Have you noticed that whenever Zizek talks about politics in clear language, his reasoning is always, "I like this so the government should do it."? He's a perfect example of picrelated being true. You can wade about in the self referential circle jerk of Hegel and Kant etc for 40 years but in the end you won't have anything to show for it.
The pseudo intellectuals will claim otherwise. They need to jerk off over Plato and Aristotle ad Wittgenstein etc in order to fool others.
>>1059824
Stalin.
Examples?
>>1059829
His recent talks about his new book, against the double blackmail. You can Google them. One is at LSE, the other with the Guardian
How is Zizek's statism proof of anything but itself?
The Munchhausen trilemma might be significant in some contexts but what are you trying to say? I don't understand the point of this thread.
>>1059836
You could just post YouTube links, you cuck
>>1059836
nigger it's an hour and 20 minutes, learn to paraphrase an argument
>>1059837
It's an significant in every context, you obscurantist aids ridden charlatan
>>1059847
OK, so how is it significant in this context? I still don't understand the point of this thread.
>>1059850
You either have a low IQ or are unseraged so I'll explain just this once.
The picture explains the basis for reasoning. It's obvious that we can't get satisfactory answers for moral questions
