Freud Lives! | Slavoj Zizek and Stephen Grosz 

Nice

Oh you're so educated, wow, I'm clapping.

You tubers never disappoint hahaha

@@scipioafricanus3324 imagine getting triggered by that comment XD

@@skepticmonkey6923 Your comment is like reading Tolstoy and your avatar is like a romantic evening with Braque under the moonlight after breaking into Monet's home at Argenteuil.

He enjoys his symptoms :^)

@@sacrificezone we all do bcs we love to think of ourselves as being unique identities

Could you explain, please, what he meant by that expression?

He’s just joking. Grosz and himself have been the only people talking thus far, thus he feels it to be “dictatorial” how they monopolised the conversation. He, “democratically”, wants to hear from other people in the room.

wow, great comment (which is rare on yt). i agree, it's interesting to see how bad attention and good attention are both more psychology advantageous than no attention. in your case, opposite to fischer, because you had this bad attention given (all the court proceedings and board hearings that i'm sure you had to endure) you felt a kind of mutated form of positive cognitive feedback. you experienced withdrawal (loneliness, paranoia, etc) from the attention that you would never have consciously desired. speaks a whole lot to how little we understand about the human tendency towards society creation.

Also read to mahler on kleins objetal theory about schizoparanoid phase, about being ignored that causes the subject to go in a aggressive or passive way because of the bad breaks, that doesn't hurt, but ignores, and it may lead to the André Green's concept of white psychosis as a continuous feeling of paranoia that keeps them on themselves without expression...

Zizek often quotes Lacan to make a similar point. A husband is jealous that his wife is cheating on him. Even if the husbands suspicions are true that his wife is cheating on him behind his back his experience of jealousy is pathological. IE, why does he need to feel jealous to sustain his identity. Perhaps because the indifference of the world is too much to cope with so jealousy is a way to create meaning and self value in an indifferent world.

If you read about Bobby, he was already having anti-semantic remarks even before he became world champion.

M T I’ve spent the last few years understanding jealousy as a concept (the way that people use the word to ascribe meaning to a feeling) and my own jealousy. I’ve never put it in terms of attention until now and I think it nestles well into how I’ve become to explain it. I always put it in terms of abandonment and self worth. ‘Attention’ can be nestled into those other concepts quite nicely. One is abandoned when they lose the attention of that person. The abandonment is a lack of attention. Thank you for you wisdom. I do appreciate it.

Daemon Dif Exactly

Psychoanalysis is not "Opposite Day" or Cpt. Kirk's Planet of Rape where "no" always means "yes".

He is provoking people conciousness

@@tlatosmd hahahahahha

Sometimes i felt a little bit to lured in to it, like getting drunk with out noticing it

Zizek's voice aggravates my bowels.

It puts you at ease because you think calm, soft voices should put you at ease. In keeping with the Freudian spirit of this video, what lurks beneath the soft exterior? "Compassion"? "Kindness"? I prefer Zizek's manic chattering warble

For me it almost has the opposite effect

It's too slow for me

what was that about? were we supposed to understand a joke or something? oh well, he might just hate the term 'feel'...

@@andreasstahl2614 Because it was too subjective in the context of his question... It's pretty simple. There is nothing wrong in using the right terminology to express oneself.

Ka pi ta Li sum

I think the onus here was more on Grosz to make a comment or contribute something … he was a no show and we didn’t need him on stage.

I was quite disappointed by this, it's not a very difficult question either. I think Zizek doesn't want to answer it because basically he is a misanthrope and think that 99% of people are stupid and uninteresting. I'm a fan of his, I think he's just disinterested in that dimension. The psychologist on the other is clearly avoiding the question, I think he is embarrassed by the contents of the question. Which I find weird for someone in his field. I can't answer for the British NHS but as I live under a similar system is that therapies outside of cbt are not considered effective or important and more importantly, mental health issues are not prioritized by the public health system. Strange since dysfunction and suicide levels are ever rising in western society in otherwise healthy patients. You can get transgender surgery, breast reduction, botox treatments through public health and god knows what else, why not better psychological therapies? Or other kinds of support for patients to heal psychological problems through lifestyle changes etc? Its simply wrong priorities and discrimination of people who suffer from illness of the mind and soul and deserve to get the same help as everyone else, suicidal people also pay taxes right? Doesn't take a professor to answer this question but really disappointed that neither took the time to answer her question.

@@setmymindinmotion or simply that cbt is shit and it takes at least 10 hours to explain everything wrong with it.

The Brocialist I don't get it

@@Quinefan It's a reference to one of Slavoj's examples.

if cream is better than milk, isn't the oposite? Less disappointment!

@@Quinefanhe explained determinate negation through an example where waiter asks customer what he wants and he says i want coffee without milk, since the shop doesnt give coffee with milk, the waiter says we dont have coffee without milk but we do have coffee without cream. So itd basically identifying/determining smth through negation.

Someone else finally figured that out ! I thought I was the only one. Hegel tapped into some major mojo.

amen

How can I really understand hegel? Any books or videod you might suggest?

@@dantemiaclub9745 JK, here's a good video for ya. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-OgNt1C72B_4.html

Doesn't mean that God is real. The dynamic is Hegelian, but it's the product of illusion. The master (god) is served/worshipped by the people, but they don't have a factual definition nor reasoning skills to set up a basis as to why.

I wish they could have spent more time on it

That's normal. You've got the right attitude to lead an intellectually fulfilling life. But keep going and get that piece of paper, however useless a lot of your lectures might seem. It will give everything you learn afterwards a different emotional context; namely, your own success.

@@eliascristante5306 Thank you

@@mb2756 My pleasure.

Remember to shag the stunners, utmost importance

Read Marx. You will enjoy 'German Ideology'.

Yeah Grosz was not needed on stage … there was just no contribution what so ever, even to questions directed directly at him…

Pressshishly!

lol

When I started reading you comment, I was expecting the Dalek's "extterrrrrrRrRrrminate"

Research Tavistock, I think it is a little like our CIA, it may very well be a divisive organization, a think tank for dangerous study of manipulating human behavior.....

​@@barbarajohnson1442 lol

Ikr... I felt bad for the girl asking that question, they basically just ignored and moved on

It's important for him to distinguish where he is not a pessimist and where he is, as he's not an all-or-nothing pessimist, and what serious thinker could be? Schopenhauer doesn't count, he was a hypocrite. Slavoj is pessimistic about certain things yet not about others.

I would agree, but then again, it IS Zizek who is the draw and who is the main character while Grosz is the foil, however I would love to hear more from Grosz. I guess I'm just saying we all know it is going to go down this way. I'd be disappointed if it were otherwise, just for my own entertainment, lol.

Michael Allison LMFT Family Therapy To readers of 'The Examined Life' at least, I think Grosz is the draw.

Really, did Zizek have anything interesting to say. How many time s did he say the word 'Lacan' ?

Quinefan certainly Grosz is a draw. That's what I meant he's the foil. But there's no way zizek is coming to Thanksgiving dinner and anyone is going to get a word in. I agree i would have LOVED to hear more from Grosz. I had some great intellectual gain from what little he did say.

Michael Allison LMFT Family Therapy That's not what 'foil' means.

Big Boss, It’s neither good nor bad but thinking makes it so. Sisek didn’t commit suicide (OMG) after being jilted by his first love, ha, ha, but the ritual, the games. (You can experence a fleeting insight on the couch, then go home & beat your wife - not change your mind or habit.) Sisek brilliantly presents Freud in context, historically embedded in our culture re sex, etc., refers to & quotes him many times in lectures (a Freudian Hegelian). Specifically, the benefits of (his distimguished doctor pointedly inserts “clinical”) psychoanalysis are inconclusive (cannot be scientifically measured). It’s more complicated than for or against,. Did you hope for a yelling match? If psychoanalysis helps (Trump definitely needs), what difference does it make what Sisek thinks?

@@marileesteele1804 seems like your projecting at the end, but ok, yeah he contextualizes the topic. A+

Hey man, hope you are doing well. In general, what Zizek is doing is presenting conditions, context and philosophical reasoning for his position. He is almost certainly in favor of psychoanalysis since he himself is/was a practicing psychoanalyst. However, as usual in the broad field of social sciences, Zizek is addressing limitations and/or problems within the "art" of psychoanalysis itself which are commonly discussed by the general consensus at academia. Of course, these reflection also bring a new discussion/approach to the topic.

@@colonelbrando "F*ck psychology." (Zizek) Any further questions ?

Can you explain how you know this?

it's because of his hysterical position (Zizek).

Because he can safely assume it from the distance.

No he is not. People have the wildest ideas.

HA! too good :)

56:43

In general? No. Under capitalism? Still no. Marriage and the family are about a gendered offloading of the cost of reproducing wage labor. I mean, rings, wedding dresses, baby formula, diapers, furniture are all commodities, sure. But we're talking about a different facet of things here. Dating apps and social media represent novel enclosures and commodifications of our interpersonal relations in ways that simply didn't exist before.

Dowry?

King Kong ok I hate you

Hahaha

Zach Patterson if you really believe that the dominant ideology is a specific lack of normativity, you are first limiting yourself to the very much not broadly emblematic environment of a liberal university. Then, you are faced with justifying the parts of normativity that are being deliberately excluded. For instance if the university department is a gender studies department that teaches Butler, and your normativity was the actually emblematic sexism and paternalism then (and this is the crazy part I know) the exclusion of you based on the norm is totally valid. I mean your position is laughable. Are you calling for the impossibility of non-ideological education? Nietzsche and Foucault’s conclusion that knowledge is inseparable from the structuring of knowledge through power seems to render that impossible. Or are you still just even more specifically arguing that you should be able to make the false and reductive criticism that feminists want to exclude hetero white men.

Zach Patterson I mean even on the extreme feminist left on RU-vid the main figures are quite often cis white men. It sounds to me like the motivation of being a victim is what *you’re* calling on here too, the difference being that in reality you are the oppressed class in what is still an inherently normative society.

Do you know joke from Ernst Lubitch's Ninotchka?

it's just a familiar story he can use at any time to quite efficiently invoke other ideas

I am sorry. We are actually out of Ninotchka jokes... So we can't give you Zizek without cream at this time. Can we interest you in Zizek without omelette, or Zizek without Indians?

Actually there is. Some authors talk about it, Racker, Bion, Meltzer, among others. But, that's why us analysts go to anaylisis and also I agree, lot of experience

this is too true

Yes. All true, but the question was in some sense answered via the final question. People are afraid of psychoanalysis because of its openendedness and because it requires the effort of the patient with an uncertain outcome whereas other forms of therapy are more tightly defined and partly for that reason, more acceptable to health bureaucrats who decide what will be funded in the public health system. However, psychoanalytic psychotherapy (as distinct from psychoanalysis) is widely available under the NHS.

Time stamp?

Grosz said that sometimes people wish to have gone through a better suited therapy sooner, and then blame it on the system for time lost (?) on cbt. Anyways, it felt like Zizek was indeed the Analysand and Grosz, the Analyst. That is probably why the second to last question was so out of place, and the last question was so spot on. And in a strange way, I think the questions complemented each other. I know very little about Psycoanalysis, but Zizek seemed very paranoic and I am guessing that the true reason he never practised is because he never finished one on himself. But I suppose that is OK, since otherwise, he wouldn't be Zizek, and so on and so forth.

Lol the way you put it makes it so comical, the poor woman waiting to be aknowledged and you think that was a short answer the psychoanalyst gave....BUT THEN Zizek steps in to answer, you think he has something grand to answer....and just ignores the question and shares some thoughts he had on a previous idea, an absolute fatal blow lol. But yeah finding a psychological help that best suits your needs can be very difficult and pricey.

it's the microphone filter which fell of when he hit it

i hate that bitch

@@nachog.s.7729 lmao, that's intense. They just asked a question

@@TheRandomBiscuit hahahahaha i dont know why i took it so bad, sory :)

BTW _that_ is what is outdated, the institutionalized psychoanalyst who demands money to give help to someone.

Oh, I note the audience questioner @52:00 got there, good for her!