DST Header4 White
Slavoj Zizek: Der Amazonas brennt – na und? - WELT


Slavoj Žižek (born 21 March 1949) is a Slovenian philosopher who works in subjects including continental philosophy, political theory, cultural studies, psychoanalysis, film criticism, Marxism, Hegelianism and theology.

In 1989 Žižek published his first English-language text, The Sublime Object of Ideology, in which he departed from traditional Marxist theory to develop a materialist conception of ideology that drew heavily on Lacanian psychoanalysis and Hegelian idealism. His theoretical work became increasingly eclectic and political in the 1990s, dealing frequently in the critical analysis of disparate forms of popular culture and making him a popular figure of the academic left.

Žižek’s idiosyncratic style, popular academic works, frequent magazine op-eds, and critical assimilation of high and low culture have gained him international influence, controversy, criticism and a substantial audience outside academia. In 2012, Foreign Policy listed Žižek on its list of Top 100 Global Thinkers, calling him “a celebrity philosopher” while elsewhere he has been dubbed the “Elvis of cultural theory” and “the most dangerous philosopher in the West”. A 2005 documentary film entitled Zizek! chronicled Žižek’s work. A journal, the International Journal of Žižek Studies, was founded to engage with his work.

His body of writing spans dense theoretical polemics, academic tomes, and accessible introductory books; in addition, he has taken part in various film projects, including two documentary collaborations with director Sophie Fiennes, The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema (2006) and The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology (2012). His work has impacted both academic and widespread public audiences.



The Essential Dialectic of Zizekian Philosophy is:

{Ideology-Fantasies ⇆ Sublime-Object ⇅ Fragile-Absolute} ↻ Split-Subject

The Essential Dialectic of Zizekian Philosophy is the Ideology-Fantasies, Sublime-Object, Fragile-Absolute, Split-Subject Dialectic because those are the four pillars of Slovoj Zizek’s work.

{Marxist-Ideology ⇆ Lacanian-Psychoanalysis ⇅ Christian-Theology} ↻ Hegelian-Philosophy




The Intermediary Dialectic of Zizekian Philosophy is:

{???? ⇆ ???? ⇅ ????} ↻ ????



The Complete Dialectic of Zizekian Philosophy is:

{???? ⇆ ???? ⇅ ????} ↻ ????


Professor Zizek The Parallax View (2009): “Niels Bohr, who gave the right answer to Einstein’s ‘God doesn’t play dice’ (‘Don’t tell God what to do!’), also provided the perfect example of how a fetishist disavowal of belief works in ideology: seeing a horseshoe on his door, a surprised visitor said that he didn’t believe in the superstition that it brings good luck, to which Bohr snapped back: ‘I don’t believe in it either; I have it there because I was told that it works even if one doesn’t believe in it!’ What this paradox makes clear is the way a belief is a reflexive attitude: it is never a case of simply believing – one has to believe in belief itself. That is why Kierkegaard was right to claim that we do not really believe (in Christ), we believe to believe – and Bohr simply confronts us with the logical negative of this reflexivity (one can also not believe one’s beliefs…).”

Pg 42 Slavoj Zizek The Parallax View (a): “Such a convoluted topology is totally absent from Spinoza’s thought. Does Spinoza not formulate the highest parallax? The substance is One, and the difference between mind and body, its two modes, is purely that of parallax: ‘body’ or ‘mind’ are the same Substance perceived in a different mode. There is nonetheless a key difference between Spinoza and Hegel here: for Spinoza, the parallax is symmetric (there is no point of contact or of passage between the two modes, each of them merely reveals the same network in a different mode), while for Hegel, the two levels involved in a parallax shift are radically asymmetric: one of the two levels appears to be able to stand on its own, while the other stands for the shift as such, for the gap between the two. In other words, Two are not simply One and One, since Two stands for the very move/shift from One to Two. (A simplified example: in the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and proletariat, the proletariat stands for the struggle as such.) The passage from the Spinozian One qua the neutral medium/container of its modes and the One’s inherent gap is the very passage from Substance to Subject.”

  {University ⇆ Master ⇅ Hysteric} ↻ Analyst