What is left after we accept identity politics as a fiction? | Slavoj Zizek & Yuval Noah Harari
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- Are we living in an age of naivete and cynicism in society? Can we be optimistic about the future? What defines our 'new normal' in the world of identity, politics, and ideology?
All of these questions answered and more in this snippet from a lively discussion between Slavoj Zizek & Yuval Noah Harari. Stay tuned for more clips from this conversation!
This conversation was filmed on July 29, 2022
Subscribe to Yuval’s Channel!
@YuvalNoahHarari
Socials & Website
Twitter: / harari_yuval
Instagram: / yuval_noah_harari
Facebook: / prof.yuval.noah.harari
TH-cam: @YuvalNoahHarari
Website: www.ynharari.com/
Yuval Noah Harari is a historian, philosopher, and the bestselling author of 'Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind' (2014), 'Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow' (2016), '21 Lessons for the 21st Century' (2018), the series 'Sapiens: A Graphic History' (launched in 2020, co-authored with David Vandermeulen and Daniel Casanave), and 'Unstoppable Us', Volume 1 (2022).
Question: Mr Zizek what is 1 + 1? Zizek: let me tell you a story.....
Lmfao
Everyone knows 1 + 1 = toilets wtf
And so on
Slavoj Zizek should be a liberal?
People who are proud users of "facts dont care about your feelings" should see this
OH MY GODDD!!! WTH, how did I just get recommended this NOW?! Amazing stuff! I didn't realize the lack of comments on this but just know that I am mind blown anytime any of the two of you speak! You two are like my two personal heroes of philosophy.
Two intelligent men with exotic accents, one skinny and one have rhinitis. The best show.
I respect and admire your intelligence and your reasoning.
We sure do live in interesting times. Confusing but revealing.🌈
Where are the full videos?
Identity Politics has to end.. What separates us ultimate is our vibration. One day they will measure us by our average vibrational level for admittance to neighborhoods/clubs/restaurants. That is how we should be discriminated against. That is something we can control as well. Our minds are powerful....
When someone asks Jordan Peterson if he believes in God 1:23
Actually, he talks about generalizations
Love the whole idea of self and identity as fiction. We are compilations of the stars - black, brown, white makes absolutely no difference. We are, in essence, separate prodigies of the whole. One boat on an ocean of waves. Religion and science seem to have, unfortunately, reinforced the misperception. Well, maybe Buddhism hasn't.
@paulwheeler6609 Ants are all just ants... they don't have self-referential identities, just innate societal hierarchies.
But due to context in their natural environment, some sub-species are more deadly than others.
Could the least aggressive ants, live in unison with the most hostile?
@@commonwunder Probably not. But we're not ants. Difficult to compare the complexity of a human to an ant. Ego is a purely human creation, or by-product of that complexity. As is narrative. Wish it were otherwise.
@@paulwheeler6609 Hubris is just confidence... quite a few 'amalgamations' that are built of cells own a high level of 'belief' ...they're at some sort of hierarchical apex.That's why 'true wisdom' is so valued. It's the removal of hubris by experience. To an individual cell, there's no difference between an ant and a 'great ape'. just a set of more complex internal instructions.
@@commonwunder Hubris is not confidence. Confidence is a selfless belief in one's abilities. Hubris is turning that belief over to the ego. One might say, overconfidence. Defeating that is precisely what the Buddha centered his teachings around. The selfless versus the self-centered.
@@paulwheeler6609 Hubris can exclusively be defined as confidence. It is a temporary knowledge of your prowess. All life experiences some form of mastery... therefore displays confidence. Selflessness doesn't exist. Context defines how much resource a being is willing to relinquish.You've been caught in the fantasy of idealism. Lost inside a fairy tale in order to forget your innate anxiousness. You live in a sort of forever daydream. Nothing particularly wrong in it, billions do it. But as a fully functioning thinking person... you've unplugged your intelligence from reality and anaesthetised yourself.
I did not understand how the question was answered with that response
The idea is that we can never get rid of fictions, but we can identify them and integrate them into our lives, making sure that they always remain "at a proper distance". The problem is not that we live in a fiction; we always have and always will. If our fictions disappear, reality itself will disappear along with it. The problem today is that we are completely lost in the confused symbolic space of fictions and identity politics, and the very impenetrability of today's fictions makes them appear as some ultimate truth that we desperately try to identify with. For example, the ever increasing list of LGBTQ+ categories, neurodiversity statuses, personality type self-identifications etc. presents itself as a liberating freedom of expression, but the moment we feel forced to identify ourselves is the moment that the fiction has captured us absolutely. That is why, in other talks, Zizek suggests the simple category of "+" i.e. the "other" category - one that allows to identify as "different", but without the oppressive symbolic space demanded by the fiction.
@@natanijelvasicThere's already a much better idea for what to do with the "+"from 1901. Shorten the entire string into a "+" which includes all genders. Then we also add a "-" which is a subgender of "+" and includes all genders that do not include themselves.
@@KucheKlizma I bet that's going to "Russell" some feathers.
Yes that's a fair comment: Zizek jumps around with examples that only obliquely answer the question. My response (and I have read most of Zizek and Freud, Lacan) is that the question of identity as a fiction-exposed presupposes that we will then move to a true understanding of social identities - that is, somehow accurate clear representations - or 'real' identities - the way humans are 'really' (individual and collective) will appear with clarity. Zizek denies this by arguing that a) (Arendt) telling a child the cold adult truth of the world's brutality would be to deny the ethical reality of providing care for the child - thus would be itself a sort of distortion - we cannot avoid ethical realities; b) (Lacan) even if I my jealousy in a relationship were to be well-founded - my partner is in fact having an affair (her identity as a cheating wife is in fact true) - there is still the additional question of why I am directing my energies towards seeking such a truth - there is still something about MY search for 'the truth' that is not neutral or simply 'objective' but motivated by a desire/fear/need(non-objective). Finally, anti-Semitism (fear/hatred of Jews, of Jewish identity) cannot be successfully defeated by aiming to show 'objectively true' facts about Jewish people being actually quite normal and not a real threat to others, since anti-Semitic ideology doesn't need facts to conjure up stories of conspiracies, weird perversions, desires to corrupt etc - the whole point of anti-Semitic fictional identities is to LEAD us away from real evidence or clear arguments. So Z. says the question of 'what comes after the fiction of identity?' misses the real problems of how we are stuck with the politics of such fictions, and the questions of how they operate in our world. We can't 'get rid' of them and arrive at full clarity - but we can ask what harms are being created. There is no 'after' identity fictions - but good critical questions can show us how fictions can operate 'for a good' or 'for a need' or 'for an aggressive politics'. (other functions too - ideology utilises human psychology in many ways)
It's par for Zizek-speak
1:46 🎉🎉😢😅😅😮😢🎉🎉😂😂😂🎉😮😅😅😮😢🎉❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
I hope you and your child are in a better situation now. Or if not, my deepest wishes that your situation does get better! Never give up, for you and your child!
Money is “fictional,” in the same sense, in that it’s a social construct. It will not cease to be a serious political force because of that. This is a stupid way of phrasing the question.
Just because identities are social constructions, it does not mean they are fiction. Just from the start the question does not make any sense.
Identity isn't fiction because of social constructs.
Keep focusing on me me me. My identity is the most important thing in the world! That will really solve humanity's problems.
😢😢🎉🎉😂😂😂😂😂😂❤❤❤❤❤😅😅😅😅😮😮😮😢😢🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Certain elements of identity are fiction, and certain other elements are rooted in reality such as race, gender, even language dispite it being a human contruct. The reality of the matter is that identity is not grounded in fiction, it's instead grounded in human contructs such as language, culture, religion and biological truths such as gender, race and so on. Some aspects of identity such as nationality are human constructs to the some extent that civilisation itself is a human construct, that doesnt imply that its in fact fiction, quite the contrary. Language, culture, borders, nationalities, food, these moldable characteristics of human identity are very much a part of reality and how we humans see ourselves. Literal wars that have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions of peopple have been fought over these very characteristics.
Well… you kinda missed the point.
Money is fictional. It will not create to be a serious political force because of that. This is a stupid way of phrasing the question. And Zizek, man, I want to pretend this is profound, but it really isn’t.
He never answers the fuckin questions. I love him anyways tho.
"Fiction" is a bit loaded. Constructs, sure, but to say that identity is necessarily fiction is flatly (and somewhat grossly) incorrect. If someone treats you differently because of how they perceive your body, that's not really a "fiction" by any stretch of really any well-established literary theory, particularly if they are explicit about it. This transcends the particular debate of the common memes of fictional literature - what does it mean to be fiction - and into the space that you're proposing that such a narrative about reality is actually not reflective of reality AT ALL.. when in fact it reasonably IS. We can know things about ourselves. Sure, they are often enough ridiculous and fantastical and entirely our own unrealistic view of ourselves and our relation to things around us. And sure, they are at times layered in subtle myth carried in assumptions and biases and so forth. But these can occasionally map reasonably and in predictable and consistent ways that can be verified by other subjective witnesses without arbitrary meaning. I'm not sure why (or how) this is really an obviously false view, and I think it only falls apart through a lens of excessive intellectual gaming. To deny this is to accept that nothing can be said meaningfully about anything, which I seriously doubt either of these dudes truly believe, as they have spent a great deal of time (and have made quite a bit of $$$) doing precisely that. Unless, of course, you are to take them as purely capitalist opportunists...
blah blah blah
You clearly didn’t listen carefully. Identities are fiction even if they are part of our subjective realities precisely because they exist only in relation to other identities. A little Sartre and his Antisemite and Jew would do the trick.
What is a construct but a fiction given structure
@@JoshTeagueStop massaging the language in order to make this question seem more precisely phrased than it is
lol
This dude looks and sounds trapped inside of his own mind.
Well, all of us are, he just shows it.
Maybe you have to get out of yours to grasp a bit of his thoughts...
@@taniaoyarzo7462
If that’s your suggestion, then I’m sorry, but you’re out of your f*ckin’ mind.
maybe you're the one confined in the small spaces yours occupies. idk
@@Jpturlax01
How do you know who I'm talking about?
He is under drugs.
And yet you are not.
As if the jews have not been hated enough- now there is harari... i wander how old he is. Beauze there is nothing scarier than a 50 year old bold man. Now add the jewness and....
Tf is wrong with you? Well, I guess this conversation would seem disturbing, specially considering to the people who got left behind in terms of the brain's evolution.
If you do not see this conversation as anything but a beautiful exchange of provoking thoughts between two powerhouses of the mind, then I don't know what you'd see. But considering how you backwardly highlight the physical beauty of the persons in question, then I seriously doubt your mental capabilities to get what I'm even saying.
@@Jpturlax01 jeezus dude
If everyone hates you that's your problem.
If everyone rejects you for a job offer that's your problem.
If everyone rejects you on a date that's your problem.
So maybe start questioning why people hate jews
Why generalize and demonize a whole group when Zionist Jews who support Israel don't even constitute the majority of Jews. A lot of Jews also support Palestine you know. A noted figure is the often-demonized George Soros. Also, to answer your rhetorical yet illogical statement, if everyone has the same problems, and they can blame minorities for said issues, OF COURSE THEY'LL BLAME IT ON MINORITIES. Jews aren't the only ones being done dirty like that, they're only the most prominent group due to the fact that they're the most numerous diaspora (groups of people spread out onto other countries).
Give me ONE successful and non-failing country in history that hated Jews. Its as if Jews only suddenly get hated when shit hits the fan and people have an irrational need to blame others for their own stupidity! Food for thought.
@@pragyanburagohain8751
Human [and other species] essential equality
it is not fiction.
They didn't say that it was... The notion of identity is a fiction, a social construct, a lie.
unfortunately it is. we might make it happen one day as a sociaty though. it is a theoretical possibility.
@@coosoorlog the fact we are essentially the same is not an invention. What is the problem to understand it?? I say ESSENTIALLY. We are very diverse and thus different at the surface. But one perspective doesnt cancel the other.
@direitistadeesquerda the concept of equality itself and equality as a goal is a human construction, how can it be true on a fundamental level and not a component of humanity's fictions if it itself is fictional.
@@remo5097 again. The same way there are twins and extremely different people, also there is this perspective in which we are essentially the same. This is not fictional.
the sound is awfull!.
what sound?
😢😮😢🎉🎉🎉😅😅😅😮😢🎉🎉😂😂😂😂❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤