• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Catastrophic but not serious.

Shrooms00087

Shrooms00087

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
3,282
http://fora.tv/2011/04/04/Slavoj_Zizek_Catastrophic_But_Not_Serious#fullprogram

This lecture is about the failings of capitalism, the green movement, and Hegel's theory of Spirit coming from the clean slate of post-"Global Warming". Primarily it's about the failings of capitalism through these subjects. So if capitalism fails and it isn't "serious" then what replaces it after the slate is clean?

Sorry I am filling space, I was forced to.

Jam: No transcript included with this Fora recording.
 
Last edited:
i couldnt get it to play.

but, i think about this a lot... and it seems at that point we will have a more neutral-caring-creative higher-mind, we will express and create more openly with our deeper-thoughts and dreamy-initiations.
i can also imagine 'we' will find new 'mechanisms tools or means to create for ourselves in a more sustainable way, as we are trying with looking more clearly at our surroundings to learn to build from, not build with so much. if all this were to occur, our dreams and deep-set-goals will be more accessible to us and we will be able to create more for ourselves and become more self-sustainable.


a more 'spiritual' (as in connection with others and nature) State, money wont mean near as much if we would just give each other a push, and volunteer more.
 
i couldn't get it to play either but Francis Fukuyama theorized in his "groundbreaking" work "The End of History and the Last Man" that our modern democratic/capitalist society is the final form of government and as humans our sociocultural evolution has come to and end.. ideological evolution is impossible says he!!! But that may not be what your really talking about, i cant access the lecture but it sounds interesting.
 
I'm very familiar with Fukuyama, but I believe he's more integral to the current problems than helping us peer into them. As for the video itself, you may want to update your adobe, or wait it out (because sometimes there is extensive lag). But as far as Fukuyama's future I believe it's all too optimistic that's why green technology (a scientific proposal to mitigate some of the damage) is just an obscene version of capitalism and doesn't offer anything truly revolutionary
 
Shrooms00087 said:
I'm very familiar with Fukuyama, but I believe he's more integral to the current problems than helping us peer into them. As for the video itself, you may want to update your adobe, or wait it out (because sometimes there is extensive lag). But as far as Fukuyama's future I believe it's all too optimistic that's why green technology (a scientific proposal to mitigate some of the damage) is just an obscene version of capitalism and doesn't offer anything truly revolutionary
Click to expand...

Ok ill update the adobe..and i dont even think the green movement is even an obscene version of capitalism i its just another addendum to the way our society is run now..its not an "alternative" in any way..but ill just shut up and watch the lecture. maybe we can all go marxist
 
piebald said:
Ok ill update the adobe..and i dont even think the green movement is even an obscene version of capitalism i its just another addendum to the way our society is run now..its not an "alternative" in any way..but ill just shut up and watch the lecture. maybe we can all go marxist
Click to expand...

I'm surprised this thread gathered any responses, so no need to shut up :)

You're right, it's just an extension of the problem, rather than fixing the problem. Fukuyama believes we'll be reduced to a no borders situation and even further limited rule. This I believe, is nothing more than his centrist philosophy in play. I believe instead of that, we will be prolonging our suffering with the green movement, rather than offering a change. But real change itself is the most dangerous of times especially in times of capital reform. As Zizek has said before, "For each genocide there is a poet, and for each Fascist movement there is a philosopher and a revolutionary."
 
god this guy is so fucking smart-his bio says "continental philosopher and critical theorist" ...he's like the james bond of intellectuals.
 
Shrooms00087 said:
This is an interesting lecture on Fukuyama by Christopher Hitchens, similar philosophy. Nevertheless a good lecture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2Jt-JU1azU
Click to expand...

I love Hitchens and his superhuman ability to write knowledgeably and critically about everything and everyone under the sun...he just wrote a great piece in the Atlantic about Philip Larkin that i really enjoyed. The only stuff i don't like is his play by play cancer commentary in Vanity Fair its getting old.
Do you read Harpers or Atlantic? Good mags..great content and writing. Ill check out lecture..this is a great thread!
 
I read Harpers. And yeah Hitchens beats the same drum often, if it's not one subject it's another. But if you haven't been ruined by his repetition he is probably the most exciting Republican intellectual to listen to.
 
as humans our sociocultural evolution has come to and end [...] ideological evolution is impossible says he
Click to expand...
seriously! if ideas like this find publishers, it's questionable to even claim that humans have already started evolving
 
I submit that humans are more revolving than evolving.

If it succeeds in completing the current loop and manages to get back on course for the next lather/rinse/repeat, it's making progress.

Peace...
 
^ i think i didnt provide context for that quote if your not familiar with his work..he's not talking about an individual or biological level but rather a governmental one..he argues that western liberal democracy is the final or absolute form of social organization...

"The triumph of the West, of the Western idea, is evident first of all in the total exhaustion of viable systematic alternatives to Western Liberalism.....What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western democracy as the final form of human government. This is not to say that there will no longer be events to fill the pages of "Foreign Affairs's" yearly summaries of international relations, for the victory of liberalism has occurred primarily in the realm of ideas or consciousness and is as yet incomplete in the real or material world. But there are powerful reasons for believing that it is the ideal that will govern the material world in the long run..."
And yes he got a publisher; wether you agree with him or not he's very intelligent and his book "The end of History and Last Man" was really interesting i had to read it twice in college..
 
"The end of history" is an interesting concept that has something to do with reality, actually.

And that's the fact that history is always the past, which is always gone/over with, no matter what time it is.

History doesn't exist as anything existent, and never has.
 
^

Eh it has a lot to do with Reality. It may just be wrong or purposely so.

"History doesn't exist" I believe it does. Many important history makers were changed before ever being realized, so reoccurring it could only be Real.
 
in his context what he means by "the end of history" is that because of the homogenization of global markets/governments and relations that the likelihood of signficant large scale struggles over ideology will become less and less. of course there will still be conflict and he argues that ethnic and national violence will still occur and terrorism things like that..but basically there will be no more MAJOR conflicts that will threaten to reverse our current course..then he says basically were are gonna get bored, i like this quote " a perpetual caretaking of the museum of the human history"
 
Shrooms00087 said:
^

Eh it has a lot to do with Reality. It may just be wrong or purposely so.

"History doesn't exist" I believe it does. Many important history makers were changed before ever being realized, so reoccurring it could only be Real.
Click to expand...

I agree History does exist..history provides us with a context; both on an individual level and cultural one..obviously history is not tangible but does it impact and effect us? yes..it exists. This argument is kinda pointless and semantical and nit-picky..if some people don't believe in history thats fine..but i payed alot to study it so it HAS to be real or i wasted that money..hahahahhahaha. i say its real!
I also think the definition of history in the way we are talking about it here is:
simply all the past events that have created the world we live in today..thats at least the way Im using the word right now.
This beer is "history" cause i just drank it too
 
History definitely "exists" - this thread is already history. It's the past (something, already created which is being added to), the present when it is being (re)read, and also the future because it will be reread and reread (and reread and....).

Humans are essentially historicists, whether or not history is fact - well.. that's moving too far from the original post, but definitely debatable.

Go on, someone make a comment - finish the cycle ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top