Пікірлер

• 
  @luka229810 күн бұрын

  Chomsky is a retard

• 
  @testostyrannical21 күн бұрын

  Wuddup, homies.

• 
  @VisiblyJacked24 күн бұрын

  My only wish is that ALL Librevox recordings might be in the public domain |-;

• 
  @ai_serfАй бұрын

  the morning after, how this will effect my ordinary life.. what a great critique against many things, especially metaphysics.

• 
  @miamadojesus2 ай бұрын

  Es una gran pena que las traducciones al ESPAÑOL 🇪🇸 de estas interesantes películas sean tan MALAS...😞😞😞😞😞😞

• 
  @jackhal12 ай бұрын

  Zizek talking about Yu-gi-oh, never knew i needed that in my life, but i did

• 
  @arlieferguson74422 ай бұрын

  To the Kripke’s ahhhhhh > Zizeck’s sniff?

• 
  @donlimbargo58652 ай бұрын

  Good narration but the nose whistling drove me nearly mad

• 
  @randalllake27852 ай бұрын

  He was poisoned. A letter sent to ALEXANDER the third was on his secretary’s desk. The secretary saw that it was from a nobleman complaining to the Tzar , that Tchaikovsky was having an affair with his son. The secretary was a colleague of TCHAIKOVSKY, FROM the days they were in the School of Juris Prudence. A court of honor was held to which Tchaikovsky was invited. If the letter got to the Tzar it would disgrace the school. The only way to prevent the letter from reaching the Tzar was if Tchaikovsky committed suicide. It was all arranged, with the Tzar’s doctor administered arsenic in doses to mimic cholera until his death. This only came to light after glasnost and the fall of the Soviet’s fall.

• 
  @nunotanackovic33982 ай бұрын

  Tchaikovsky 💘

• 
  @IKnowNeonLights2 ай бұрын

  It might be useful to consider this clue as that which it is, a clue. There are only a single in terms limited number of language versions which have a considerably useful amount of vague references in number in order to make use off. If and when current existence is considered, such number is less than the possible original one. Within such language versions there is only a very precise way of one being able to fully make use of such possible vague references, and such a precise way, regards the total within being of one within a particular language version. A, any and all possible combinations of language versions as far back as Latin, such possible number of vague references which can be made use off, reduces drastically all the way to none existing. Unless one uses a vague reference, on top of a vague reference, on top of a vague reference, on top of a vague reference and so on..., as a possible initial vague reference. In doing so, results will be available and plenty, and then the usual blank phase will availably present itself also, making all the possible results derived through, (at their best), a set, a vague deduced consequential set. One which even a bacteria can arrive at, as an observable proof. The difference is, bacteria is firmly based within a very strong corrolation, whereas a set based on a vague references, on top of a vague, on top of a vague, and so on... Is as strongly corrolated as lego pieces. That. Is your problem.

• 
  @KingsOfCydonia3 ай бұрын

  We can distingish what is fiction and what is reality. But if we take away the fiction we lose reality itself.

• 
  @amuria553 ай бұрын

  I don't really think Chomsky cares about this dude, he really just talked about him when he was directly asked about him, and the interviewer kept asking "what do you think about Zizek's works", so he answered, what is very clear: There is no work, he is just a poser. It's very simple, Chomsky nailed it, this guy is nothing more than a poser, he has no work, no real content, he is just image, voice, and basic social media comment section rage talking points, there's nothing there. Two hundred years from now, Chomsky is gonna be talked about for his work and ideas as much as we talk about most great philosophers in history, from Socrates to Nietzsche... This Zizek dude will be nowhere to be found. But you know, you're free to skirm if you love him, I mean, ALL he does (and why he has any fame now) is to comfort the weak minded and the fools, so, you know, understandable really, sad, but understandable. History is the biggest filter of BS, and this dumbo will be filtered as what he is, just a basic poser, without any content aside from providing comfort with the most basic BS.

• 
  @haydensmith99764 ай бұрын

  Chomsky is not a serious figure, except in linguistics, where he is dead wrong about everything.

• 
  @Invest4Cash-Flow5 ай бұрын

  as far as I understand nietzsche, he was just another Nazi

• 
  @varaconn67083 ай бұрын

  that's not very analytical. why does one become a Nazi?

• 
  @firstal37995 ай бұрын

  Putnam always underwhelmed me

• 
  @dubbelkastrull5 ай бұрын

  2:05 bookmark

• 
  @johnmaisonneuve90575 ай бұрын

  Zizek is an embarrassment. A total nut case and a waste of time.

• 
  @sudhirpatel76206 ай бұрын

  Nature goes on forever for everyone and everything to return as everyone and everything an infinite number of times through evolutionary processes. 🌌

• 
  @Coneman36 ай бұрын

  ENTP is never going to be able to understand an INFJ. Zizek sounds too angry to be using his intellect correctly imo

• 
  @Coneman36 ай бұрын

  “ Violently opposed”. Ok, chill dude and talk slower ffs

• 
  @davelordy6 ай бұрын

  This is good lads, but I'm not hearing a single.

• 
  @birdwatching_u_back6 ай бұрын

  1:45:46 Crazy how he brings this up presumably *right* before scientists actually literally discovered the Higgs Boson (on July 4, 2012). At any rate, this lecture was posted on KZread in September of that year, so I’m assuming he delivered it at least a few months before then. Dang, pretty wild :)

• 
  @tomschneider75556 ай бұрын

  Zizek is a charlatan, a self important actor who pretends to be a philosopher, but has not published anything of any significance

• 
  @allenandrews23806 ай бұрын

  An excellent diagnostician. Di- agnostic!!! A double lie. Or the death of not knowing?

• 
  @joshbaino30877 ай бұрын

  His point about Chomsky and the Khmer Rouge is drawn from mainstream American media and is a complete fabrication. Chomsky never denied the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge. He simply contextualized them, and demonstrated how they were used by an opportunistic media who A) ignored the atrocities when it was the United States and its allies who were commiting them (and destroying Cambodia to an extent that some deaths under the Khmer Rouge due to malnutrition and other factors were spill-overs. There were more deaths here than under the KR, and the indiscriminate attacks on peasants led to a sympathetic base for the Khmer Rouge) and B) silently re-adjusted their stance when, after Vietnam invaded and ousted Pol Pot, the United States SUPPORTED Pol Pot and the KR in their attacks from the West-aligned Thai border.

• 
  @user-ep6sq6kc5p7 ай бұрын

  Thanks

• 
  @outerworld1007 ай бұрын

  That’s insane like no one does them on flat

• 
  @bjwnashe55897 ай бұрын

  Chomsky destroyed these theory posers like Zizek.

• 
  @joeybeann7 ай бұрын

  ok, so this dude wants a "will to power " so many times but talks aobut life being a give up moment 2:47:14

• 
  @joeybeann7 ай бұрын

  These guys talked about life while it was happening along side of them. It passed them by and we began a new era when they finally finished their long winded speeches.I hope you learned at least something from these men.

• 
  @anastasijicasavicansta7 ай бұрын

  WOW

• 
  @bruzm.17378 ай бұрын

  He flattened Chomsky! That makes me happy.

• 
  @user-fw6gc8ls9w8 ай бұрын

  7:52 preface 23:59 The problem of socrates

• 
  @JimmyMcBimmy8 ай бұрын

  So basically... Chomsky: Zizek is full of unverifiable gibberish and is essentially a glorified charlatan. Zizek: Chomsky is narrow-minded focused on empirical, "microscopic" facts and fails to build an umbrella of theory that could explain reality as a whole. Both sides have obvious problems, and these two men could (and should) try to see more in each other.

• 
  @gurjotsingh89348 ай бұрын

  Revisiting my playlists

• 
  @TheChewman20018 ай бұрын

  I think Žižek is dancing around a particular definition of fascism which relies on the idea that the enemies of the state are both powerful and weak simultaneously. Particularly in regards to left wing people, the idea is floated around that they are weak and pathetic and also that they have infiltrated political institutions and are waiting for a time to strike.

• 
  @valskorupko87148 ай бұрын

  Zizek is an asshole. Chomsky is off limits.

• 
  @GhostCrow6668 ай бұрын

  Only just found this narrator. You sound almost exactly like me 😮

• 
  @octavioavila65488 ай бұрын

  45:42 Krishna issues a similar command to Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita when He commands him to slaughter his own family who is on the opposing army

• 
  @waynesmathers31478 ай бұрын

  Praise Zoroastria, Canaan attack on Is-not-real today 😅

• 
  @phis72309 ай бұрын

  Probably Zizek should have read Chomsky before he talk about him.

• 
  @xletix699 ай бұрын

  formulas of sexuation start at 18:20

• 
  @animefurry35089 ай бұрын

  Well you heard him boys we have the go, time for Canada to do what is right and Invade the US lol! Good luck comrades! 🇨🇦

• 
  @animefurry35089 ай бұрын

  Aaaa yes Pokemon cards a classic example of Kantian logic with its set rules in visible and invisible variables, but if i do say so i much prefer the speculative mixed Hegelian ontology of Yu-Gi-Oh where every card is its own let of laws and objectives. ... In essence Pokemon is for evil authoritarian totalitarians and Yu-Gi-Oh is good radical and based, and anyone whom plays pokemon is dumb and we cut there heads off lol!

• 
  @Waferdicing9 ай бұрын

  💯

• 
  @fergoesdayton9 ай бұрын

  FUCK REASON!

• 
  @MontyCantsin59 ай бұрын

  31:54: Bit of an odd reaction by Maureen Eckert. 😅

• 
  @trixylizard69709 ай бұрын

  "That wouldn't match my definition of melodrama, so it would be highly inappropriate to bring up!" *pearl clutching intensifies*

• 
  @coolbian51310 ай бұрын

  chomsky is right