Zizek vs Peterson: April 19

Zizek vs Peterson: April 19


hi everyone April 19th at the Sony Centre in Toronto Ontario Canada I’m debating Slava Dziedzic Slovenian philosopher and professor at the Institute for sociology and philosophy at the University of Ljubljana whose works on cultural studies psychoanalysis and above all for the purposes of this announcement Marxism are world renowned the pre-sale code is JB psz and begins Thursday February 28th at 11 a.m. local time until Thursday at 10 p.m. local time general ticket sales begin Friday at 10 a.m. local time the topic happiness Marxism vs. capitalism hope to see you there

100 Comments on "Zizek vs Peterson: April 19"


  1. left wing liberals aren't happy with this….. it freaking showed up in my Google feed written by someone named jahar…. very unhappy and really doesn't like jp…

    Reply

  2. He put on that tie to make this video, further evidence we need to rally and free Peterson from the oppression of Men's Warehouse. He has to be the only guy this century still wearing a vest.

    Reply

  3. Rather than talking past each other can you both speak about your understanding of what Christianity is since that is where you are likely to have the most common ground.

    Reply

  4. I got Peterson by knockout in the 1st or 2nd round. But if it goes the distance, Zizek wins by submission in the last rounds. I also heard “Big John” McCarthy is coming out of retirement to ref it. …And Joe Rogan will be the fight commentator. #Sweet #Epic

    Reply

  5. JP you take alot of your material from Bible, so how do you explain Biblical stance (New Testament) on money – "Money is root of all evil."

    Reply

  6. I would propose doing a drinking game for this event. (Every time Zizek rubs his nose do a shot) The only problem, most people would be laying on the floor in three minutes .

    Reply

  7. I really hope there's a good moderator for this debate. The debates/conversations with Sam Harris were much more productive when Bret Weinstein was moderating them. With Zizek and Peterson having very different fundamental philosophical frameworks, I feel that the conversation could become very messy.

    Reply

  8. JP fans should stop doing to Zizek what mainstream media does to JP. Don't buy the sound bites. He is a leftist and he is far more critical of capitalism than JP is, but they actually share a lot of common ground. If they can get over their respective hatreds for capitalism and Marxism this can actually be a great discussion. Sadly I trust neither of them to be able to pull this off at this point. Zizek lives to provoke and JP is becoming increasingly thin skinned over the last 8 months or so. Maybe it's exhaustion or the mindless mob driving him to a frenzy, but I hope he can go back to being calm, collected and respectful like he was a few years ago. Even if they disagree on fundamental issues, they both deserve each other's respect. Let's hope we get a good debate out of this.

    Reply

  9. Romantic rebellion against the status quo can come in conservative or leftist modes. Peterson and Zizek represent these poles. They have fan bases not so much because of the content of what they say as the personas they project as rebels and outsiders standing against the "system." Unfortunately, it leaves out a whole third way of thinking about political and social issues, namely, modern liberalism. But this is to leave out the very political ideas by which most modern industrial societies live, ideas about justice that defend a system that has both free markets and welfare rights, both the duty of personal responsibility as well as the right to some equality of resources that make effective freedom of the individual possible in economic and political life. The unfortunate consequence of posing our choice as between either Peterson or Zizek is that the dichotomy blinds us to the values we actually live by, prevents them from coming to consciousness, and from being debated and justified. It suggests a false-either or alternative that both Peterson and Zizek have an interest in fostering because the more you believe in that binary opposition the more you think one or the other of them is the savior we need. They would both love the old 60s saying, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem." It's a secular version of the old religious idea that you are either among the saved or among the damned, the elect or the reprobate. This stimulates fanatic followers, but unfortunately it's a false opposition. But it helps explain why both Peterson and Zizek agreed to the debate.

    Reply

  10. To. Dr Jordan Peterson,

    I recommend providing us with your thoughts of the significance of GAZE.

    Reply

  11. The lobster-king rises to save us simultaneously from the tyranny of Satan and the dragon of chaos. Truly God's grace shines down on us.

    Reply

  12. Why does this feel like a boxing match. I dont think the versus kinds of debates get us anywhere, they only ever seem to divide people further

    Reply

  13. Popcorn ready…PC a non issue…light vs darkness, good vs evil…can Zizek ever explain the gulag spa treatments

    Reply

  14. I was going to say "You can do it Jordan¡¡", but I prefer to listen critically to both of you and take a rational conclusion.

    Reply

  15. Jordan Peterson doesn't materially disagree with Zizek on happiness, they both believe that fulfillment is found in finding your path and following it. Zizek believes that ordinary happiness sold in stores is junk and real happiness is struggle with what you are passionate about. Peterson believes that you must take up the good fight to step forward in the world and speak the truth as you can best discover it. They don't disagree. Jordan thinks Marxism is some big intellectual threat, Zizek believes accepting the status quo is ruinous and is not the sort of Marxist who Jordan refers to when he talks Marxism. One difference is that Zizek actually has done the reading, speaks five languages, has two PhDs, and is moved on past Peterson's level of hawking self help for kids.
    An amusing aside is how dopey Peterson will look in one of his overdressed vested zoot suits while Zizek slobbers all over his sport shirt.

    Reply

  16. Tickets on Ebay, about $250-$800 EACH. All proceeds go to buying vested suits for Peterson and decongestant for Zizek.

    Reply

  17. they need a professional boxing announcer for this debate.
    hardly wait. saw peterson live in NZ.

    Reply

  18. I thought a dialogue with Zizek would be interesting long before it was even rumoured. Imagine my disappointment that I can't get tickets now. Dr. Peterson, please start using bigger venues… like maybe Rogers Centre (aka Skydome).

    Reply

  19. Love you Jordan Peterson 😉 Im busy with my life, but still watching your lectures, when a free time is available 😉

    Reply

  20. Thank you professor, you are the way-shower. Slavoj is very sick man. Best wishes from Croatia !

    Reply

  21. "Capitalism" is a pejorative attached to free markets by totalitarians. We should therefore reclaim the name "free markets" as the title of our non-totalitarian economic system.

    Reply

  22. I live in Germany and won't be able to join this discussion. Will there be a live stream or something comparable ?

    Reply

  23. Zizek and Peterson will probably sit and agree for majority of the discussion and disagree on semantics.

    I for one am looking forward to this epic battle between The Master Sniffer and Lord of The Lobsters.

    Reply

  24. I was depressed. then I found videos of prof. peterson on youtube and started watching them. and now I m a communist. thx prof. peterson.

    Reply

  25. Mr Peterson are you willing to admit yet bill C16 was not what you made everyone believe it was? its been 5 years now since it passed and none of the bad things you scare mongered people about have happened?

    People you've been fooled…

    Reply

  26. I am not a supporter of any dogma and/or doctrine, but I have to say something about this matter. I have lost a house and a home in 1992, it was pillaged, burned then destroyed to the ground by Serbian chetniks (paramilitary troops) and JNA (Yugoslav People's Army) in the war and never got a new one from the state, while the area was ethnically cleansed and I could never go back. For 25 years I lived without my own home. Now I do, but only thanks to my own family by hard work. Since Žižek prefers Marxsism/socialism/communism, I expect him to share his own house and wealth with me. Not that I need it or want it (I have my own stand), it's just since he has that kind of a stand, prove it. Until then, Žižek, talk is crap. On the other hand, the so-called capitalism is a slavery in disguise. Both doctrines, along with national-socialism, are just one of the many tools of the Rothschilds and their poltroons (zionists, "royal families", freemasons, politicians and similar parasites), so the key to happiness is keep out the bullshit people, situations and stuff. Now you have a nice day

    Reply

  27. not to offend, but will there be subtitles? … i heard Peterson has a horrible accent in Slovenian

    Reply

  28. So obviously the Marxist accepted the idea of commercializing the debate. The participation of him in this debate is paradoxical itself.

    Reply

  29. True societal happiness is when society learns to solve social problems with social solutions, capital problems with capital solutions and combine problems with combine solutions, as opposed to using a pre-picked ideology to arbitrarily dictate problem-solving.

    Reply

  30. Are you absolutely sure mr. Peterson, that you are, at the best of your ability, being true, to your own claim of one of the most important virtous, being true, when choosing this debate opponent?

    I really like it by the way, but my sense is, the choice of opponent or recentment of other other opponents, and thereby, the goal of the debate. Offcourse, one could argue (regular Peterson term) that choosing a opponent that wont kill you, will lead to more debates and more people taking advantage of those debates. I sure liked this one, but what about my question, how do you choose who to debate or not?

    Reply

  31. Peterson you are ignorant of economics let alone socialism.

    Here is the dissection of his argument https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1GqjlO1VN4

    Reply

  32. What about the debate with Richard Wolff?

    Interesting. Is that because Zizek is more difficult to follow and he's more difficult to take seriously? And Wolff actually has the potential to open some of your fans' eyes and/or make them actually contemplate socialism and Marxism?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *