Žižek: Why You have to know Kant to understand Hegel

Good morning everyone. Today is like to explain why Žižek argues that you have to know Kant in order to understand Hegel. Žižek often refers to Kant as the “vanishing mediator” for Hegel, which in this video I will also try to explain.

Apologies for the sound of my dog in the background. She was sleeping and briefly woke up during the video.

Julian

#zizek #slavojzizek #kant #hegel #marx

[julianphilosophy]

Apologies for the background noise. That was my dog Molly waking up and then going back to sleep. PS: the ebooks are here:

[jonirischx]

You have to understand Hume to understand Kant, Kant to understand Hegel, Hegel to understand Marx, Marx to understand Zizek, so that you can finally analyze Christopher Nolan's Batman movies and Coca Cola advertisements the way they were meant to be analyzed...

[sourdough]

oh god. you need to know hegel to truly know marx, and to truly know hegel you need to know kant. time to dedicate the rest of my year to idealism!

[anthonyclark]

And then in order to understand Kant you have to understand Hume. Fuck, I was drawn to philosophy because I didn’t want to work

[samuelmelton]

More reading?? Clearly not vanished enough 🔫

[johnwentz]

Reading homer to unerstand plato to understand aristotle to understand epictitus to understand plotinus to understand augustine to understand aquinas to understand descartes to understand spinoza to understand locke to understand berkeley to understand hume to understand kant to understand ficte to understand hegel to understand marx to understand the funi trash man.

[SunAndMoon-zcvd]

1:39 - when philosophy and tambourine lessons collide.

[selimword]

Would it be fair to say that Marx anticipated the concept of the vanishing mediator in his essay “On the Jewish Question”? If I recall he makes similar arguments about how the stateform universalizes and secularizes Christianity, while capitalism universalizes and secularizes Judaism.

[amillar]

Ah, I finally understand sublation, thank you!

[gachi-san]

Please, keep doing what you are doing

[slmille]

Apparently Hegel mistakes the boundaries of human reason as simply obstacles to be overcome, when in fact they are the very conditions that make knowledge possible...

[fastsavannah]

This is an important bit of information to understand many things about “the free subject”, which is THE topic of Juan Carlos Rodríguez’s work in Spain.

[conforzo]

In SoL the vanishing mediator is Becoming. You try to think immediate thought without sensory representation or determination, known as Pure Being. You realize you are thinking Nothing. But this thought of Nothing still _is_. So it brings us back to Being, which again is Nothing. This back and forth, or dialectical dead-lock, is the immediate vanishing, we can retroactively in our Understanding analyze the moments, but the thought is immediate. Being immediately vanishes into Nothing which immediately vanishes into Being. Now, instead of abandoning the exercise due to the contradiction, we realize that this immediate vanishing is itself mediation, or Becoming, so the immediate vanishing has vanished itself into its own sublated concept of the Becoming. Continuing with Hegels method we know ask ourselves, "Becoming _what_?", movement from what to what? In our recollection we conclude it is Ceasing-to-Be (Being to Nothing), and Coming-to-Be (Nothing to Being), and this in turn will be sublated into Determined Being and Determined Non-Being. The point is you have to do the thought exercises yourself, it's hard, takes time, and requires the guiding of Hegels writing. Hegels lays out the moments for us, but to truly Vernunft it, we must do it.

[Nestoras_Zogopoulos]

thank you for this video, you really articulate it very clearly.

[SI-qpcm]

Why are we not critiquing Hegel - the way Schopenhauer did. The Thing in itself being solved by interaction with subjectivity is not open to him to take. Certainly not if one reads the Critique of Pure reason from start to finish. Shcopenhauer was correct to label Hegel a charlatan for that move. The only way one can accept it is by not understanding the fundamental question that Kant was looking into. Not a metaphysical but epistemological . Now apply Hegel to the critique of Hume as a resolution and it becomes nonsensical. That is how it seems to me at least.

[unknowninfinium]

Imagine understanding the entire philosphy just to realise that is not what Hegel really meant.
That is Hegel in a nutshell.
And Marx sympathisers including Zizek.

[bennguyen]

I always thought Marxism is mostly a critique the shortcomings of capitalism.. and how it requires war in order to exist.

[djsjdh-hoahdi]

Is it fair to say the investigation to discover what the ideal object looks like is replaced by the investigation to discover what the ideal subject looks like, as well as, of course, interacting with the essence of the object in a way that you can dialectically redefine it?

[codawithteeth]

As someone who’s read a bit… Don’t take shit like this too seriously. It’s never as necessary as people think it is, they’re just nerds that aren’t satisfied with a partial but still enlightening level of understanding, and they’re pressuring you to be as obsessive as they are. Don’t take it too seriously.

[alighori]

Is Hegel a vanishing mediator for Marx and Marx in turn provided materials for postmodern theory to come forth. Would be interesting if saw this way.