What, exactly, did they mean by this?

Why did he leave out Bataille?

It means you shld read Graham Harman's introduction to Heidegger instead.

For Deleuze & Foucault use Todd Mays

>Zizek
Ok guys, all memes aside is this guy valid?
Any Youtube lecture or something I can check out to get into his philosophy?

I'm telling you right now, grabbing both your shoulders and looking right into your eyes, yes, Zizek is worth studying. Yes, he is a brilliant thinker and speaker. Yes, he will enrich your life in ways that nothing else that exists can or will.

But the one thing I have to tell you is. There are prerequisites to him. Big ones. All of Western philosophy big, I mean. You will get a lot of cool ideas from his talks, but you don't really understand him until you do the work. That's just how it is.

Remember this post.

Should I start with the Bible?
best post I've read all year

For reading Žižek biggest prerequisites are Hegel and Lacan, so once you know enough philosophy to read these two, and after you read them, your are prepared for serious Žižek.

Žižek is considered in some circles a meme, due to his less serious videos and interviews (in which he likes to to provoke, makes dirty jokes, etc etc), but his serious work (so actual books and serious articles) are the state of the art of psychoanalsys (especially Lacanian) today.

>Lacan
My professor spoke about him tangentially while analyzing Nietzsche's The Gay Science
>Hegel
I know about him what I studied in high school
Still, are there some Youtube interviews or conferences in particular that I can check out?

Well watch his videos (any videos), but be aware that he isn't serious in them (he is still tackling serious thematics though). Before his books you will have to study at least Lacan quite in depth, and both Lacan and Hegel are considered notoriously hard, due to complexity of topic they cover & both building upon European tradition. Before Hegel study at least Kant, before Lacan Freud, Heidegger, Hegel, Kant, ... and get good companion books.

But it's worth it. Good luck.

Paradoxically good intruduction to Lacan is "How to read Lacan" by Žižek, mainly because he explains Lacan in simpler terms, instead of building on him his own philosophy as usual.

So my advice is read about Hegel, maybe even try to read his Phenomenology of the spirit if you fell prepared enough, then How to read Lacan and then directly to Žižek. You will have to google some terms he uses, since this method will leave you some gaps in knowledge, but it is the fastest way.

>his serious work
>the state of the art of psychoanalsys (especially Lacanian)

That's why he can't be take seriously and not because his videos or jokes. He's just another Althusser.

Lol not, did you even read him?

Is it because they're mostly irrelevant in Anglo-American Phil departments?

Yes. I didn't say his philosophy is the same as Althusser's (I expected you to be more... "alive"). He is _like_ Althusser, which means: another leftist antimarxist intellectual disguised as marxist who don't add anything to philosophy but he's just a trend and usually appearing in social media, lectures, universities, etc. Kinda like a guru for western leftists.

I couldn't be more clear now.

I know him personally. His ex bf was a lacanian and now he hates them with a passion. He even stopped talking to me because I like both Lacan and Heidegger hahah

If you only read the geniuses, and not what goes around them you will never understand them.

People like Zizek are very good in re-focusing problems and showing us what some thinkers (like Lacan and Hegel) were all about.

Zizek is much more serious than his articles and his putting Hegel back in the map after the disregard of Nietzscheans and Analytic philosophers is an achievement.

As an interpreter of Hegel he is also fair, Pippin even doesn't dislike him.

This is the best and most serious introduction to Zizek:

iep.utm.edu/zizek/

im 100% ok with this but i bet i'd hate the person for whom this twitter account belongs

damn, who is this?

bukowski is utter garbage, avoid

>this WE WUZian view of history

Discarded.

>If you only read the geniuses, and not what goes around them

How do you know what I read?

>you will never understand them

Now you are not only interest in psychoanalysis but also in reading minds

>showing us what some thinkers (like Lacan and Hegel) were all about.

How about actually reading those authors? I think there's some crazy people who do that.

>his putting Hegel back in the map after the disregard of Nietzscheans and Analytic philosophers is an achievement.

His not the first. I remember some countries (specially one huge former country) were Hegel was spread, and that's why analytic and nietzscheans were supported and so popular in USA and Western Europe.

But ok. We can give him the credit of bringing back Hegel (althought it has to be examinated what he says about it/how he uses him in his philosophy).

>As an interpreter of Hegel he is also fair

I don't really remember deeply this topic, so being honest I cannot talk about this right know. But I have other great references for explaining Hegel or being hegelian and developing a philosophical system, so this doesn't mean much for me.

I have to go back to work.

What's wrong with Badiou?

>How about actually reading those authors? I think there's some crazy people who do that

That what I meant by reading only geniuses. I studied philosophy and the ones who refused to read commentaries and histories and minor philosophers are the one me who regularly misunderstood the big philosophers.

It's a classic hermeneutics point: for comprehension you require pre-comprehension.

Reading Heidegger is impossible, reading Gadamer is ok, but Gadamer makes Heidegger easy.

He aged too well, so everyone is envious

You have suggestions for companions and histories for some of the "big" philosophers?

Ex: Heidegger, Nietzsche, Kant, Hegel, etc

Cassirer's biography of Kant is a very good introduction. But all of Cassirer history of philosophy is very good.

Hegel Kojeve, Hyppolite and Pippin are the best stuff I've read.

On Nietzsche and Heidegger I have read a lot of Gianni Vattimo but not sure how much of that is translated in english. Gadamer is a greater thinker that practically recycles all of Heidegger insights in more accessible, and occasionally superficials, insights.
Also for absolute beginners Steiner wrote a small and agile book on Heidegger. It's his interpretation of Heidegger and not always the most scholarly, but again it's a good introduction.

Lacan Fink's Lacanian Subject is the best introduction and Roudinesco's Biography is very fun.

Hope this helps.

He's a Maoist in 2017.

the retard probably considers them too "problematic" or whatever

As I said worse: it's his private vengeance to his ex bf.

that badiou character is some manner of communist, so really, it's a sound practice to discourage his writing