Welp

Attached: tgt_headshot.png (337x370, 158K)

He's back

i'm a great admirer of your work, this might be one of your best

le epic win!

yikes

gay

Imagine thinking either one of these brainlets know what they're talking about

that was amazing

sneed

Attached: image.jpg (433x419, 126K)

This board is officially worse than reddit

that's what makes it great.

formerly better then reddit

Peterson is worse about this.
I laughed. OP didn't make the image though.

High IQ post

Based.
Cringe.

The Marxism/postmodernism thing isn't coherent on the surface sure, but there is a deeper relationship on which it makes sense. Much like how sections of the left act as apologists for radical Islam. The hypocrisy of their beliefs and behaviours is what people like Peterson are critiquing. Saying 'yeah well our views are incoherent therefore cannot be what we actually believe' is not a valid defence.

B A S E D SNEEDPOSTER

What a ridiculous picture. Zizek didn't say that because he knows better. Deleuze was a fucking materialist.

we Yea Forums level now

Deleuze wasn't much of a postmodernist if we are being honest though

Detective retard here, just wanted to say that you are based.

>implying being a troglodyte isn't the appropiate mindset during Kali Yuga

Neither was Foucault then. If anything he was even less so for his emphasis on the irreducible nature of the transcendental.

I would wholeheartedly agree, Foucault himself hated the term

A prepared speech that he used before, verbatim, that people have heard before. Pseuds and posers do that. What killed my interest in e-celebs is hearing them speak in person; they have their rehearsed speeches they give, word for word. It doesn't matter of it's Zizek or some pop-scientist, they are like the quacks who used to go town to town selling medicines, and they'd have their same rehearsed speech they'd say over and over again. This is the same thing with their "philosophy". Same exact things. Same bullshit. Same intonations. Same pauses. Just memorize and wheel you around from point A to point B. It might impress brainlets and get you a small following but if an intelligent person heres you saying the same shit over and over again, they know you're full of crap and are just a worthless ventriloquist without anything novel or insightful to offer. A stageman, not a thinker.

Attached: 1531305401145.jpg (399x322, 25K)

Lol try and come up with new philosophical material every year

That's not where my grievance lies, brainlet.
If they had the slightest clue of what they were talking about, they wouldn't need to memorize their lines. Intelligent people can speak ad lib.

this is literally the opposite of how academic philosophy works, a stageman comes up with interesting and new ideas to captivate the normies with handwaving; Schopenhauer invented his philosophical position in his twenties and defended it his whole life.

Attached: 1521958013390s.jpg (250x233, 4K)

Defended it with the same exact lines and words he used before? Time and again? Exactly? No, he didn't.
If speeches were books, they would have written the same book hundreds of times. It's not a new book. It's not even worth going to their events if they are going to repeat a speech I just watched on Youtube.

>they wouldn't need to memorize their lines.
>Intelligent people can speak ad lib.

Looks like somebody has never spoken in public multiple times. Lol, who would even want to hear you speak?
Nobody memorizes the lines, simply once you say something once it's very easy to say it again in a similar fashion. A few more times you say the same thing, and you fall into a pattern.

But why the fuck would you spend so much time watching those "hacks" that you know everything they say? Autism? NEET? All of the above?

if Peterson was able to present any sort of comprehension of the subject matter it might have developed into a very interesting conversation, instead Peterson pretty much asked for a live Zizek meme compilation and he ended up loving it.

Attached: 1555748248174.png (549x2020, 724K)

autistic but still hilarious, have another (You)

kek

he said shit i never heard him say and i've seen a lof of his bs. stop being so sad&mad and read a book

OP absolutely devastated

welp

Attached: agony.png (128x125, 31K)

Please say sneedposting isn't leaking out of Yea Forums. For the love of God, please, no.

Attached: 1550686208373.jpg (395x346, 23K)

formerly chuck's

Oh boy. The irony.
Schopenhauer called Hegel a charlatan for doing the same shit.

This. "But Marxism is a grand narrative!" When Lyotard himself said he pulled most of that book out of his ass and admitted it was terrible. Pomo was largely a prank that went too far when angloids took it seriously.

Peterson himself points out this discrepancy all the time. The worst thing about the debate is the utter brainletism demonstrated by those commenting on it, there's not a trace of the principle of charity in argument which would help commenters tremendously in not looking retarded.

marxism is literally "everything has been building up to the grand battle between the rich and the poor!!!! the poor will win said battle!!!!!!!!! eventually!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" how is that not a grand narrative?

youtube.com/watch?v=jlTggc0uBA8
Welcome to popularity contest known as democracy; where poor collective memory serves cancerous behavior.

youtube.com/watch?v=6q7D3uM93Es

Attached: 1538783232760m.jpg (876x506, 273K)

fucking based

You should have made it a collage of past vs present, now it's boring and lame.

unconstrainedanalytics.org/report-re-remembering-the-mis-remembered-left-the-lefts-strategy-and-tactics-to-transform-america/

You saying Deleuze wasn't a materialist? Where's your proof pomo is rebranded Idealism?
I'm saying Lyotard's formulation is not definitive and it's even pretty much self-contradictory.

>be incapable of judgingo the substance of someone's position
>find a superficial nitpick X
>"pfft i don't listen to people who X, they're just not intelligent enough for me"
very good user, i bet you're great at tricking normies into thinking you're clever. but you picked the wrong X this time because some people here might have seen the inside of a university and therefore know what a lecture is.

I don't think you understand what an NPC is

Attached: 1554677418005.gif (179x259, 714K)

You are without a doubt the most collosal retard ive ever come across in this board, its shocking. Slavoj has dozens of books about a range of topics, all based on his own phiosophical system. In public he is trying to give people an introduction of this so they can understand his books, this is how academic philosophy works in the 1 in a million chance it gets popular. What next, are all proffesors npcs because they give 10 identical lectures every week? Beyond a fucking moron.

t. seething Zizek.
Probably really is. I don't see why you would be this upset unless you had a stake in this. Either that or you're profoundly mentally ill. But those aren't mutually exclusive. That's a given if you're Zizek in the first place. Zizek has motor tics, grimaces, disturbed manner of speech, all indicating SEVERE mental illness. I look at him, I don't see a cocaine fiend or drug user as people think with le sniff; I see someone who is sick in the head, and would have been better off medicated and put to manual labor than entertaining his delusions on the stage. He doesn't offer anything valuable. He surrounds himself around obtuse philosophies that's easy to pseud your way around, Hegel to Schelling to Lacan (the biggest hack of them all). The net result is a Frankenstein bastardization of all of them.
Next time, try being more original instead of memorizing your lines like a puppet. Sorry you can't hold your own here. Maybe if you weren't an quirky EEOC nutjob case, you would have fallen into obscurity where you belong. This whole thread has clearly irritated you, Slavoj. Most professors are midwits but I'll give them credit for not memorizing their lines word-for-word like parrots. But then again who am I? I'm a colossal moron compared to Monsieur Professor Slavoj Zizek, esteemed author of "dozens of books", 'all based on his own philosophical system'. If this really is you Zizek, I give you ten years before you're institutionalized at a psychiatric facility where you belong. Really great minds see through your pseudery, and you cannot handle it when they do. You'll get no pats on the back from midwit undergrad pseuds here.

Attached: nutcase.png (504x892, 766K)

Serious question: is Peterson a postmodernist philosopher?

Attached: richard-moult-after-the-rapture.jpg (2797x3939, 3.3M)

I think he technically has a grand narrative and I've heard postmodernism rejects that sort of thing but I'm no expert. Arguably he's not even a philosopher

he is the example of a postmodern philosopher (NOT a postmodernist). he is concerned with creating a particular appearance and spectacle rather than an engagement with philosophy

he's a self-help author who maybe did something vaguely academic 20 years ago.

He's famous for not wanting to call a bunch of hermies "it" instead of "he/she" and attained internet notoriety.
he makes lots of money on patreon.

This.

actually, steamed hams