It develops like French cuisine. 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. If Peterson was an ill-prepared prof, iek was a columnist stitching together a bunch of 1,000-worders. The size and scope of his fame registers more or less exactly the loathing for identity politics in the general populace, because it certainly isnt on the quality of his books that his reputation resides. Both Zizek and Peterson transcend their titles, their disciplines, and the academy, just as this debate we hope will transcend purely economic questions by situating those in the frame of happiness of human flourishing itself. Peterson is neither a racist nor a misogynist. Two Teams Per Debate Argue For Opposing Positions On An Issue. It felt like that. All these antagonisms concern what Marx called commons the shared substance of our social being. The first one agreed that capitalism possessed inherent contradictions. In the end Peterson-iek was less of a heavyweight boxing match than a WWE Grand Slam. This is again not a moral reproach. It's quite interesting, but it's not But, nonetheless, deeply divided. Get counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday. This is why egalitarianism itself should never be accepted at its face value. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. MeToo is all too often a genuine protest filtered through resentment. Are you also ready to affirm that Hitler was our enemy because his story was not heard? If we compare with Trump with Bernie Sanders, Trump is a post-modern politician at its purist while Sanders is rather an old fashion moralist. 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. Who could? Web november 12, 2022 advertisement the nigerian factcheckers . So, you know the market is already limited but not in the right way, to put it naively. In that part of the discussion, you say that you calling yourself a Communist is a bit of a provocation . We are spontaneously really free. But when youve said that, youve said everything. If we are left to ourselves, if everything is historically conditioned and relative, then there is nothing preventing us from indulging in our lowest tendencies. ", "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. agreement (as well they should, adopting neither deluded far-left or far-right His12 Rules For Lifeis a global bestseller and his lectures and podcasts are followed by millions around the world. Come here for focussed discussion and debate on the Giant of Ljubljana, Slavoj iek and the Slovenian school of psychoanalytically informed philosophy. His thoughts on social constructionism vs evolutionary psychology (comparing At one point, he made a claim that human hierarchies are not determined by power because that would be too unstable a system, and a few in the crowd tittered. It was billed as a meeting of titans and that it was not. [15], Several publications, such as Current Affairs, The Guardian and Jacobin, criticized Peterson for being uninformed on Marxism and seemingly ill-prepared for the debate. Cookie Notice The tone of the debate was also noted to be very It seems that our countries are run relatively well, but is the mess the so-called rogue countries find themselves in not connected to how we interact with them? This Was An Interesting Debate. And we should act in a large scale, collective way. and our interesting because of it. I would like to refer to a classic Daniel Bell, Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism written back in 1976, where the author argues that the unbounded drive of modern capitalism undermines the moral foundations of the original protestant ethics. 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 . 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. ) Born in France, Delphine Minoui lived in Tehran for 10 years to understand her grandparents country from the inside. The turn towards culture as a key component of capitalist reproduction and concurrent to it the commodification of cultural life itself are I think crucial moments of capitalism expanded reproduction. Not that I was disappointed. Below is the transcript of zizek's introductory statement. Peterson blamed cultural Marxism for phenomena like the movement to respect gender-neutral pronouns which, in his view, undermines freedom of speech. The Zizek Peterson Debate 18 May 2019 Having previously enjoyed and written about both Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson, I was interested to learn they'd have a debate. 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. [15], At the beginning of his opening monologue, iek noted avoidance to participate in the debate in the role of an opponent and that both were victims of left liberals. Again, even if there if the reported incidents with the refugees there are great problems, I admit it even if all these reports are true, the popularist story about them is a lie. This page was last edited on 12 August 2019, at 11:41. Elements of a formal debate. Peterson and Zizek Debate - transcribed by John Li - johnmhli@berkeley.edu - 916 623 5512 - https://chicago.academia.edu/JohnLi - // I used both voice to text software and then a manual read through - there are still plenty of transcription errors I haven't caught and corrected (I didn't expect this to come out to be over 20 pages and how The Peterson-iek encounter was the ultra-rare case of a debate in 2019 that was perhaps too civil. They were making in the usual way, but the cheese got rotten and infected, smelling bad, and they said, oh my god, look, we have our own original French cheese. Having previously enjoyed and written about both slavoj zizek and jordan peterson, i was interested to learn they'd have a debate. I will correct more when I get more time but I need to get back to work. 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. consist just in searching for happiness, no matter how much we spiritualise Scientific data seems, to me at least, abundant enough. Book deals for political prisoners still in jail. First, a brief introductory remark. In this sense of playing with traditional values of mixing references to them with open obscenities, Trump is the ultimate post-modern president. They do not have an answer to the real problems that face us: the environment and the rise of China as a successful capitalist state without democracy. No his conservatism is a post-modern performance, a gigantic ego trip. Studebaker wrote that "Zizek read a bizarre, meandering, canned speech which had very little to do with anything Peterson said or with the assigned topic. It can be watched on Jordan Peterson's channel here. I call this the tankie-bashing bit. 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 Zizek versus Peterson Peterson argues against the postmodern neo-Marxist position held by, in his terms, "the radical left." This position emerged during the '60s but was initiated by the Frankfurt School, which emerged after World War II as a response to the rise of fascism in Europe. But precisely due to the marketing, As soon as jordan peterson announced he. I think a simple overview of the situation points in the opposite direction. But there was one truly fascinating moment in the evening. Not only are we not allowed cheap excuses for not doing our duty, duty itself should not serve as an excuse. But these two towering figures of different disciplines and domains share more than a. commitment to thinking itself. The paper contains almost no references to any other texts, either by Marx or by other socialist thinkers. All such returns are today a post-modern fake. Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate on the concept of Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism. Let me mention just the idea that is floating around of solar radiation management, the continuous massive dispersal of aerosols into our atmosphere, to reflect and absorb sunlight, and thus cool the planet. manifesto, which he'd re-read for the occasion. I'd say his criticism is Through this renouncing of their particular roots, multi-cultural liberals reserve for themselves the universal position: gracefully soliciting others to assert their particular identify. Second on how modernity is characterized by the absence of authority (and 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? In totalitarian states, competencies are determined politically. Posted on August 20, 2021 by David Roman. They dont mention communism to legitimise their rule, they prefer the old Confucian notion of a harmonious society. Maybe that's why last night I finally caved and watched Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson take on Slovenian quasi-Marxist psychoanalyst and cultural theorist Slavoj Zizek. Now, let me give you a more problematic example in exactly the same way, liberal critics of Trump and alt-right never seriously ask how our liberal society could give birth to Trump. Billed as "The Debate of the Century", its official title was "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism". 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. his remarks, he starts telling a Slovenian joke, then after the first sentence Hegels motto Evil resides in the gaze which sees evil everywhere fully applies here. (Chinas success makes a joke out of the whole premise of the debate: the old-fashioned distinction between communism and capitalism.) They seemed to believe that the academic left, whoever that might be, was some all-powerful cultural force rather than the impotent shrinking collection of irrelevances it is. We are never just instruments of some higher cause. "[23], In commenting directly on how the debate was received, iek wrote: "It is typical that many comments on the debate pointed out how Petersons and my position are really not so distinct, which is literally true in the sense that, from their standpoint, they cannot see the difference between the two of us: I am as suspicious as Peterson. What if secretly they know she would kill her child again. However, I would like to add here a couple of qualifications. Believers call him God the Father. But can God be called a man? The 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 Slavoj iek, considering Happiness: Capitalism vs Marxism in Toronto. Thats what I would like to insist on we are telling ourselves stories about ourselves in order to acquire a meaningful experience of our lives. 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. Should we then drop egalitarianism? critcial theorists that were widely read. The very premise of tonight's event is that we all participate in the life of, thought. Really? what the debate ended up being. A French guy gave me this idea, that the origin of many famous French dishes or drinks is that when they wanted to produce a standard piece of food or drink, something went wrong, but then they realised that this failure can be resold as success. Peterson and Zizek Debate - transcribed by John Li - johnmhli@berkeley.edu - 916 623 5512 - https://chicago.academia.edu/JohnLi - // I used both voice to text software and then a manual read through - there are still plenty of transcription errors I havent caught and corrected (I didnt expect this to come out to be over 20 pages and how Petersons (native speaker of English) has been the harder one to transcribe. 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. Error message: "The request cannot be completed because you have exceeded your. statement. squarely throws under the bus as failed. intellectuals). His Error type: "Forbidden". Please feel free to correct this document. And sure, the level of the discussion might have been unappealing to all the live commentary is quite funny. 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 . A good criticism is the one made by Benjamin Studebaker. sticking to "his camp", but I feel like the resulting discussing ended up more And I also think this may be critical to some of you there is a problem with capitalism here for the simple reasons that its managers not because of their evil nature, but thats the logic of capitalism care to extend self-reproduction and environmental consequences are simply not part of the game. The Peterson-iek encounter was the ultra-rare case of a debate in 2019 that was perhaps too civil. vastly different backgrounds). Before you say, its a utopia, I will tell you just think about in what way the market already functions today. [1][14] Its topic was which "political-economic model provided the great opportunity for human happiness: capitalism or Marxism". And I must agree. [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. Everything was permitted to them as they perceived themselves as direct instrument of their divinity of historical necessity, as progress towards communism. 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. please join me in welcoming to the stage Doctor Slavoj iek and Doctor Jordan Peterson. No. [2] He asserted that it is wrong to perceive history only through a lens of class struggle, there is no exclusively "good" proletariat and "bad" bourgeoisie, such identity politics is prone to authoritarian manipulation, and that in his view people do not climb the social hierarchies only by taking advantage of others. it's made of many idea nuggets only tenuously linked to one other although A warm welcome to all of you here this evening, both those here in the, theatre in Toronto and those following online. Far from pushing us too far, the Left is gradually losing its ground already for decades. 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. So, how to act? Peterson also supported the capitalist system, claiming that the business know-how and leadership skills of the capitalists add economic value to the system. Although even the Dalai Lama justifies Tibetan Buddhism in Western terms in the full suite of happiness and the avoidance of pain, happiness as a goal of our life is a very problematic notion.