>>9524179

At the very least I'd like to hear what Zizek has to say about Peterson.

He will be 78 in 10 years. at least he is being realistic

>15 minutes of snorting and picking on his shirt

How about he writes about it instead

yeah *sniff* that works too

I don't get "debates". Its always just people talking through each other.

Certainly. And vice versa
I think, if they found much significant conflict, Peterson would be better as criticizing the general meta-beliefs of Zizek and Zizek would be better at tackling the foundational specifics that prop Peterson's beliefs up. That seems to be where their strengths each lie

Maybe, but they can still say some really interesting shit anyways. Mainly I just want some help exploring the relationship between two belief systems I find interesting

Don't delude yourself into thinking that he's anywhere relevant enough just because /pol/tards spam him over and over around here.

He should be though. He has some highly relevant ideas and, although it ventures into self-help territory, really great advice for the modern aimless youth

The people you see spamming him either don't actually share /pol/'s common views or don't understand/don't actually listen to his work

>ventures
lol

Maybe not the perfect use of that word but "wanders" doesn't fit what I was trying to say

>tfw you die in Zizek's lifetime

"borders on self-help," there you go

>borders on
lol

You aren't the smartest one, are you?

Are you not familiar what phrase? Do you only read dictionaries or something?

This is sad so I will help you out: that's not what I was getting at. But it's nice to have a confirmation that his fanbase is made of morons like I've suspected.

Says the man who is under the impression that acting cryptic and devious makes him appear smart to everyone else

How convenient for you that you were able to deduce that without addressing a single belief or position

Other user here, nothing cryptic about that post.

I understand that he was implying that Peterson is 100% self help but he did it in the most obnoxious way imaginable

Try watching one of his videos, maybe he will help you out with your hurt feelings.

You have ten seconds to start jogging before I floss your teeth with a tire iron, cowboy

he was saying that peterson is legit self help and doesnt just border on it, which is true. peterson is a psychologist and if you knew anything about a lot of the things he talks about, you'd realize that he spouts flagrantly incorrect nonsense. im pretty sure his book is a joke in the academic community as well, but i haven't read it. listening to him talk about nietzsche is certainly funny, though. not so good if you'd like to learn, but if you wanna pop off the shoes and have a giggle after work, the talks are great.

>flagrantly incorrect nonsense.
Examples? Not doubting at all, honestly asking

>having others carry that weight

Oh and before you answer, I'm well aware of his shaky grasp of post-modernism vs post-structuralism and what they both are at their base.

What about psychology specifically is he wrong about?

Not that guy but his posts about Godel's incompleteness theorems were hilarious.

On his Twitter? That thing is a disaster, I have no interest in it. The man doesn't know much about conduct online

A pants on head retarded opinion is still a pants on head retarded opinion.

True enough, good point. In one lecture he started actually saying that the forces of the universe somehow reward you for honesty. I lost a good chunk of respect for him after that one

sorry, on my phone so messages are hard. i dont think hes not taken seriously in the psychologist academic community. hes a professional there. but he tends, very frequently, to give opinions outside of psychology. and thats where he makes an error.

i didnt mean to imply hes not a professional in psychology. his advice is probably good! sleep, exercise, have a routine, have friends, etc.

but his philosophy is pretty awful. you can google search it i think. sorry that i cant give an adequate answer, but it took me like 5 minutes to type this.

academics with dumb opinions on things outside their fields is not rare, but its quite bad when he has such a rabid fanbase and he kinda just misinforms them.

Ah okay, I see what you meant. He does end up looking foolish at times when he steps too far out of his expertise but I think philosophy (more of a psychoanalytic theory) is pretty damn solid and coherent

>to efficiently cooperate, humans sacrifice individuality for "rules" which can manifest in culture, manners, customs, actual rules for games, etc
>these mutually agreed upon rules allow you to somewhat accurately predict and map out the behavior of others, even people you haven't met (pretty much Hobbes' social contract)
>men who rise to the top of any given "game" using these rules are more likely to be selected by females and reproduce
>this process has been used in a form since the beginning of life, and has lead the most bare essence of these rules becoming biologically ingrained in us through selective breeding, which has manifested in the base notion of morality we see even in other species
>we as humans develop, process, and pass on these rules through story telling and religion, which essentially help us understand how to act and why in ways we can't articulate

I'm not doing it great justice but I see it as a perfectly useful way of thinking about morality and culture

*his philosophy

>he's not relevant because my feefees say so
>also /pol/ seems to like him. so he must be bad!
How does it feel to be a retarded troglodyte?

>he isn't relevant because only /pol/ posts him
ftfy

Also, hi /pol/

/pol/ is not the only one posting him
I'm glad you believe that though. Must make it easy to dismiss him without much effort

I know it and your initial post definitely confirms it.

Listen rough man, how about I come down there and knock you around a little bit? Introduce your leg bones to my good friend cinderblock?

That isn't true, but like I said, you're a retarded troglodyte.

I understand that you are desperate to stay relevant on this board in some way /pol/, but sadly it is.

what the fuck did you just fucking say about me

Good. Let the pussy die just like his beloved communism.

I'm gonna grab my cat o' nine tails and whip ye in the head, partner

Which head? ;)

when I'm through with ye you won't be able to tell, compadre

>anything that gets posted by people I don't like is wrong

consider suicide you worthless flesh bag

I see, not only are you a retarded troglodyte, but you're also a redditor. Well, I have some unfortunate news for you, but Veeky Forums isn't your echo chamber, nor is it your ideological battleground. I recommend leaving.

>reddit
Your containment board is showing again. I'm not surprised that paterson's fans don't even have the mental prowess to conceal the fact that they are crossposters from that shithole.

Keep fighting the good fight, brother.

why are you posting that polack "journalist"? he's been totally exposed as a liar that made up all his "journalism". did you actually think that shit was real?

>no sublime object of ideology
>no ticklish subject
pls pick better žižu books

lmao zizek would cuck this hack

lmao this place has become so fucking braindead

It's a fucking starting guide you mong. If you really would start the average reader with the ticklish subject, you're probably a sperg.

>not respecting Debord and Pasolini

C'mon yo

>tfw can't decide if I want Žižy to survive to see the apocalypse or to be spared that terror

Sav'd

Reminder that Zizek is a hack fraud and confirmed plagiarist.

withendemanndom.blogspot.com/2014/07/slavoj-zizek-philosophaster-and_9.html

Žižek stopped having original thoughts years ago. He's just repeating himself all the time now, might as well be dead already.

where does Elon Musk talk about capitalism? I can't find this anywhere

This is dumb, best books to start with are Looking Awry or Sublime Object of Ideology.

>marxist
>anti-capitalist
>"Once more into the famine, dear comrades, once more."

>tfw you will die in the Zizek timeline

Debord is dead though. I was referring to those who are alive. I actually liked Debord too. I've never heard of Pasolini though.

The fact that it's not mentioned in this thread that he basically talks about /pol/ around minute 30 makes me think nobody actually watched this

I think it's fairly clear that broken hearted people like Zizek and Land know about Veeky Forums and probably lurk many boards. Some of them probably even troll right here, and I bet Zizek made many a post about Soros on /pol/ just to see what happens.

not really, /pol/ has projected itself out onto the entire internet by this point. You don''t need to go read the blueprint to observe the house it has built.

While this is true, I still believe many of them [sort of celebrities?] came in here before the Trump election and other major happenings. To be fair though, the only one I'm 90% sure of is Nick Land, he just reeks of this place.

There would be no debate. Peterson is an absolute fraud.

lol no. zizek is absurdly productive: endless lectures and tv appearances, several new books every year etc. it's precisely because he's not active online that this is possible. he's from an older generation that actually pours their frustrations and anxieties into actual work instead of just uselessly dissipating them into online shitposting and video games.