talking about wherever he felt like that was tenuously related rather than Aquella vez me parecieron ms slidos los argumentos del primero. The debate, titled "Happiness: Marxism vs. Capitalism," pitted Jordan Peterson against Slavoj iek, two of the West's reigning public intellectuals. [5] He also criticized Peterson's discussion of "cultural Marxism", stating that "his crazy conspiracy theory about LGBT+ rights and #MeToo as the final offshoots of the Marxist project to destroy the West is, of course, ridiculous. people consumed the debate. In this short passage, which is dropped as quickly as it is picked up by Zizek, you have what's at the center of an entire intellectual life, a life devoted to formalizing a new and unorthodox. T. S. Eliot, the great conservative, wrote, quote what happens when a new work of art is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the work of art which preceded it. Email: mfedorovsky@gmail.com Resumen: La presente colaboracin es una resea sobre el debate llevado a cabo entre los intelectuales de izquierda y derecha, The past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past end of quote. The paper contains a long digression about all the reasons the Soviet Union was terrible. so that ultimately the worst thing that can happen is to get what we In Peterson's defense, he did manage to stay much closer to the actual topic of the debate, while Zizek jumped wildly between a dizzying number of subjects. iek & Peterson Debate . Hundreds of millions raised from poverty into middle class existence. You know, its not very often that you see a country's, largest theatre packed for an intellectual debate, but that's what we're all here for tonight. This is I think now comes the problematic part for some of you maybe the problem with political correctness. a.Teams are iterating, but the system is not b.Conflict and disagreement on processes and practices are difficult to, Program Increment (PI) Planning is a major event that requires preparation, coordination, and communication. Let me now briefly deal with in a friendly way I claim with what became known sorry for the irony as the lobster topic. Zizek Peterson Debate Transcript. Web nov 14, 2022. One of the most stupid wisdoms and theyre mostly stupid is An enemy is just a story whose story you have not heard. The first and sadly predominate reaction is the one of protected self-enclosure The world out there is in a mess, lets protect ourselves by all sorts of walls. Still, that criticism would be salutary for most "communists" Of course, we are also natural beings, and our DNA as we all know overlaps I may be wrong around 98% with some monkeys. Thats the big of ideologies how to make good, decent people do horrible things. It's quite interesting, but it's not The rest of the debate was (if memory serves) also interesting, but it gets even Zizek will suit up for Team M and Peterson will wear the "C" on his hometown jersey. divinity) that could impose meaning from above, and how it's impossible to go Elements of a formal debate. And we should act in a large scale, collective way. squarely throws under the bus as failed. (Chinas success makes a joke out of the whole premise of the debate: the old-fashioned distinction between communism and capitalism.) There are two teams, each consisting of two or three speakers. No his conservatism is a post-modern performance, a gigantic ego trip. My hero is here a black lady, Tarana Burke, who created the #MeToo campaign more than a decade ago. He said things like Marx thought the proletariat was good and the bourgeoisie was evil. Let me mention the change enacted by Christianity. This is why egalitarianism itself should never be accepted at its face value. No. 2 define the topic, if . It can be watched on Jordan Peterson's channel here. statement. I can see no threat to free creativity in this program on the contrary, I saw health care and education and so on as enabling me to focus my life on important creative issues. It made me wonder about the rage consuming all public discussion at the moment: are we screaming at each other because we disagree or because we do agree and we cant imagine a solution? yardstick: In our daily lives, we pretend to desire things which we do not really desire, First, a brief introductory remark. Hitler provided a story, a plot, which was precisely that of a Jewish plot: we are in this mess because of the Jews. But there was one truly fascinating moment in the evening. In such times of urgency, when we know we have to act but dont know how to act, thinking is needed. The statement has some interesting ideas though, including the statement that What appears as its excesses its regulatory zeal is I think an impotent reaction that masks the reality of a defeat. officially desire. Most of the attacks on me are from left-liberals, he began, hoping that they would be turning in their graves even if they were still alive. Other than that, multiple commentators (one, two) pointed that the "Debate He acknowledged that unrestricted capitalism can cause its own problems and tends to make the rich richer, but to him the poor are also better off financially under such an arrangement. Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. This one is from the Guardian. he event was billed as the debate of the century, The Rumble in the Realm of the Mind, and it did have the feel of a heavyweight boxing match: Jordan Peterson, local boy, against the slapdash Slovenian, Jordan Peterson, Canadian psychology professor and author. It also helps to put Zizek's ideas and role in modern political discussion in . meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival. And here applies the same logic to Christ himself. Through this renouncing of their particular roots, multi-cultural liberals reserve for themselves the universal position: gracefully soliciting others to assert their particular identify. Blackwood. Ideology, Logos & Belief with Transliminal Media . Happiness is a confused notion, basically it relies on the subjects inability or unreadiness to fully confront the consequences of his / her / their desire. April 20, 2019. Hegels motto Evil resides in the gaze which sees evil everywhere fully applies here. Or, they were making wine in the usual way, then something went wrong with fermentation and so they began to produce champagne and so on. The Hidden Argument in the Zizek/Peterson Debate, From a Competitive Debator | by Timothy Clark | Dialogue & Discourse | Medium 500 Apologies, but something went wrong on our end. Canad. I always thought that neoliberalism is a fake term. If you're curious, here's the timestamp for the joke. Iran is a land of contradictions where oppression and freedom uneasily coexist. Zizek and Peterson sell books for cash, but cash is just what you need for the real prize: the minds of men. In Peterson's defense, he did manage to stay much closer to the actual topic of the debate, while Zizek jumped wildly between a dizzying number of subjects. Reddit and its partners use cookies and similar technologies to provide you with a better experience. [16][17] In a similar fashion, iek asked Peterson to name him personal names of "postmodern neo-Marxists" in Western academia and from where he got the statistical numbers because according to him the over-the-top political correctness is opposed to Marxism, to which Peterson replied that his references are aimed towards ideas that are connected with Marxism and postmodernism as a pheonomenon and not necessarily towards people defining themselves as such. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. They passionately support LGBT, they advocate charities and so on. I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. Its trademarks universal health care, free education, and so on are continually diminished. A debate speech format follows the below pattern. Incidentally, so that you will not think that I do not know what I am talking about, in Communist countries those in power were obsessed with expanded reproduction, and were not under public control, so the situation was even worse. Peterson, in his opening remarks, noted that scalped tickets were selling at higher prices than the Maple Leafs playoff game happening on the other side of town. something wrong was said therein, you ought to engage the content rather than In the end Peterson-iek was less of a heavyweight boxing match than a WWE Grand Slam. That the debate will be live-streamed and more than 1,400 people have already dropped $14.95 for. I see equality as a space for creating differences and yes, why not, even different more appropriate hierarchies. of the Century", its official title was "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism". Peterson stated that although capitalism produces inequalities, it is not like in other systems, or even parts of the world compared to the so-called Western civilization as it also produces wealth, seen in statistical data about the economic growth and reduction of poverty worldwide, providing an easier possibility to achieve happiness. Before you say, its a utopia, I will tell you just think about in what way the market already functions today. And they both agreed, could not have agreed more, that it was all the fault of the academic left. He has published more than three, dozen books, many on the most seminal philosophers of the 19th and 20th centuries. Zizek expressed his agreement with Petersons critique of PC culture, pointing out that he is attacked as much by the Left that he supposedly represents as the right. He doesn't do much to defend Communism So, you know the market is already limited but not in the right way, to put it naively. Book deals for political prisoners still in jail. About No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis "[1][6] According to Matthew Sharpe writing for The Conversation, .mw-parser-output .templatequote{overflow:hidden;margin:1em 0;padding:0 40px}.mw-parser-output .templatequote .templatequotecite{line-height:1.5em;text-align:left;padding-left:1.6em;margin-top:0}, the term 'cultural Marxism' moved into the media mainstream around 2016, when psychologist Jordan Peterson was protesting a Canadian bill prohibiting discrimination based on gender. And Peterson agreed with him: It is not obvious to me that we can solve the problems that confront us. They are both self-described radical pessimists, about people and the world. El inters que suscit dicho encuentro descansa en gran parte en el carisma de sus protagonistas que con relativo xito han sabido posicionarse como rostros mediticos y . [2][16] The monologue itself was less focused as it touched many topics and things like cultural liberalism, Nazism, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Fyodor Dostoevsky, and xenophobia, among others;[2][15] and against the expectation of the debate format did not defend Marxism. Below is the transcript of zizek's introductory statement. Below is the transcript of Zizek's introductory statement. [15][16] On the example of China, he tried to connect happiness, capitalism, and Marxism as well criticize China itself[16] and asserted that "less hierarchical, more egalitarian social structure would stand to produce great amounts of this auxiliary happiness-runoff". Capitalism threatens the commons due to its His comments on one of the greatest feats of human rhetoric were full of expressions like You have to give the devil his due and This is a weird one and Almost all ideas are wrong. The experience that we have of our lives from within, the story we tell ourselves about ourselves, in order to account for what we are doing is and this is what I call ideology fundamentally a lie. Instead they often engage in self-destructive behavior. In this sense, the image of Donald Trump is also a fetish, the last thing a liberal sees before confronting actual social tensions. First of all it's much shorter than Peterson Vs Harris. Competencies for what? His12 Rules For Lifeis a global bestseller and his lectures and podcasts are followed by millions around the world. Capitalism won, but today and thats my claim, we can debate about it the question is, does todays global capitalism contain strong enough antagonisms that prevent its indefinite reproduction. To cite this article: Ania Lian (2019): The Toronto Debate: Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek on Ethics and Happiness, The European Legacy, DOI: 10.1080/10848770.2019.1616901 El debate entre iek y Peterson se produjo en Toronto, Canad. : Just a few words of introduction. But if violence perpetuated in the name of an idea is supposed to disqualify the idea, then more people have died in the name of communism and nationalism than any other idea. We are spontaneously really free. He sees the rejections of some systemic failures of capitalism onto external semi-intentionally quite funny. A good criticism is the one made by Benjamin Studebaker. Peterson opens with a 30-minutes speech where he criticizes the communist I cannot but notice the irony of how Peterson and I, the participants in this duel of the century, are both marginalised by the official academic community. Peterson El debate entre Slavoj iek y Jordan Peterson posmodernismo. [16] Due to lack of defence for Marxism, at one point Peterson asked iek why he associates with this ideology and not his philosophical originality, on which iek answered that he is rather a Hegelian and that capitalism has too many antagonisms for long-term peaceful sustainability. A democracy this logic to the political space in spite of all differences in competence, the ultimate decision should stay with all of us. matters: meaning, truth, freedom. His thoughts on social constructionism vs evolutionary psychology (comparing But I nonetheless found it interesting. I did see the debate of the century, the debate of our century. Kierkegaard, mine and everybodys favourite theologist, wrote If a child says he will obey his father because his father is a competent and good guy, this is an affront to fathers authority. Freedom and responsibility hurt they require an effort, and the highest function of an authentic master is to literally to awake in us to our freedom. increasingly erratic in the rest of the debates. authors with occasional bridges being thrown accross. However, in place of charging a fee and in recognition of the work I put, in, I would strongly ask anybody who found extensive use of it to give a small donation of $5 or more to. ) This page was last edited on 12 August 2019, at 11:41. The people who laugh might do it that way, he replied. But Zizek was too busy complaining about identity politics and his status within academia to try. So, a pessimist conclusion, what will happen? Please note, during tonight's presentation, video, audio, and flash photography is prohibited and we have a strict zero, tolerance policy for any heckling or disruption. So, how to react to this? The controversial thinkers debated happiness, capitalism and Marxism in Toronto. It didn't help Peterson's case that he came into a debate about Marxism with . A warm welcome to all of you here this evening, both those here in the, theatre in Toronto and those following online. Post was not sent - check your email addresses! Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. Peterson's more practically-oriented style also made his arguments a bit more approachable to non-academics. In the Nazi vision, their society is an organic whole of harmonic collaboration, so an external intruder is needed to account for divisions and antagonisms. Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. The true opposite of egotist self-love is not altruism a concern for the common good but envy, resentment, which makes me act against my own interests. knowledgeable about communism. [7], Peterson said he could meet "any time, any place"[1][4][8] to debate and it was announced on 28 February 2019 that the debate was scheduled for 19 April 2019. We have to find some meaningful cause beyond the mere struggle for pleasurable survival. Peterson was an expert on this subject, at least. IQ, Politics, and the Left: A Conversation with Douglas Murray Transcript Nina Paley: Animator Extraordinaire Transcript Aspen Ideas Festival: From the Barricades of the Culture Wars Transcript Bonus: Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zizek on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. In a similar way, the Alt-Right obsession with cultural Marxism expresses the rejection to confront that phenomenon they criticise as the attack of the cultural Marxist plot moral degradation, sexual promiscuity, consumerist hedonism, and so on are the outcomes of the immanent dynamic of capitalist societies. Canadian bill prohibiting discrimination based on gender, "Jordan Peterson, Slavoj Zizek each draw fans at sold-out debate", "The 'debate of the century': what happened when Jordan Peterson debated Slavoj iek", "How Anti-Leftism Has Made Jordan Peterson a Mark for Fascist Propaganda", "There Is No One to Cheer for in the Potential Battle Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek", "Why do people find Jordan Peterson so convincing? ", "Video: Analizirali Smo 'Filozofsku Debatu Stoljea': Pred prepunom dvoranom umove 'ukrstili' iek i Peterson, debata ostavila mlak dojam", "The Jordan PetersonSlavoj iek debate was good for something", "Why Conservatives Get Karl Marx Very, Very Wrong", "What I Learned at the 'Debate' Between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek", "How Zizek Should Have Replied to Jordan Peterson", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Petersoniek_debate&oldid=1142515270, This page was last edited on 2 March 2023, at 21:02. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Forced marriages and homophobia is ok, just as long as they are limited to another country which is otherwise fully included in the world market. Jordan Peterson itching to take on Slavoj Zizek - 'any time, any place' -", "Slavoj Zizek vs. Jordan Peterson: Marxist gewinnt philosophenduell", "Happiness is watching a brawl between iconoclastic philosophers", "Has Jordan Peterson finally gone too far? Other commentators opted for snide, which I think is sad although the linked Key Agile Release Train stakeholders, including Business Owners, What can occur as a result of not having an Innovation and Planning Iteration? Having watched it (video), I regret to inform you it was neither of those The Peterson-iek encounter was the ultra-rare case of a debate in 2019 that was perhaps too civil. Read the full transcript. On Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson: Nature, Culture, and the Displacement of Time. Zizek also pinpointed white liberal multiculturalism as the reason for the Lefts current political woes. His father Joe iek was an economist and civil servant from the I have included my method and aims in a Note at the end of the transcript. Deep underwater, temperatures are close to freezing and the pressure is 1,000 times higher than at sea level. Here refugees are created. It is often claimed that true or not that religion makes some otherwise bad people do good things. Somehow hectoring mobs have managed to turn him into an icon of all they are not. The second threat, the commons of internal nature. It will be certain only it will be too late, and I am well aware of the temptation to engage in precipitous extrapolations. "Qu produce ms felicidad, el marxismo o el capitalismo?". But this divine spark enables us to create what Christians call holy ghost or holy spirit a community which hierarchic family values are at some level, at least, abolished. I am supposed to defend here the left, liberal line against neo-conservatives. His charge against Peterson's argument is followed with how he thinks Zizek Born in France, Delphine Minoui lived in Tehran for 10 years to understand her grandparents country from the inside. There was a livestream which people could pay to access that peaked at around 6,000 viewers. Source: www.the-sun.com. Who could? of the Century" was overhyped (overmarketed, really), and seemed poorly prepared And I claim the same goes for tradition. It has been said of the debate that "nothing is a greater waste of time." Tickets to the livestream are $14.95, and admission to the venue itself was running as high as $1,500. Last nights sold-out debate between Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek and Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson at the Sony Centre was pitched as a no-holds-barred throw down . Its not just that in spite of all our natural and cultural differences the same divine sparks dwells in everyone. SLAVOJ IEK: . They argued whether capitalism or communism would be the best economic and political system. The Master and His Emissary: A Conversation with Dr. Iain McGilchrist Transcript . critcial theorists that were widely read. 2 Piano Mono - moshimo sound design. opinions), and that the debate was cordial, even mutually admirative at times. What qualifies them to pass a judgement in such a delicate matter? (or both), this part is the most interesting. The debate itself was framed as a free-spirited competition, "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism" two ideologies enter the ring, and in a world where we are free to think for ourselves, the true ideology would emerge victorious as 'truth.' The threat of ecological catastrophe, the consequence of new techno-scientific developments, especially in biogenetics, and new forms of apartheid. intellectuals). [9] Billed by some as "the debate of the century",[2] the event had more tickets scalped than the Toronto Maple LeafsBoston Bruins playoff on the same day, and tickets sold on eBay for over $300. They didnt understand what is happening to them with military defeat, economic crisis, what they perceived as moral decay, and so on. [22], Der Spiegel concluded that iek won the debate clearly, describing Peterson as "vain enough to show up to an artillery charge with a pocket knife". This is a pity, because Peterson made an argument I have seen many times, one which is incredibly easy to beat." Copyright 2007-2023 & BIG THINK, BIG THINK PLUS, SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by Freethink Media, Inc. All rights reserved. For transcription of Zizeks first exposition (the actually coherent one I believe), I found that it had already been transcribed on Reddit during my own transcription so I integrated it into this one. This largely contrasts Peterson's viewpoint who admittedly has never used that term to refer in any way to the associated conspiracy theory, but only to raise critique about cultural phenomena that are, according to him, directly associated with postmodern thought. It is todays capitalism that equalizers us too much and causes the loss of many talents. This means something, but nature I think we should never forget this is not a stable hierarchical system but full of improvisations. Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism: the Peterson and iek Debate, I am releasing this transcript free of charge to best facilitate free use discussion of, the debate and the two authors. Remove him from his enemies and he is a very poor example of a very old thing the type of writer whom, from Samuel Smiles Self-Help to Eckhart Tolles The Power of Now, have promised simple answers to complex problems. In the 1920s many Germans experienced their situation as a confused mess. interesting because of it. And, in the new afterword, Bell offers a bracing perspective of contemporary Western societies, revealing the crucial cultural fault lines we face as the 21st century is here. Peterson noted at the outset that he'd set a personal milestone: StubHub tickets to the debate were going for more money than Maple Leafs playoff ticketsa big deal in Toronto. With anti-Semitism, we are approaching the topic of telling stories. All such returns are today a post-modern fake. In intellectual circles, the recent debate of the century between the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson and Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek was a real heavyweight bout. Rules for Life, as if there were such things. The lesson of todays terrorism is that if there is a god then everything even blowing up hundreds of innocent bystanders is permitted to those who claim to act directly on behalf of god. Christ was justified by the fact of being Gods son not by his competencies or capacities, as Kierkegaard put it Every good student of theology can put things better than Christ. Please join. The Peterson-iek debate, officially titled Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism, was a debate between the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson (a clinical psychologist and critic of Marxism) and the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj iek (a psychoanalyst and Hegelian) on the relationship between Marxism, capitalism, and happiness.Moderated by Stephen J. Blackwood, it was held before an . Zizek's opening statement is probably the most interesting part of the debate. I mean primarily so called popularly neural-link, the direct link between our brain and digital machines, and then brains among themselves. There can be few thingsI thinknow more, urgent and necessary in an age of reactionary partisan allegiance and degraded civil discourse than real, thinking about hard questions.