"I'm generally opposed to wisdom" - Slavoj Zizek

[StarStruck]

Zizek is the commercial version of Socrates. 

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

That is why hardcore relativism is a midway point between naive realism and pragmatism. You get hung up in the fact that there aren't absolutes (because you've discovered pluralism and relativism), and absolutes is what the naive realist wants, and you want to critique that, but you sort of forget that it's possible to be pragmatic and choose something that works relatively well, or is relatively wise. But you can't go back to absolutism, so the logical choice is to marry pragmatism with pluralism: take a meta-theoretic approach, see common trends in a large selection of wisdom traditions, and boil it down to the basics (find the "systemic" principles). That is how you re-introduce order and hierarchy in a meta-modern framework, and when it comes to wisdom, that is where concepts like holism and balance come in.

Yep.

[Nilsi]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

That is why hardcore relativism is a midway point between naive realism and pragmatism. You get hung up in the fact that there aren't absolutes (because you've discovered pluralism and relativism), and absolutes is what the naive realist wants, and you want to critique that, but you sort of forget that it's possible to be pragmatic and choose something that works relatively well, or is relatively wise. But you can't go back to absolutism, so the logical choice is to marry pragmatism with pluralism: take a meta-theoretic approach, see common trends in a large selection of wisdom traditions, and boil it down to the basics (find the "systemic" principles). That is how you re-introduce order and hierarchy in a meta-modern framework, and when it comes to wisdom, that is where concepts like holism and balance come in.

What you have just described is not meta-modernism, but modernism.

Meta-modernism is precisely all the new stuff that emerges from this assembly of perspectives, not the common denominators between them.

Your notion of "holism" and "balance" are basically scientific-rationalism.

[Nilsi]

1 hour ago, Gesundheit2 said:

No, he's just a person who is stuck in chronic criticism that turned into a survival strategy. And like most other post-modernists, his philosophy is fruitless. He has no will or initiative. And he is toxic/destructive/pure negative. He does not teach you how to jailbreak your mind, because he has not done that in the first place. He is stuck in his mind, playing games, coming up with nonsense and equating that with wisdom.

So a critic?

The problem is that you speak on things, you know nothing about.

He is not a post-modernist - he is more of a post-structuralist/semiotician - and he has a clear goal, which is subverting the ruling ideology.

Fair, he is not teaching "jailbreaking your mind," but neither are you. His deconstruction and cultural analysis is miles ahead of your naive selective scepticism.

[Carl-Richard]

1 minute ago, Nilsi said:

Meta-modernism is precisely all the new stuff that emerges from this assembly of perspectives, not the common denominators between them.

And what is that?

[Nilsi]

5 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

And what is that?

Paradoxical conceptions like "rational mysticism" or "egaltiarian fascism," that tease out a higher order synthesis - which is much closer to what Zizek does, than to collapsing everything into neuroscience, or whatever the hell youre doing.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Nilsi

[Girzo]

@Nilsi you are sharp today. I agree with your position in this discussion.

[Nilsi]

24 minutes ago, Girzo said:

@Nilsi you are sharp today. I agree with your position in this discussion.

Always am 

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Nilsi said:

So a critic?

A critic has standards and can provide answers and solutions.

1 hour ago, Nilsi said:

He is not a post-modernist - he is more of a post-structuralist/semiotician - and he has a clear goal, which is subverting the ruling ideology.

Destruction is not a goal. It's what happens naturally when you don't have a goal.

1 hour ago, Nilsi said:

Fair, he is not teaching "jailbreaking your mind," but neither are you. His deconstruction and cultural analysis is miles ahead of your naive selective scepticism.

I am no teacher. And I am merely communicating on an online forum. Don't expect me to write essays or do elaborate research on everything I speak about.

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Nilsi said:

Paradoxical conceptions like "rational mysticism" or "egaltiarian fascism," that tease out a higher order synthesis - which is much closer to what Zizek does, than to collapsing everything into neuroscience, or whatever the hell youre doing.

I'm not limiting it to science, no. Also, finding a higher order synthesis is also about taking pluralism and deducing some basic underlying principles. It's just that some syntheses are more summarizing while some are more innovative, but you often have a bit of both (integration vs. emergence, "include" vs. "transcend").

Edited March 19, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Nilsi said:

Paradoxical conceptions like "rational mysticism" or "egaltiarian fascism,"

This is pure nonsense that may only serve as mental masturbation material or clickbait titles.

[Nilsi]

Just now, Carl-Richard said:

It's just that some syntheses are more summarizing while some are more innovative, but you often have a bit of both (emergence vs. integration, "transcend" vs. "include").

So youre collapsing everything into some lowest common denominators. This is literally why Zizek calls this modernist notion of wisdom "conformist." 

What about the 1% on either side of this distribution of syntheses?

1. They get marginalised
2. Evolution works by way of mutations and so quite fundamentally, your own project tells you, that its in that 1% that real progress is found

If you want to play it safe, stay in your modernist paradigm of proving everything beyond a shadow of a doubt - but dont expect exceptional results from that.

[Carl-Richard]

8 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

So youre collapsing everything into some lowest common denominators. This is literally why Zizek calls this modernist notion of wisdom "conformist." 

What about the 1% on either side of this distribution of syntheses?

1. They get marginalised
2. Evolution works by way of mutations and so quite fundamentally, your own project tells you, that its in that 1% that real progress is found

If you want to play it safe, stay in your modernist paradigm of proving everything beyond a shadow of a doubt - but dont expect exceptional results from that.

True. It is comformist, it is safe, not very extreme, not very sexy, not very appealing to testosterone-filled young men.

Evolution works by fitness of the entire genome, not just the mutations. Mutations are often deleterious. There again you see holism at play.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

11 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

True. It is comformist, it is safe, not very extreme, not very sexy, not very appealing to testosterone-filled young men.

Evolution works by fitness of the entire genome, not just the mutations. Mutations are often deleterious. There again you see holism at play.

Evolution works by mutations, of which 99% spectacularly fail and 1% spectacularly succeed. Thats all there is to it. 

The holism comes into play, with the mutations having to confer some kind of advantage in the broader environment, in which survival takes place.

[Gesundheit2]

40 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Mutations are often deleterious.

And the ones that are not deleterious are very obvious, often you don't even need to doubt or question them, especially the more grounded and established you are within the system.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Gesundheit2

[Nilsi]

11 minutes ago, Nabd said:

Afaik, he doesn't mean a good old soviet style revolution, all these quotes doesnt mean he supports normal revolutions, in fact, I remember him saying recently that we should do simple basic stuff that are good, and he mentioned Obama healthcare reforms, stuff like that improve the quality of life.

No one was talking about a Stalinist revolution.

Obamacare is precisely such a subversion of American ruling ideology of "every man is steward of their own destiny;" "don't tread on me" and so on.

He even calls himself a Hegelian (the "History is awakening of Absolute Spirit through thesis-antithesis-synthesis" guy).

Edited March 19, 2023 by Nilsi

[WelcometoReality]

@Nilsi Yeah funny guy! Although I wonder if what's really going on in the video is stage yellow opposing stage turquoise. ?