Tonight Mr. X and I attended a great lecture by Slavoj Zizek, academic rockstar, obscenely prolific writer, philosopher, and former candidate for the
presidency of Slovenia. An assistant prof. introduced him, speaking for 30 minutes or so without an understandable word, except Zizek's name, which
he said about 100 times. He used lots of air quotes, and said not only that Zizek was an idiot, but the world's village idiot. After that I was
ready for a nap just like my school days, but Zizek was surprisingly clear and entertaining. I understood about 1/2 to 2/3 of what he said, although
it would have helped a lot if I were more familiar with deconstructionism, or with the work of Lacan, Deleuze, or about 20 other thinkers whom he
constantly cited.
I'll take a bit to relate some of his memorable thoughts. First, there was talk of how the 'virtual' can be more real than reality. For example,
pain produced by directly stimulating the pain center of the brain, we might call virtual because nothing physical is causing the pain in the usual
sense. But (so Zizek says) our senses are really a level of indirection that makes physical pain less real, and brain-stimulated pain, is in a sense
more pure, therefore more real.
The other big thing I remember was about all the contradictions in our society. An important one is, we tend to think of ancient or primitive people
as really believing in the crazy things in their culture, like the Greek gods, or animal spirits. But if you look more closely, you find that those
people really didn't necessarily believe in it, or they might all say they don't really believe it, but their parents and grandparents do. And it's
in fact today that people are really believing in these crazy religions. Another example from my own experience is the paradox of consumerism here,
where we are always being told to indulge ourselves, yet we must somehow remain slim. So we get coffee without caffeine, beer without alcohol, etc.
Zizek crystallized it with the example of the chocolate laxative, its own counteragent.
Finally, he had a great bit about the phrase "if God doesn't exist, then everything is permitted." In fact, he claims, it's quite the opposite!
(Sentences to this effect permeated the lecture.) If God (and the afterlife) exists, then you can do anything and say it's in his name, and no matter
what you do here, as long as you meet the criteria, you can look forward to eternal life in heaven. If God doesn't exist, then you must make the most
of your life, because it's short and all you have, and you are solely responsible for your actions.
The common criticisms of philosophy could apply. Apart from the dense language, he's basically stirring things up by providing seemingly outlandish
and perverse interpretations of life and society that tend not to mean much from a practical perspective. But Zizek's strength is that he does
provide real life examples, even from current events and popular culture. You really have to do that unless you only care about being understood by
professional philosophers, which is kind of pointless unless you're just testing the ideas out. For my part I don't mind it, because even if it
doesn't change the way you walk down the street, it's interesting now and then to look at things from a very different perspective, and wonder why it
should be seen as perverse or dangerous, rather than simply another way.