Zizek on Philosophy
A Links entry from Saturday, June 21, 2008Zizek on Philosophy
A series of three articles written by Zizek on philosophy, examining the relationship between Spinoza-Kant-Hegel, Deleuze-Derrida-Lacan and, lastly, Badiou. I thought this was especially well-put, as its an insight that many come to experience at a University, but never really consider as a problem outside of the way “Philosophy” departments are run:
This theory of the four “conditions” of philosophy allows us to approach in a new way the old problem of the “role” of philosophy. Often, other disciplines take over (at least part of) the “normal” role of philosophy… in US today - in the conditions of the predominance of cognitivism and brain studies in philosophy departments -, most of “Continental Philosophy” takes place in Comparative Literature, Cultural Studies, English, French and German departments… What if, then, there is no “normal role”? What if it is exceptions themselves which retroactively create the illusion of the “norm” they allegedly violate? What if not only, in philosophy, exception is the rule, but also philosophy - the need for the authentic philosophical thought - arises precisely in those moments when (other) parts-constituents of the social edifice cannot play their “proper role”? What if the “proper” space for philosophy ARE these very gaps and interstices opened up by the “pathological” displacements in the social edifice? Along these lines, the first great merit of Badiou is that, for the first time, he systematically deployed the four modes of this reference of philosophy (to science, art, politics, and love).
(Via Naught Thought.)
frank furt
Searching through the too-long catalogue for something worth reading - something worth thinking about - and came across your Zizek snippet. What a relief!
So many religious blogs! What is happening in the states? The public realm whips up the war drive while the private prays for salvation?
But back to Zizek. Like him. Just read his “Violence” book - an easy read. But doesn’t one tire soon with this trope that the exception is the condition for the possibility of the rule? And then the query (which the reader mistakes for a conclusion) that philosophy (in this case) should be happy to be the exception and not the rule. But philosophy now has become irrelevant. The juggernaut steams on. Are we to say a resounding “Yes” to irrrelevance because the exception is the condition for the possibiltiy of the rule?
The trope appears again and again: Pain is a condition for the possibility of painlessness (etc, etc); exteriority is a condition of the possibility of interiority; telling the truth (or at least the promise to do so - the expectation that one will do so) is a condition for the possibility of lying. But what makes pain good - what sort of pain is good? Why is some kind of pain a necessity now? What sort of exteriority matters now? And how is the truth to be told.
Maybe I have missed the point.
Maybe I am insufficiently philosophical.
Anyway, this is by the by. Really just a monad-blogger in search of a neighbourhood.
By the way, I write multiple choice questions for Greek kids who think the University of Michigan is cool. Is it cool?
Bryan Klausmeyer
Hi Frank. I’m glad to see a thoughtful comment around here.
I can’t help but notice that perhaps what you find formulaic about Zizek is his Lacanian-informed reading of Hegel. As a reader of Zizek I’m sure you’re aware of this, but the essential idea is that a universal can only be founded on the basis of some excluded particular. A good example would be class struggle, in which the proletariat stands for the excluded particular that also represents the universal field of emancipatory politics.
Although I haven’t read “Violence,” from his lectures on the subject I gather that the central point is this: in our day to day experience of watching the news and engaging in political discourse, we encounter disparate cases of violence that appear to be isolated and depoliticized. Zizek’s Marxian critique of this is that violence is in fact a structural manifestation of global capitalism. Regarding the subject of violence, his view of liberation might be something between Walter Benjamin’s notion of “divine violence” that breaks the knot between power (legitimized violence) and authority and the founding of a community along Pauline lines.
As to your question of UofM: it was a great institution and Ann Arbor is a lovely city. Unfortunately, the dire economics of the state of Michigan and the post-1968 sentiment have led the university to run itself more and more as a business, with some tragic results.
The Author
Recent Posts
- Networks vs. Structures By Bryan Klausmeyer on Nov 22 2008
- Obama’s Two Constituencies By Bryan Klausmeyer on Nov 22 2008
- Teen Commits Suicide with Live Web Audience By Mark Elliot Cullen on Nov 21 2008
- Spectacle with Elvis Costello By Mark Elliot Cullen on Nov 21 2008
- @+@ ALWAYS ≠ % By Mark Elliot Cullen on Nov 20 2008
2 Comments