Slavoj Žižek: When is a shark not a shark.
Added 2024-06-01 22:09:16 +0000 UTCJoin Matt and Chris as they plunge into the heady mental universe of Slavoj Žižek, the Slovenian philosopher known for his eclectic and provocative ideas. The duo parses Žižek's 'unconventional' takes on ideology, consumerism, and revolutionary theory, peppered with his playful movie criticism of films like Jaws and a Clockwork Orange and even a few that he hasn't even watched.
We delve into snuffle-laced discussions of transgressive acts, revolutionary politics, moderate conservative communism, consumerist psychology, and musings on whether Jaws is really about a shark. Throughout all Žižek's dramatic flair is shining through, but is he actually as provocative and hated as he likes to suggest? Matt and Chris have some thoughts...
Expect to reconsider everything you thought you knew, listen to some edgy book blurbs, and finally collapse in a puddle with the deconstruction of your ideology.
Links
Novara Media: Our World Is Coming To An End | Aaron Bastani Meets Slavoj Žižek | Downstream
Philosophize This- Episode #196 - The Improbable Slavoj Zizek - Pt. 1
(Also, there are three other Žižek episodes in this series!)
Comments
Zizek is rad.
Jake Upton
2024-07-16 11:39:25 +0000 UTCEvery time Zizek says "ideology", I can't help but hear "Ideologie".
Trees
2024-06-14 00:58:57 +0000 UTCI’m bringing Sexizek.
Intergalactic Panda Wrangler
2024-06-07 22:07:18 +0000 UTCPraying for a decoding of the zizek/ Peterson debate Pleaaaase
D
2024-06-07 20:07:11 +0000 UTCAs he should be
MeatMullet
2024-06-07 01:59:31 +0000 UTCI haven't seen the EP yet, but I think the retort would be that Spielberg's conscious intent is irrelevant, kinda like it's irrelevant whether a politician genuinely believes what they claim. The cogs keep turning, ideology keeps reproducing itself.
MeatMullet
2024-06-07 01:56:09 +0000 UTCRegarding that review - I'm surprised Matt didn't get the footy show reference. He's referring to an Australian tv show about some ex-rugby players who talk about rugby and do stupid things. It's got a reputation for being a bit stupid and 'blokey.' I think his criticism wasn't attempting to dox you, he was painting a caricature of a loser like he thought you guys would be. I'm sure he's too lazy to do any real research
Liam McMahon
2024-06-05 00:15:35 +0000 UTCGreat episode!
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-04 20:15:57 +0000 UTCI didn’t say I would do them all in one episode!
Christopher Kavanagh
2024-06-04 00:20:52 +0000 UTCYou said my name! I played it back to my very uninterested pregnant girlfriend. She's now using this as even more ammo that our first born should not take my second name, as nobody can pronounce it!
Níall Faughnan
2024-06-03 20:32:48 +0000 UTCI recently listened to an episode from last year and I was surprised to hear them read my review Thanks guys For everything
jss
2024-06-03 20:03:16 +0000 UTCLmao he asked for shout-outs and I STILL didn’t get one 🤣🤣🤣
Joe Romel
2024-06-03 16:31:45 +0000 UTC(I hope you trust my anecdotes more than Zizek’s)
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-03 15:34:16 +0000 UTCRe: Fukushima My step-mom is radiation protection officer (in Poland), recently she told me a story about conference with specialists from Japan Atomic Energy Agency, who had speech about science communication and demystifying it radiation. According to her, people from JAEA regret that they didn’t to enough in science communication and as result they had to deal with totally overblown panic and inappropriate reactions to nuclear accident. Also land around Fukushima is safe now, but I received very technical rant that I neither remember or understood.
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-03 15:25:21 +0000 UTCI like Voegelin on Popper, who "is philosophically so uncultured, so fully a primitive ideological brawler, that he is not able to even approximately to reproduce correctly the contents of one page of Plato. " No small feat, but you can imagine this stated in a slightly different tone. As a philosopher, many consider him like that guy who wrote the theme song to Ghostbusters, if also an indefatigable asshole and culture warrior. Comparisons could be made to the best/worst of the IDW.
Exai
2024-06-03 13:08:36 +0000 UTCChomagerider, I understand your frustration because, as Chris said, it does seem hard to judge. When we are looking at works of art, especially ones that are complicated, ambiguous, and multi-layered, there can be many good interpretations. This is one reason why the arts, for me, are so fascinating because they are not easy to pin down, and we can learn more about ourselves when engaging with them. I think it is important to realize that interpreters also bring their own backgrounds and thoughts to the experience. For example, it was not surprising that Castro saw Jaws as being about capitalism. In addition, because they are collaborative, films usually don’t have one author. Yes, Spielberg was the director, but there are the actors, the cinematographer, the editors, and so forth, all of whom bring their interpretations to the work. Even the producers and advertisers will put their stamp on the film with the posters they choose to print. And just so you are aware, not all critics or cultural theorists are against the idea that the author’s intentions aren’t important to take into consideration, though they may caution against only relying on what that author says the work is about. I guess the best way I understand the concept that the author is not always aware of what they are communicating is from my own experience. My twin sister and I created characters and worlds that we acted out as children to deal with stuff we were going through and to entertain ourselves. We may have not been entirely aware of what these stories were about as children, yet I can look back at them and tease apart some of what they were saying. In my opinion, a good critic of the arts takes into consideration the historical factors and the author’s personal life as well as the evidence in the text itself. All that said, the artist is making choices, consciously or unconsciously, and good ones are aware of the way their creation could affect others.
Linda Sears
2024-06-03 12:50:59 +0000 UTCIt is interesting to me that Diogenes is one of the founders of cynicism. Apparently, the word cynic comes from the Greek word for dog; a cynic is dog-like. Here is a fun article on Diogenes. Zizek does have traits in common: https://www.willbuckingham.com/diogenes/#:~:text=It%20is%20from%20this%20nickname,live%20naturally%2C%20without%20the%20encumbrances
Linda Sears
2024-06-03 12:16:13 +0000 UTCThe left wing gurus are so empty and boring. So banal
Tobias nilsson
2024-06-03 11:08:02 +0000 UTCZizek most definitely has a far longer, highly nebulous, possibly explicit answer. Honestly that's his appeal really, his manner of address, and he really isn't a tankie. I only really got into his Pervert's Guide output, because it's entertaining, and he was on my reading list at university. He's amusing, and makes you think, kinda like a marxist Alan Watts?
Matt
2024-06-03 09:33:19 +0000 UTCThe shtick is to believe that all symbols are real and have a teleology (sense makers love this) and then fake outrage at how these are being aubverted by a shadowy cabal (conservative types love this). In the past men (and it's mostly men) were doing this when confronted with the mysteries of nature, but since exploration has dried out we spook outselfes like young foals
Emil Mi
2024-06-03 09:27:35 +0000 UTCDammit! Guess the Bohr story is just too good to be true, but, yeah, it does still work as an example (a parable?). You're definitely right that Zizek is using the Jaws example to explain his theory of ideology rather than being particularly concerned with What Steven Spielberg Was Thinking About (which was largely 'shit, this expensive animatronic shark is broken', as i understand it). Still, I can understand why one would want examples to be actually the case? Like, where does it leave you if they are not, does it disprove you're point?
John S Durst
2024-06-03 07:11:20 +0000 UTCSort of -- he's generally (rightly) given mad props for the falsifiability criterion, but the rest of his philosophy has kinda passed by the wayside. Along with the Gettier Objections, he's generally credited with meaningfully improving on Plato's definition of knowledge, which is no small feat!
John S Durst
2024-06-03 06:50:06 +0000 UTCI think this is a genuine division that comes up. Some people are fine with that ambiguity and others (myself and Matt) want to know the specific standard that can be used to judge an interpretation as strong or weak, and how it is not ultimately aesthetic or relative?
Christopher Kavanagh
2024-06-03 06:27:43 +0000 UTCI don't get Zizek. Based on this sample, it seems like he is a social and political commentator. What does he do that's so appealing? What does it mean that he's a socialist? Richard Wolf, a socialist economist, took 90 minutes on The Glenn Show to finally define it as the pursuit of an economic system that is better than what we have. That seems like a Game B type non-answer. Does Zizek have a better definition?
Adam Sher
2024-06-03 05:41:07 +0000 UTCFair enough, I don't pretend to be educated on the topic, only pointing out a flaw in reasoning around the subtext of the initial post as I saw it. I'm quite aware that it is a very complex topic, and understand that a single data point doesn't prove a point. Though, a representative demographic survey does provide a little more to the conversation than "you've got some boning up to do...". Appreciate the thoughtful feedback.
Password1234!
2024-06-03 04:23:27 +0000 UTCHa ha! Maybe, but you know the old joke about how the cheapest two departments in a university are supposed to be the mathematics one where you only need paper, a pencil and a bin, and the philosophy department which is like the mathematics department but you don't need the bin.
Robert Andrews
2024-06-03 03:51:11 +0000 UTCFirst off: Thanks a lot for engaging so seriously and thoughtfully with what really was a dumb and flippant comment. I'm just really struggling with the simple point that if we say the author has no authority to say what a movie / text etc. is about, NOBODY should have. So, I'm really on board with saying "this movie/text COULD be about..." This is a fun, recreational activity. But nobody can say for certain that a text/movie IS about something. Yes, some interpretations seem more plausible than others. But in the end, everything is an interpretation.
Chomagerider
2024-06-03 03:49:42 +0000 UTCThis sounds like what we were getting at... "He tried to demonstrate that wisdom and happiness belong to the man who is independent of society and that civilization is regressive. He scorned not only family and socio-political organization, but also property rights and reputation. He even rejected traditional ideas about human decency. In addition to eating in the marketplace, Diogenes is said to have urinated on some people who insulted him, defecated in the theatre, masturbated in public, and pointed at people with his middle finger, which was considered insulting. Diogenes Laërtius also relates that Diogenes would spit and fart in public." Social conventions, what are they about anyway...
Christopher Kavanagh
2024-06-03 03:43:05 +0000 UTCI thought philosophers tend to say that Popper is passé these days?
Christopher Kavanagh
2024-06-03 03:33:25 +0000 UTCShocked... SHOCKED I was at Matthew Browne's calumny against the noble discipline that is philosophy. He says something like (I can't remember the exact words which may be more defensible) that Slavoj Zizek doesn't look for disconfirming evidence because, you know, he's a philosopher, and they're all like that, don't you know! Oh really? Well, here's a counter-example for you, Sir Karl Popper!! The guy who came up with the concept of falsifiability!
Robert Andrews
2024-06-03 03:24:51 +0000 UTCOh buddy...you've got some boning up to do on the state of play of Ingenious identity in NA. There's no one "link" to sum things up. Anyway, out of my pay grade to speak to it in a responsible manner. Just to say I stand by statement that Zizeks claim about use of Indian is not something that casual listeners should take too seriously.
Allan Malcolm McPherson
2024-06-03 01:26:21 +0000 UTCSure, but it would seem that there is no most preferred term based on the only data I could find in a lazy 10 minute search (feel free to correct me with a link to other, representative data if you have it). You make a valid point if you're criticising Zizeks generalisation, but a less valid one if you're suggesting that he's wrong in his broader point of suggesting that individuals who may identify as a member of said group don't feel infantilsed by the obsession to pander to delicate sensibilities. I know I have friends who feel that way, but then again, my anacdotal evidence is just as worthless as his. Link to data: https://www.luminafoundation.org/interactive-data-racial-equity/preferred-racial-identifiers/do-people-prefer-native-american-indigenous-or-american-indian/
Password1234!
2024-06-03 00:02:46 +0000 UTC“philosopher that lived in a barrel” - it was Dioneges and he had nothing to do with being thought-provoking. What you mean is concept of gadfly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadfly_(philosophy_and_social_science) and Socrates, who didn’t live in a barrel and was annoying as hell just like Zizek is
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-02 22:33:40 +0000 UTCThe “let’s tear everything down” part seems to be more satisfying than the “let’s work over a long period of time and get things right” part.
Linda Sears
2024-06-02 19:30:52 +0000 UTCI think films are particularly suited to psychoanalytic interpretations as many film theorists have pointed out, most notably Laura Mulvey. Not only is the film theatre like a dream space, but the birth of cinema corresponded with the dispersal of Freudian concepts into the wider culture. A great example of a film that fits within a Freudian view is Bunuel and Dali’s Un Chien Andalou. Another great example is Bergman’s Persona. The film doesn’t make as much sense without an understanding of Freudian psychology. Freud’s ideas may be dismissed by most psychologists, but artists had a field day with him!
Linda Sears
2024-06-02 19:18:49 +0000 UTCYour discussion of the French Revolution made me think of the movie Danton, by Andrzej Wajda. The film was made during the Polish solidarity movement, so some see parallels between the character of Danton and Lech Walesa. Matt’s view of Robespierre matches how he is presented in the film as both an idealistic true believer and a ruthless defender of ideas at the expense of the humans those ideas are supposed to protect. I’ve often thought that a revolution from within is far more likely to lead to bloody purges than one like the American Revolution, where the main enemy is further away.
Linda Sears
2024-06-02 18:33:12 +0000 UTCIt can also depend on how deep one wants to take the analysis, and what one hopes to get out of it. If one wants to understand the themes of, for example, a film it can help to look at the different streams of ideas that lead into it. For example, on a surface level Blade Runner is an adaptation of the PK Dick story 'do androids dream of electric sheep', and knowing that can help someone pick up on the subtext that Ford's character might be a replicant himself. On a deeper level, the symbolism incorporated can be seen as part of the 'wider' semantic network and show another layer: snake scales suggest sheading skin; eye balls suggest different view points (at first seen very close up, later smeared on someone's shoulder); puppets and mannequins appear regularly; etc. Deeper still, we can trace the references to slavery and the concept of a subclass: the rich have left the earth to live off world, war still occurs but occurs in space between replicants as proxy wars for the rich; population decline plus population density reduce general living standards, etc. Then philosophically the film articulates something in the nature of consumer capitalism: what the replicants represent is the sadist's ideal sexual partner: the sadist longs for an immortal, undead victim who wants to be abused. The quest to demarcate a section of humanity as not having a soul, and some how being deserving to total exploitation is a subulated desire, not wholly within any one person (other than the truly sick) but a collective 'systemic' desire that capitalism wants. The perfect employee who doesn't even want to take their breaks, the sex worker who doesn't desire their own pleasure, the delicious animal who wants to be eaten. Eventually, in Blade Runner, capitalism (via incentives) attempted to satisfy this urge by creating just that, but the issues is: 'we' (the incentives inherent in capitalism) don't want an object, we want a subject we can objectify. 'We' want our victim to have the ability to be objectified. (And if they have that capacity, that implies they must also have the capacity for autonomy and choice.) At every layer the film is posing questions of identity, subjectivity, liberty, and how our material circumstances determine our actions and outlooks. As for the Jaws issue: there isn't a shark in the movie. Yet people are still discussing what the absent shark 'meant'. We are symbolic creatures, trapped in a symbolic order.
Ymirsdreams
2024-06-02 18:07:43 +0000 UTCHumpty Dumpty: When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean. Neither more nor less. Alice: I wonder what all those words you just said meant. Maybe you're telling me I can have all your stuff! Humpty Dumpty: What!? No! Alice: Your car, too? Gosh, thanks! xkcd: Communicating https://xkcd.com/1860/
Roland Weber
2024-06-02 16:34:37 +0000 UTCRe: day after revolution My formative reading was „Democratic theory” by Giovanni Sartori, which I’ve read during 1st year in collage. One of takes that stayed with me since then is that engagement is the highest during the revolution and it’s not possible to build government/law/community on assumption the engagement will last forever. <- it’s seems kinda obvious, but many systems proposed around buzzword „community” are built on premise of constant hight engagement
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-02 16:06:29 +0000 UTC+1 to Linda, also culture often capture important truths about society in current time: fears, dreams, life expectations, standard of living, social norms, ethical directives.
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-02 15:58:10 +0000 UTCThe prevailing ideological gesture today: “I know I’m just a cog in ideology, even so, still… I’ll have more of what they’re selling but with a wink and a nod.”
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 15:42:18 +0000 UTCWhen I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 15:37:07 +0000 UTCDoes it matter whether the examples Zizek repeats are true or not? One of his most-repeated stories involves the physicist Niels Bohr, who supposedly kept a horseshoe above his door because "it works even if you don't believe in it." According to Zizek this quote represents the nature of ideology today...we follow ideology cynically but it still performs its social role. As in turns out the story seems to not actually have happened -- or at least someone else made the horseshoe quote, which was falsely attributed to Niels Bohr. https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/8387/is-the-anecdote-about-niels-bohr-keeping-a-horseshoe-on-his-door-true However I'd view these stories, as well as the film criticism, as simply jumping off points for whatever he wants to say. When Zizek talks about what the various interpretations of what the shark stands for in Jaws it's just an analogy for ideology as an empty vessel...he's not actually making any particular claim about what the shark stands for, which for all we know could just be a shark.
everythingism
2024-06-02 15:32:37 +0000 UTCGreat episode. I, too, am please to confirm I am a slightly conservative Marxist. Just a point about the Coke is 'it' segment - If you are studying critical theory it was/perhaps still it impossible to get very far without getting your head round Lacan. People try to avoid it of course but it means you with not really engage with a massive amount of film theory, feminism and cultural theory. Levi Strauss is better with a grasp of Lacan. That doesn't mean he was right ..... but in terms of the development of a field of study it is similar to leaving out Marx. Hence why Zizek's use of Lacan is important. To use a bit of Bourdieu here - Zizek is playing a great game of tennis with the theoretical tools available. However, some people believe that the game of tennis itself is pointless!
Nina Davies
2024-06-02 14:27:03 +0000 UTCOr to question the (hidden, repressed, unrealized) structures behind our thinking.
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 13:59:32 +0000 UTCI see your points that cultural analysis seems very nebulous and pointless. However, if one is interpreting a particular text, one can make better or worse interpretations. For example, if I argued that Jaws was about the daily drudgery of doing chores, like washing dishes, most would think that was a ludicrous interpretation. If I argued that Jaws was about the rapacious capitalist system or the violence of male sexual desire those might sound more probable. The interpretation should be defensible through evidence found in the text itself as well as pertinent cultural context.
Linda Sears
2024-06-02 13:53:36 +0000 UTCWow cynicism as ideology! That resonates with me.
Tim Tripp
2024-06-02 13:29:41 +0000 UTCProbably a massively ignorant comment (certainly not meant as an offense) but what's the point of cultural theory and literary analysis beyond being a fun way to train your brain muscle? The author isn't the sole authority, so I guess nobody else is either ?So everything can mean anything or nothing. Who's to tell?
Chomagerider
2024-06-02 12:50:46 +0000 UTCI had seen some interviews with him on YT. Found him somewhat entertaining, also somewhat hard to listen to, but not very provocative. When I heard he'd written about the Barbie movie, I was interested. Luckily, I heard that he hadn't watched the movie before I got to read what he had written about it. When I read a movie review or critique, I want to know what the author thinks about the actual movie, not what they think about what they think the movie is about. So, yeah, I guess that was provocative after all. 🤔 Thanks for the episode, I enjoyed it! There was a bit of noise when the end music faded out, but anyone making it that far won't mind. 😄
Roland Weber
2024-06-02 12:37:39 +0000 UTCI had heard he *lived* in a barrel.
Roland Weber
2024-06-02 12:24:02 +0000 UTCNice! I'm going to have to watch the source material first. Can't believe I've never watched it before.
Robert Andrews
2024-06-02 12:11:22 +0000 UTCIt also opens the question of whether “Galaxy-brainness” is, in this case, just a symptom of mobilizing multiple abstract concepts. Literally what continental philosophy is. That level of abstraction — and even mystification — serves a point, which is to make the familiar unfamiliar
Daniel P
2024-06-02 11:59:42 +0000 UTCOh, in case anybody took Zizek as correct on the use of "Indian"...yeah, you might find some folks that prefer that term but that going to be a niche regional/generational thing.
Allan Malcolm McPherson
2024-06-02 11:12:11 +0000 UTCChris bringing Critters into the discourse was not on my bingo card.
Allan Malcolm McPherson
2024-06-02 10:55:31 +0000 UTCwhat’s kinda funny other cafe chains catched up in 2024 with Starbucks prices from 2014, while Starbucks didn’t rise prices. Tho coffee from cafe chains is too expensive now for regular consumption
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-02 08:52:07 +0000 UTCWhen Starbucks entered polish market in 2009, it was brand for hipsters/teenagers. Starbucks coffee was ungodly expensive compared to other cafes, but it offered 2 things other cafes didn’t: 1) baristas asked about your name and wrote it on cup (infinite meme potential!!!), 2) product well known from american internet, where Starbucks was some kind of fashion/personality/subculture statement. Craze slowed down in ~2015 and most people turned away from Starbucks, because it was too expensive for below avarage product. Culture started forming around Costa Coffee (good coffee, cheapest of all chain cafes, best loyality program) and Green Nero Cafe (it’s so fancy! srsly google it, when I was in UK and discovered regular Nero Cafe I was in dismay how meh everything is compared to polish Green Nero Cafe, which is fusion of international Nero Cafe with polish cafe chain)
aneladgam_varelse
2024-06-02 08:47:15 +0000 UTCI feel he would score low on the gurumeter. Maybe because my background is in critical theory, but I just don’t find him that jargon-heavy. His galaxy-brain-ness is more antic than other gurus. He’s not proselytizing or aggrieved.
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 06:46:29 +0000 UTCLol that first clip really caught me of guard! Wasnt prepared for zizek eating trash
Mikael Heller Sahlgren
2024-06-02 06:30:04 +0000 UTCI do like him but he’s almost abit David Brent sometimes. “I said to my son how dare you do your homework when there is a horror movie on Netflix” woah crazy guy! Rule breaker. Put your feet up on the desk! Screw the normies Ziz!
Chris Clark
2024-06-02 05:54:46 +0000 UTC*Sniff*
Ymirsdreams
2024-06-02 05:40:18 +0000 UTCThere are no straightforward meanings; there are only strong and weak readings of a text.
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 03:33:32 +0000 UTCYeah, art can evoke any meaning from the audience, and they both have a cultural context, but I reckon Jaws has a more straightforward artistic meaning than Moby Dick. The discussion of Victorian novels on the last "Decoding Academia" did however remind me of this interesting piece about the Shelley's Frankenstein vs some of the others: https://omny.fm/shows/the-last-archive/it-s-still-alive-the-deadline originally in The New Yorker: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/12/the-strange-and-twisted-life-of-frankenstein
rooftowel
2024-06-02 03:30:16 +0000 UTCLike Moby Dick was about a indomitable whale…except it wasn’t.
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 02:39:21 +0000 UTCOkay but I think jaws was about scary sharks.
Yoloswag42069
2024-06-02 02:37:19 +0000 UTC45 mins. into it and I have observed a lot. One: you guys are most definitely not in the humanities. Second: the documentary was a kind of a cheesy way to make Zizek’s Lacanian cultural theories accessible to a broad non-academic audience: it’s not exactly the best way to judge his theories. The intentional fallacy. I’m not sure you understand in cultural theory and literary analysis the idea that the author is the sole authority of his or her work is rejected. Just asking Spielberg what the “shark” means is beside the point (would he even know?). Everything is a “text,” bearing a system of social and cultural signs that can be interpreted. Every text is therefore “read into” to uncover the social and cultural signs or what Jameson called, “The Political Unconscious.” There is no master interpretation. Poststructuralism 101. I fear you guys might be too much the empiricists to comprehend Zizek. What I think separates Zizek’s cultural analysis from JP’s cultural speculations (beyond Zizek’s rhetorical clarity) is that Zizek’s Marxist politics are up front and center, announced beforehand. You can’t really understand his concept of ideology with understanding someone like Althusser. Zizek is moving away from classic Marxism’s conception of ideology as false consciousness. This is because Leftist at the end of the 20th Century needed a new theory to explain why people consistently supported political ideologies not in their interest, i.e. the Revolution never came. So, enter Lacan to describe the “desiring” subject and his “grammar” of desire.
Mark Olague
2024-06-02 01:14:28 +0000 UTCI could picture the philosopher that lived in a barrel but couldn’t remember his name either. Bloody Diogenes. Had to consult Google
Shane Partington
2024-06-01 23:56:25 +0000 UTCAnd to answer the question about whether ChatGPT is part of my daily info search… not really I see it more of a research/discussion tool and a coding partner.
Christopher Kavanagh
2024-06-01 23:43:34 +0000 UTCOh yeah sure… the hedonistic treadmill and all that. But just specifically the claim that coke increases your thirst. ChatGPT is good for straightforward factual questions that will have lots written about them.
Christopher Kavanagh
2024-06-01 23:39:09 +0000 UTCFinally! So thrilled for this.
Sean Doody
2024-06-01 23:36:47 +0000 UTCReally stoked on this one, I've found Zizek interesting in clips but difficult to listen to at length so awesome format for longer introduction imo
Barrett
2024-06-01 23:34:43 +0000 UTCon coke and desire: 'i did check with chatgpt...' Chris, out of curiosity is that your daily driver for an info search? Also it sounds like there was more in the source material but isn't this idea about unending desire or the desire of desire that Zizek raises a fundamental concept in Buddhism and also roughly consistent w current model of dopaminergic behaviour? Ideas in our hosts' wheelhouses that weren't raised, but perhaps I'm stretching :)
Barrett
2024-06-01 23:33:30 +0000 UTCLooking forward to this!
Linda Sears
2024-06-01 23:08:53 +0000 UTC👏👏
Lillie
2024-06-01 22:10:52 +0000 UTC
