i am truly thankful for you and your channel. I study architecture, and your introductions to philosophy have been extremely informing and motivating for me to dive deeper into philosophy.
Hi guys, just wanted to add that this lecture is part of an ongoing series on ‘spurious infinities’ which will wrap up end of January and be released as the next installment of my ebook subscription service. Really looking forward to it. For more, visit: www.patreon.com/jenalineandjulian
If it still matter: thanks a lot from BERLIN, DE. I m Bulgarian fan. Born in those years on that special semy-isle Balkan. Im GRATEFUL for your content
Ziz is pretty imbedded in cultural criticism, Lacan circles, psychoanalysis/film studies...as far as how his ideologue-kritik is treated by 'hardcore' marxists...who knows?? I come across references of him on the reg
I would love to know what you think about this reply in the live chat: how do you feel about Chomsky describing Zizek as "posturing" his view points to be overly sophisticated without real framework?
Italy here, first time viewer and I liked it so far, very well exposed. Thank you. In the movie "la grande bellezza" the performer says:" I don't love myself" , just for your info and, I think, a more coherent pattern with the scene. Good thoughts to everybody.
I’m from the boring and depressing United States. Specifically, New Jersey. I really struggle to understand your videos, but I don’t think it’s your fault. I’m probably just not fully prepared to absorb it, but maybe one day after enough bashing my head against the brick wall things will click.
@Dalym - don't worry, it isn't because you are stupid. As an undergraduate English literature student in the 90's I remember a guest lecture from a postmodernist (can't remember his name) that I struggled to understand. Now I do understand - just because I've read more. Also, the structures in your brain that enable understanding have to grow. Start with simple things - introductions to a subject, designed for a beginner, and go from there.
My problem with all of this is, if I understand it anywhere close to correctly, which I might not, that _WHY_ would I even hypothesize that the content or absolute, which I understand to be reality that we try to make sense of through reason, is anything other than pre-existing outside of us and independent of our ability to reason? To me it is apparent that reality exists independent of ourselves, because we can see causality that extends back beyond our existence. And so I see no reason to question where reality lies or emerges. It is a useless question with problematic answers.
As a low IQ human being interested in philosophy, i appreciate these videos very much, you make these mountainous idea digestible and fun for us. God bless you friend 😘
@@SPACEDOUT19 If you think philosophy is about IQ or the mastering of concepts, then you have to really rethink whether you want to be doing this in the first place. From Hegel to Deleuze, the fundamental trajectory of philosophy has been to trace the ways in which thought escapes normative and reified ideas of truth (and its prerequisite intelligences). Philosophy is about intelligence, but it's not about IQ. It requires a different kind of an intelligence and temperament.
great video like always but you really need to learn how to normalize you audio files on recorded video and/or using a better microphone on the live one. Is relly hard to stay attentif on what you are says with this audio quality.
The relation of form and content yields its own content. This appears to be the theme of the lecture. Starting with objects of art was troublesome. Does the work of art gets its significance from its official location, for example, in a museum? This is criticizable. For example, DeVries "War and Pieces' recently at the Lightner Museum, St Augustine, represents a nuclear explosion made from broken pieces of porcelain and small statues of religious figures. The premodern and anti modern motifs are palpable; is this postmodernism? Same query about Duchamp's 'Toilet' and Malevich's 'Black Square.' What constitutes postmodernity? Postmodernity is a power struggle but how do we discern that a work of art represents a power struggle? By its location or not in a museum? This is not a reasonable conclusion. The location must be historical and social. The 'Black Square' of 1915 must relate to WWI - 10,000 deaths, not casualties, every day. Same for 'Urinal,' 1917. as a comment that says "pissed" and addresses men, or gender. The issue is 'what is the content concealed in the relation between form and content of the work of art?' Postmodernism is not simply a rejection of differentiation of culture from the social system, or an anti-science sentiment - how could it be with the widespread acceptance of technology, namely weapon systems? The content of art in these cases is not kitsch because the art object yields a definitive meaning about the historical context. Phrases like the dialectic of the dialectic, imaginary of the real, symbolic of the imaginary, real of the imaginary are obscure notions which require definitions and examples. Relating form and content to Kant's formalism and Hegel's speculative idealism and Lacan's sinthome was insightful.
