Slavoj Zizek is a philosopher for the 21st century. His pace is terrifyingly polymathic and just keeping up with the intricacies of his speaking style is an intellectual assault course. Described by his biographer as doing philosophy with such recklessness as to risk making it interesting (a rather pessimistic and unjustified jab at ‘analytic’ philosophy) Zizek is a controversial, card-carrying comrade, but to run away screaming ‘COMMUNIST!’ would be to commit to the modern fallacy of pigeon-holing and categorizing. Zizek is too weird for that.
What interests me about his thought in the context of this blog is his critique of Christianity. An atheist, Zizek would no doubt shun the ‘new atheist’ movement and perhaps view this blog's posts on the future of freethought with bizarre fascination - as he might view the blog in its entirety. Nonetheless, this ‘continental’ thinker has much to contribute to any atheism/theism debate.
Zizek focuses on the Christian command to ‘love thy neighbour’. Firstly, and less interestingly, he asserts along with many other thinkers (I can also think of Hitchens) that love issued as a command is simply not possible. Any claim to do such a thing should be met with suspicion.
The intriguing stuff starts when Zizek asks what is meant by the term ‘neighbour’. It isn’t, he claims, that we should have empathy or sympathy with the man on the street. It is very far removed from this. As part of his larger critique of capitalism, Zizek holds that the term ‘neighbour’ is employed only in order to distance the user from his fellow human. Humanity, claims Zizek (paradoxically in my view), has both human and inhuman aspects. The command to love one's neighbour forces you to embrace both sides.
Charity in the 21st century, is not what it seems, says Zizek. The real motivation for giving to the poor isn’t that you want to help your neighbour; it’s just that you couldn’t care less and want to forget about the issue, but want to feel like it’s ok to forget.
Zizek skilfully extends this critique of religion to a political one and then back again, and if you fancy some quick-paced thinking, check out this video, the first part of which is posted below.
Remember, I’m just a blogger, so don’t go taking this post to your philosophy lecturer. If you want to learn more about Zizek, listen to the man himself.
6 comments:
My age is 70 so I'm not sure if I'm allowed to comment here! "Love your neighbour" is the first axiom of humanism and pre-dates christianity by centuries. "Love your enemy also" was the innovation by Jesus, though even that, in a more sensible form (negotiate peace with your enemy if possible) is also a humanist principle well known to earlier philosophers. Zizek may be an atheist but is evidently not a humanist.
Of course you can comment! It's great to see the older generation on sites like this. I don't know exactly what Zizek would make of Humanism, but I'd certainly like to find out.
I love the speech by Zizek, however, is it me, or is he high on cocaine? Sorry, but he looses all credibility during his speech by constantly sniffing and rubbing his nose, and then wiping his (snot?) on his shirt.
I have never seen the man before, so perhaps this is his normal behavior. Still... I could not get past it. Maybe I'm being overly critical, and that this quirk of his is normal. Can anyone tell me is this not unusual for Zizek? Has anyone here seen him give speeches in the past, where he behaves the same way?
If so, then I apologize for bringing it up in the first place. For a man of his high academic credentials,I can not easily believe that he could be doing what I think he his?? Please, please, correct me if I'm wrong. Or maybe he just has allergies, and is unusually hyper?
- Mark
He is a self-professed neurotic, which may have something to do with his almost compulsive behavior; it also might be a cleverly-designed trick to capture your attention at a purely ocular level that transcends the gaze.
Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
Or not...
Post a Comment