Protestant here, it’s good to hear the Gospel in dialogue with Lacan and Hegel. Christ’s love and grace is always the answer. Thanks for your content James.
Hey brotha! Had a phenomenal talk with telosbound the other day would also love to have a conversation with you and you’re work as well! Let me know if you interested, keep up the great work 👍🏽
This conversation works it’s way over to the other side of psychoanalysis to lacan: to object-relations. Lacan (and Hegel) has a kind of rigidity to it. As trey seems to outline with zizek these guys outline well the reality of our situation here in the fall or toward hell. There is a totalising idolatrous nature to their theories that describe well our idolatrous world but not the way out of the hall of mirrors even if the awareness and acceptance is a fabulous step out of the horror show it doesn’t get us that far. And I can’t agree that this is the only reality and neither does the larger half of psychoanalysis - object relations which opens up a more discrete set of options that can grow developmentally. While lacan has basically no development.
Thank you sir. Just saw your stream with Dave and subbed. Good stuff. Curious as to what you found interesting with the McGowan interview? I wondered how/if the Theory folks would engage with the content. Btw Masvidal is a welterweight I've got him by 50 pounds 🫠
@@JAMESKOURTIDES From what I gather, anything that doesn't fit neatly in a category is a contradiction to Hegel, and when confronted then we do the dialectic. McGowan is someone who says the Mother of God is a whore, because whores exist and it must be included. Unless I'm misunderstanding that just sounds lame.
Having just started this video and not knowing totally the context, but having spent some time "studying" (not in a formal academic sense, just something I spend a considerable amount of time listening/reading) McGowan's & Žižek's work, I would say this, which hopefully is helpful: contradiction is ontological. All matter, all beings, all thoughts, all relations, all objects (virtual and physical), are immanently contradictory. Nothing is or can be beyond contradiction.
@@bradspitt3896 gosh, you're making me think 😆 actually I deeply appreciate this since it's forcing me to be better at articulating it. We could look from maybe two angles: 1. Maybe it's helpful to think of it backwards (for whatever reason this is "backwards" to me): nothing is beyond contradiction. The negative space of non-being is the only position of freedom, of being outside of contradiction. 2. "Everything is contradictory," is a "form vs. content," proposition. As Hegel puts it "substance as subject." By that I just mean to say that it isn't that everything is also it's exact opposite, like a dog is also a cat, or an apple is also an orange, but that everything that exists is also the failure of itself. Immanently within everything that exists is its undoing, on its own terms. For example, if something is alive it must die, otherwise it could never have been alive. "Aliveness" means necessarily death. If there is a "hero," there must be an enemy. The position of "good" itself necessitates "evil." One cannot exist without the other, that's the "gap," or "cut," or "contradiction." Hegel used the "master/slave," example to show (as I understand it, I'm only getting this second hand through Žižek and McGowan haha) the master is actually the slave to the slave, as the master's position is only made possible through the slave. Maybe it's all just silly nonsense, but I love it. Both McGowan and Žižek connect this Hegelian dialectical method and ontology to psychoanalysis and the necessary consequences of consciousness and I really think it's a beautiful and powerful way to understand and critique everything.
So fascinating you'd say that, I think his retort would be that's precisely the opposite of what he thinks. He is a universalist that necessarily rejects positing "good and bad," which is the reason he uses the terms "left and right," instead. Fascism/right-wing does implicitly get labelled as bad (as is the obvious correct position) not because of an inherent "badness" but because the right-wing position itself necessarily, on its own terms, needs an enemy, needs evil, since without it this position cannot exist. What he designates as "left" is the universalist position, a position beyond good/evil and hero/enemy. In fact, his universalist positioning means we necessarily cannot have good/evil - that's the very thing that makes it universalist. The negative space of non-belonging isn't "good" so much as it's beyond good and evil.
Very excited to watch this
Todd is a great interlocutor. I could definitely see Todd as a monk!
Protestant here, it’s good to hear the Gospel in dialogue with Lacan and Hegel. Christ’s love and grace is always the answer. Thanks for your content James.
The deep dive dialogues you do is your best work.
Very interesting discussion. It would be useful for us all if more of Todd McGowan's regular audience were to engage with these questions.
Hey brotha! Had a phenomenal talk with telosbound the other day would also love to have a conversation with you and you’re work as well! Let me know if you interested, keep up the great work 👍🏽
Let's do it
@@JAMESKOURTIDES I put my email in the bio of my channel, go ahead and shoot me one at your convenience and we can go from there
This conversation works it’s way over to the other side of psychoanalysis to lacan: to object-relations. Lacan (and Hegel) has a kind of rigidity to it. As trey seems to outline with zizek these guys outline well the reality of our situation here in the fall or toward hell. There is a totalising idolatrous nature to their theories that describe well our idolatrous world but not the way out of the hall of mirrors even if the awareness and acceptance is a fabulous step out of the horror show it doesn’t get us that far. And I can’t agree that this is the only reality and neither does the larger half of psychoanalysis - object relations which opens up a more discrete set of options that can grow developmentally. While lacan has basically no development.
This was quite interesting. Kinda random, but you look a lot like Jorge Masvidal lol
Thank you sir. Just saw your stream with Dave and subbed. Good stuff. Curious as to what you found interesting with the McGowan interview? I wondered how/if the Theory folks would engage with the content. Btw Masvidal is a welterweight I've got him by 50 pounds 🫠
👌
Seems like he's using contradiction so broadly. I don't know what he means.
See Hegel
@@JAMESKOURTIDES From what I gather, anything that doesn't fit neatly in a category is a contradiction to Hegel, and when confronted then we do the dialectic. McGowan is someone who says the Mother of God is a whore, because whores exist and it must be included. Unless I'm misunderstanding that just sounds lame.
Having just started this video and not knowing totally the context, but having spent some time "studying" (not in a formal academic sense, just something I spend a considerable amount of time listening/reading) McGowan's & Žižek's work, I would say this, which hopefully is helpful: contradiction is ontological. All matter, all beings, all thoughts, all relations, all objects (virtual and physical), are immanently contradictory. Nothing is or can be beyond contradiction.
@@nah8845 "all things are contradictory," what does that mean?
@@bradspitt3896 gosh, you're making me think 😆 actually I deeply appreciate this since it's forcing me to be better at articulating it. We could look from maybe two angles:
1. Maybe it's helpful to think of it backwards (for whatever reason this is "backwards" to me): nothing is beyond contradiction. The negative space of non-being is the only position of freedom, of being outside of contradiction.
2. "Everything is contradictory," is a "form vs. content," proposition. As Hegel puts it "substance as subject." By that I just mean to say that it isn't that everything is also it's exact opposite, like a dog is also a cat, or an apple is also an orange, but that everything that exists is also the failure of itself. Immanently within everything that exists is its undoing, on its own terms.
For example, if something is alive it must die, otherwise it could never have been alive. "Aliveness" means necessarily death. If there is a "hero," there must be an enemy. The position of "good" itself necessitates "evil." One cannot exist without the other, that's the "gap," or "cut," or "contradiction." Hegel used the "master/slave," example to show (as I understand it, I'm only getting this second hand through Žižek and McGowan haha) the master is actually the slave to the slave, as the master's position is only made possible through the slave.
Maybe it's all just silly nonsense, but I love it. Both McGowan and Žižek connect this Hegelian dialectical method and ontology to psychoanalysis and the necessary consequences of consciousness and I really think it's a beautiful and powerful way to understand and critique everything.
I really feel you are going into a kind of new age direction ... it is troubling ...
In the new age but not of it 🫣
Is there a reason why you don’t put these up on Apple Podcasts? Great content, looking forward to more
Not really just haven't gotten around to it. I need to though. Thanks for the kind words.
@@JAMESKOURTIDES easiest way to get ur podcasts out on all platforms is by using Anchor. recently discovered it, very helpful
Todd is so biased to his side, left all good, right all Bad, he is too old to think in such childish manner.
So fascinating you'd say that, I think his retort would be that's precisely the opposite of what he thinks. He is a universalist that necessarily rejects positing "good and bad," which is the reason he uses the terms "left and right," instead.
Fascism/right-wing does implicitly get labelled as bad (as is the obvious correct position) not because of an inherent "badness" but because the right-wing position itself necessarily, on its own terms, needs an enemy, needs evil, since without it this position cannot exist.
What he designates as "left" is the universalist position, a position beyond good/evil and hero/enemy. In fact, his universalist positioning means we necessarily cannot have good/evil - that's the very thing that makes it universalist. The negative space of non-belonging isn't "good" so much as it's beyond good and evil.