Zizek in New Scientist

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Aug 31 2010 16:15
Zizek in New Scientist

I have close to zero interest in Zizek 'the people's philosopher', but he's in New Scientist this week, and I know bellends like Revol like him
full interview here

sabot's picture
sabot
Offline
Joined: 21-06-08
Aug 31 2010 16:40
Quote:
"the man they call the most dangerous philosopher in the west"

grin

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 31 2010 18:13

Nobody called Zizek the most dangerous philosopher in the west:

Adam Kirsch wrote:
Pity is not one of the qualities one associates with Slavoj Zizek, whose radicalism runs more towards fantasies of purgative violence. But in a recent interview with The Times of India, he indulged in at least a little pity for himself, complaining that “now they say I am the most dangerous philosopher in the West. But I don’t care.” He was referring, I presume, to an article I wrote in The New Republic in the fall of 2008—though, to be a stickler about it, the cover line for that article called him the most despicable philosopher in the West.
Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Aug 31 2010 20:55

I'm not familiar with his work, but that interview really wasn't all that bad imo.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Aug 31 2010 21:00

Yep the interview was decent, and he's correct to talk about the dangers of the likes of Craig Venter.
His final bit about Gould and exaptations was sloppy and probably best left out or qualified, but otherwise a grand interview, and interesting.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Aug 31 2010 21:02
revol68 wrote:
Yorkie Bar wrote:
I'm not familiar with his work, but that interview really wasn't all that bad imo.

I thought it was pretty bland but then it was a short interview.

You should read his 'First As Tragedy, Then As Farce' or 'Welcome To The Desert Of The Real', they're quite short, accessible and I pretty funny in parts.

I have threatened to actually read some Zizek before, and given how straightforward and un-wanky that interview was it's still within the realm of possibility.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Aug 31 2010 21:17

straightforward and un-wanky? Are you on crack?

Quote:
What if reality itself is rather like a computer game where what goes on inside houses has not been programmed because it was not needed in the game? What if it is, in some sense, incomplete?

BIG METAPHYSICAL QUESTIONS.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Aug 31 2010 21:26

Liberals are too feminine. We need to alienate ourselves from nature. Are you shocked yet?

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Aug 31 2010 21:32
revol68 wrote:
and like I've said before it's an interview, if you want to actually criticise his theories you should at least read some of his texts or maybe even a good introduction.

Jesus fuck, you're like that simpleton who keeps saying that you gotta read Hakim Bey's works before you can like criticize anything about him.
I'm just talking about this here interview that Choccy linked to, not his amazing "theories," and the interview is the old "take the stereotypical liberal view and say the exact opposite" shtick, then mumble something about "reality" and presto! you got zizeked.

sabot's picture
sabot
Offline
Joined: 21-06-08
Sep 1 2010 01:10
Noa Rodman wrote:
Nobody called Zizek the most dangerous philosopher in the west

Except in the article Choccy just posted.