Is this his whole philosophy Yea Forums ?

is this his whole philosophy Yea Forums ?

Attached: der.jpg (405x315, 26K)

If history confirms anything, it's that the opposite is true.

i know it looks bad but my point was more so that zizek's philosophy is based around inverting commonly held notions and claiming that in (precisely)the opposite of these notions lies the truth.

we have more bullshit to sift through than previous eras faggot, no period in human history has had to dig through as much junk information as ours.

The problem isn't that we do it, the problem is that we do it almost exclusively. When something good comes along we generally don't give it the time it's due.

no it's about Hegelian negation, finding contradictions isn't truth, the sublimation of the contradictions into a larger whole is

You're right about Zizek's application of Hegel, but you're lacking the lacanian innovation that he brings to it. the idea of a 'larger whole' is at odds with zizek's insistence on ontological incompleteness, asymptomatic desire, etc.. Remember, he's a big champion of the disjecta membra metaphor– contradictions that are subsumed by a whole which can never be fully realised. We might be able to partially reassemble an ancient vase from its fragments, but the inscription that adorns its side will forever be lost to us, and we will never witness the total (absolute) outline of the artefact.

this is still totally Hegelian though "the mysteries of the ancients were already mystics to the ancients", ect.

What the fuck are you talking about? This quote was referring to children's intuition where he said:
>...that's why we need innocent children's gaze. People say that the first look at something is usually deceptive, that you need to look again. If history confirms anything it's that the opposite is true.
I have no idea why RT used it as a standalone quote or why you looked at the thumbnail for a YouTube video and, without watching it, decided to post a thread about it on Yea Forums. You're a fucking pseud and you should get off this board.

Maybe, but if Zizek were only drawing from Hegel then the idea of incompleteness is only incomplete because it advances towards 'something', absolute spirit, cosmic consciousness, the end of history, whatever you want to call it. Lacan's innovation is to make that fundamental gap into a constitutive part of desire that needs no metaphysical absolute to move towards, because it is in the very nature of desire to be deferred away from its object of resolution. It's why zizek sees history and historical subjectivity as a sequence of catastrophic mistakes, rather than considering himself a 'progressive' in the conventional sense.

Is there a source for this in Ecrit? Specifically about rendering the gap between a state of affairs and the absolute desirable, because if anyone were to deliver on that, it might lead to actually useful therapy

Bump

Good explanations

you guessed it right

BASED

/thread

I can give you a few examples that could support that reading of Lacan, though as always with him its a case of reading between the lines:

>"The mirror stage is a drama whose internal thrust is precipitated from insufficiency to anticipation – and which manufactures for the subject, caught up in the lure of spatial identification, the succession of fantasies that extends from a fragmented body-image to a form of its totality" (p4)

>"a voyueristic-sadistic idealization of the sexual relation; a personality that realizes itself only in suicide; a consciousness of the other that can be satisfied only by Hegelian murder" (p6)

>"And the enigmas that desire seems to pose for a 'natural philosophy' – its frenzy mocking the abyss of the infinite, the secret collusion with which it envelops the pleasure of knowing and of dominating with jouissaunce, these amount to no other derangement of instinct than that of being caught in the rails– eternally stretching forth towards the desire for something else –of metonymy." (p166-167)

Also, the entire essay on the phallus is super useful towards thinking about this stuff too

The post I responded to mentioned the deferral of resolution? Certainly not the same thing as the Derridean supplement?

To my knowledge, Lacan does follow the Derridean notion of the signifying chain, but goes a step further in the metaphor and acknowledges that chains consist of concentric rings, nested inside a larger ring that is also just a concentric ring in an even bigger ring, and so on.

no

Just sat on the bowl to take a poop. Good to see Zizek in these times. I bet he doesn't wipe.

dialectics innit

no, zizek is clearly a neonazi. he does not claim that history points out the opposite, but in fact that he is pursuing for a point of history where he consider as true and ruthlessly market his ideology until other people agree with him.

History doesn't and can't confirm anything to be true.