed"
-Isiah 53:5
Only a suffering God can save us. -Slavoj Zizek
LASALLIONSTALLION 10 months ago
Zizek is echoing Buddhism (and many other religions) here: "love" for another person is just training wheels to remind you that we ALL are mortal, we ALL are fragile, foible, and suffering. Even the rich megalomaniacs are suffering. It's true Universal Love that we should be striving towards. Love your enemy, etc.
SPKaa 10 months ago
I just LOVE Slavoj Zizek. He is absolutely on point as always...
Sartre said it another way, "Suffering is other people".
jfkoudelka 10 months ago 7
@jfkoudelka I think Sartre was explaining "bad faith" when he said that- how it's hard to be your authentic self around other people. I may be wrong....who cares? Not me. I have a massive hangover.
crud4 7 months ago
@jfkoudelka L'enfer c'est les autres...
sqccccccccc 6 months ago
@jfkoudelka I believe Sartre said "Hell is other people," and Zizek is not an existentialist. He's a Marxist-psychoanalyst (with more Lacan than anything else)... Sartre said that the act of loving other people causes ourselves suffering and imprisons us to them. Zizek is saying that loving other people is selfish and chaotic. What he's saying is actually closer to Plato in the Symposium or Phaedrus than Sartre...
NazTb0y 5 months ago
Love is game theory + Idealogy.
LASALLIONSTALLION 10 months ago 2
All existence: One Continuous Mistake.
John Campbell deserves a Nobel prize in physics.
Turtleproof 10 months ago
Love is not a 0 sum game. You can hate everything then decide to love one thing, you still hate everything else just as much as you did before but now you love that one thing on top of that, it's a step up. This guy failed middle school math. Why is he famous again?
zoquibax 11 months ago
It's true though. He depends upon, and leaves untouched, the concept of "evil" to debunk the concept of "love".
SarahMarieShelley 11 months ago
A musical tribute:
KatelyAW 11 months ago
this guy is like a meme itself O.o
nachoijp 11 months ago
I listen to this over and over again and still can't fully grasp what he means. How is love a cosmic imbalance and how is it accepting the mistake and going to the end? I really want to comprehend what Slavoj is saying. Please anyone who gets it, explain to me, I have only recently gotten into philosophy.
AvramIsMyHero 11 months ago
@AvramIsMyHero
hey, to me it translates like this:
if Love means to particularly care for just one creation, and this one 'thing' was born out of a 'catastrophy', love is evil, because you embrace the imbalance, even more, you want the world to be out of balance.
I don't find it too offensive.. he is really being personal here, which comes through for me, and he pretty much narrowed it down to the idea that 'creation is imbalance'.
Let's say creation is Coincidence.. what would follow up..:)
bagbeater 11 months ago 11
@bagbeater Thank you for explaining.
AvramIsMyHero 11 months ago
Well that was uplifting..."We are an accident"..."Love is bullshit"..."Im not sure if I hate the world or if I am just indifferent to it"
And this is the guy we are putting on a pedestal?
chefshitpiece 11 months ago
@chefshitpiece He's just fucking around. Zizek sometimes says things that are deeply insightful. Other times, in cases like this, he's just yanking your chain.
michaelgj23 10 months ago
@michaelgj23 How do you know?
chefshitpiece 10 months ago
@chefshitpiece Because he's saying that love is evil and that's just stupid. He must playing around.
michaelgj23 10 months ago
@chefshitpiece Actually, I do find it uplifting. There's a lot of depression around from saying the world is so great that if we don't feel happy all the time then we're awful. This duty to be happy is like a great weight around the shoulders of our culture, and the mental health stats back that up. To hear somebody articulate so well the idea that the world is a mistake, or that those of us without a love in our life aren't lacking anything that great or noble, is relief, liberation. Oxygen.
lewisrain 9 months ago
@lewisrain I agree that a lot of mental health disorders are due to the idealized image of life that Hollywood tries to shove in our face is. I hate those Norweigen bastards that are all in charge of Hollywood. What a bunch of fucking assholes. Personally, I don't believe in love, strictly in terms of definition. I am considering doing a video on it.
chefshitpiece 9 months ago
@chefshitpiece I don't know about any pedestal.
But just because you might find his conclusions depressing or unsettling, doesn't mean they are wrong. Am I to infer that you believe that any "true" idea or philosophy must be uplifting, to confirm some value or importance to life/existence?
twentyarms 9 months ago
@twentyarms Everyone should have their opinion aired and respected. But there are philosophers out there who have something a little more positive and socially constructive to say, and, might I add, have better structures to back up thier theories. THOSE are the ones we should be respecting, not this guy.
chefshitpiece 9 months ago
@chefshitpiece
thanks!
thesuikerlounge 9 months ago
Notsofmzo, I'm sorry. I really am.
WhereEngelsFearTread 11 months ago
@WhereEngelsFearTread Nah why? For what though..
Notsofmzo 11 months ago
And please pardon my "French" (Chill out, it's a figure of speech) and for commenting.. But here's a bit of philosophy I picked up from somewhere, I wonder who stated this ..“Once we understand that the integrity of our personal existence depends on the integrity of everything else in our world, we have truly understood the meaning of unconditional love, for love is extensionality & seeing everything as you, as everything can have no conditionality, for in fact we are all everything at once.”
Notsofmzo 11 months ago
Oh and as for 1:18, you use the word "Love" as if it were some kind of arrogant behavior and maybe you should lay low when it comes to speaking about the act of love. Not the sexual, obscene or compulsive side but try to analyze more about the motivational side.. Ever asked yourself why we have philanthropies inside various fucked up industries that toy with their creations? Maybe it's not the people that are fucked up... Maybe something else around here is fucked up.. I blame the "System"
Notsofmzo 11 months ago
1:05 damn yo someone's pissed >_> Anyways dude, my notion is "Hate is such a weak word. See.. Me, I don't hate. I disagree, an it take's more critical thought to explain why you disagree that to just say 'Oh I hate it, yadah yadah..' " Here's another personal opinion of mine, I think you use the word quantam to make yourself sound smart lol =P
Notsofmzo 11 months ago
The meaning of love for most is an emotion that stimulates their own selfish wants. Love = Evol/Evil
True love is actually compassion for others needs and wants. Love is lost to most of the world. It seems evol projected from ego is the way of the world today.
wiseyeffect 11 months ago
@wiseyeffect I actually wrote a book comparing the two, if you are at all interested it is called COMPASSION BEATS LOVE...I guess you can pretty easily determine which side I am on. I do not believe the two are synonomous, and as soon as i write my exams i will be doing research into how the brain processes attraction and empathy differently.
chefshitpiece 10 months ago
@chefshitpiece Have studied the teachings of the Mystery schools? There is a reason the worlds perspective has been twisted insideout.
wiseyeffect 10 months ago
Modern Gnostic.
alexanderwotl 1 year ago
I actually think he described infactuation, not love. there's a marked difference.
smithhedgehog 1 year ago
@smithhedgehog yes, otherwise he is a cold man :D
K0nsumkind 11 months ago
@K0nsumkind Agreed :-)
smithhedgehog 11 months ago
Irony: An empty man is talking about love.
torotube99 1 year ago
it isn't!
ananoula 1 year ago
Zizek is so, so, so highly overrated. Have any of you even read any of his works, let alone comprehended one of them? Do you need your intellectual food handed to you in the form of a whacky slovenian youtube personality before you'll pay any attention?
I despise this new breed of faggy pseudo-intellectuals the internet is churning out; people who haven't read a book in their lives, yet see themselves as an authority on anything. Go and namedrop Zizek to your hipster friends you failures.
Intelectual95 1 year ago
Comment removed
79898325 1 year ago
Comment removed
79898325 1 year ago
@Intelectual95 Who is he overrated by? Yeah, I've read a book of his. People who like Zizek are failures? You couldn't even spell Intellectual right in your username, you dumbshit. Fuck off.
79898325 1 year ago
@79898325
"I've read a book of his." - which one, you namedropping half-wit?
I didn't say that people who like Zizek are failures. Get some reading comprehension, you tard. I'm saying that mediocre-minded fucktards (like you) watch his videos cause it makes them feel like they're fucking intellectual (they're not, you're not). I'm talking about pea-brained youtube namedroppers (like you).
"I've read a book of his." - no you haven't, liar. Tell me which one. Tell me your thoughts on it.
Intelectual95 1 year ago
@Intelectual95 For they know not what they do, Enjoyment as a political factor.
"Go and namedrop Zizek to your hipster friends you failures."
Get a life kid.
79898325 1 year ago
@79898325
It's stunning how little thought you show. After 15 minutes of seething anger and desperation all you could cook up is "get a life" and a Zizek book title you managed to google? You conveniently avoided telling me your thoughts on that book you lied about reading, btw.
Intelectual95 1 year ago
@Intelectual95 If I start discussing it you'll say I just read the reviews.As if I care if you believe me! I hope this has been everything you wanted and you now feel like you can carry your opinion as if it's valid. You didn't even criticize anything he discusses and then say I'm showing little thought. Don't respond to me because I won't read it. For the second time, fuck off and get a life.
79898325 1 year ago
@79898325
Wow. Confirmed for pleb. Next please.
Intelectual95 1 year ago
@Intelectual95 Your idiocy is painful.
alexrider99 1 year ago
@Intelectual95 you are completely and utterly right.
yupiie 8 months ago
I say most obviously because those are "IN" that experience of profound Love, Freedom, Acceptance, cannot do anything but rejoice in it totally. It's like an orgasm of the mind. It's the ignorant, close minded people who seem to never try to experience this, because it destroys their sense of Selfhood, their sense of personality and security as a person named Matthew. Thoughts?
alliant 1 year ago
I don't quite understand him here. I don't think he's bashing the feeling of Love as an impersonal experience is he? The sensation of accepting reality as it is, giving your self to it, totally without resistance. This is LOVE to me. This is the natural void of which he speaks, the Harmony. The particular love, I love my sister, that dog, this Ipod. Are these the love he says are evil? Or is love, always, evil? Love in the sense of which I spoke, most obviously cannot be evil.
alliant 1 year ago
"quantum physics... you know?" made me laugh. No dude, I have no idea.
a1579 1 year ago
@a1579 Lol
EclecticSceptic 1 year ago
wow
lauraluvspaul66 1 year ago
He's an interesting guy and I've been fascinated with almost everything I've heard him say, but I feel sorry for him in a way. I guess for all his intelligence he doesn't have the faith or understanding to love the world and life.
habde 1 year ago
@habde I'm sure one of the smartest men in the world values your opinion of him very much. If you halfway understood anything he said you would be too busy being affected by the weight of these brave assertions to this kind of stupid comment. Faith is a paralysis of critical reason and universal love is a sado-masochistic, ignorant and naive way to understand what love really is. You fail, go watch something easier to understand like Sesame Street
ajcics 1 year ago
@ajcics Late response, I know, but I don't check the email address this account is linked to. Apparently, I upset at least a couple people with my comment earlier saying that while he's interesting, I feel sorry for his lack of "faith or understanding to love the world and life." I understood what he said, I see where he's coming from, but my thought differs from Zizek's. The world is this incomprehensible place of disorder. (continued...)
habde 8 months ago
(continued from my previous comment) Phenomenologists such as Schütz, Berger and Luckmann as well as ethnomethodologists like Garfinkel, share a similar belief that the world has no inherent meaning. Garfinkel examined how people jointly define the world and attribute meaning to it. I agree with this type of thinking except I believe in God, Who is the only absolute and is beyond human comprehension. I try to be at peace with the fact that the world is not rational, accept it, (continued...)
habde 8 months ago
@habde I'm sure one of the smartest men in the world values your opinion of him very much. If you halfway understood anything he said, you would be too busy being affected by the weight of these brave ideas to have time to post this kind of stupid comment. Faith is a paralysis of critical reason and universal love is a sado-masochistic, ignorant and naive way to understand what love really is. You fail, go watch something easier to understand like Sesame Street
ajcics 1 year ago
@habde Well really faith doesn't enter this issue. The recognition, of what the 'world' and reality is, is two things: Visceral and reasonable. By this I mean no amount of 'faith' in any direction can just make you 'love the world and life'. As in, faith in what? God? Faith in the idea that life is a thing to love? That doesn't work. And it doesn't work because this recognition is visceral: our reaction reality is provoked without the neccessity of deliberation. I can't choose to think this/that
EclecticSceptic 1 year ago
That lisp is CRUCIAL
MurderCassette 1 year ago 49
@MurderCassette
sounds like a 2nd grader who just came back from the dentist with brand new braces! XD
Appear86 8 months ago
iz vsega spoštovanja vas prosim da ne govorite takšne neumnosti....očitno komentirate negativno stvari še preden jih spoznate oz. občutite...
verjamem v to da boste prišli nekoč do drugega prepričanja ;)
Love,Blaž
Tomzy7 1 year ago
haha i love this man:) his accent is so funny and so sharply slovenian lol:) and im sooo proud that at least one of us is making an impact and is known internationally...love his cinema books..thank you zizek for making me proud to be slovenian:))
Ancika55 1 year ago
This man is mad! Love is love!
MrBulgarash 1 year ago
@MrBulgarash would you love a poor man? a sick man?
you only "love" according to some set, predictable criteria, you choose. that's the essence of his point, your choice is an unconscious elevation of somebody above the norm. Love in the modern world is akin to a false deification of another person. it's insane.
southsydney 1 year ago
visiting buenos aires, Argentina
uqzyorch 1 year ago
Comment removed
mycollegeshirt 1 year ago
thats garbage, there is too many assumptions, first love, actual love doesn't make you care for other things less, lust maybe, love no, and if we take it as a running hypothesis that love is a form of inclusion into our selves, ignoring the fact exclusion would be evil, inclusion in the sense that we care for x as much as we care for ourselves, they become in a sense