What do you think?
Rate this book
The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters
The feature which distinguishes the great works of materialist thought, from Lucretius’ De rerum natura through Capital to the writings of Lacan, is their unfinished character: again and again they tackle their chosen problem. Schelling’s Weltalter drafts belong to this same series, with their repeated attempt at the formulation of the ‘beginning of the world,’ of the passage from the pre-symbolic pulsation of the Real to the universe of logos.
F.W.J. Schelling, the German idealist who for too long dwelled in the shadow of Kant and Hegel, was the first to formulate the post-idealist motifs of finitude, contingency and temporality. His unique work announces Marx’s critique of speculative idealism, as well as the properly Freudian notion of drive, of a blind compulsion to repeat which can never be sublated in the ideal medium of language.
The Indivisible Remainder begins with a detailed examination of the two works in which Schelling’s speculative audacity reached its peak: his essay on human freedom and his drafts on the “Ages of the World.” After reconstituting their line of argumentation, Slavoj Žižek confronts Schelling with Hegel, and concludes by throwing a Schellingian light on some “related matters”: the consequences of the computerization of daily life for sexual experience; cynicism as today’s predominant form of ideology; the epistemological deadlocks of quantum physics.
Although the book is packed with examples from politics and popular culture — the unmistakable token of Žižek’s style — from Speed and Groundhog Day to Forrest Gump, it signals a major shift towards a systematic concern with the basic questions of philosophy and the roots of the crisis of our late-capitalist universe, centred around the enigma of modern subjectivity.
F.W.J. Schelling, the German idealist who for too long dwelled in the shadow of Kant and Hegel, was the first to formulate the post-idealist motifs of finitude, contingency and temporality. His unique work announces Marx’s critique of speculative idealism, as well as the properly Freudian notion of drive, of a blind compulsion to repeat which can never be sublated in the ideal medium of language.
The Indivisible Remainder begins with a detailed examination of the two works in which Schelling’s speculative audacity reached its peak: his essay on human freedom and his drafts on the “Ages of the World.” After reconstituting their line of argumentation, Slavoj Žižek confronts Schelling with Hegel, and concludes by throwing a Schellingian light on some “related matters”: the consequences of the computerization of daily life for sexual experience; cynicism as today’s predominant form of ideology; the epistemological deadlocks of quantum physics.
Although the book is packed with examples from politics and popular culture — the unmistakable token of Žižek’s style — from Speed and Groundhog Day to Forrest Gump, it signals a major shift towards a systematic concern with the basic questions of philosophy and the roots of the crisis of our late-capitalist universe, centred around the enigma of modern subjectivity.
254 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
32 people are currently reading
460 people want to read
About the author
Slavoj Žižek
638 books7,555 followersSlavoj Žižek is a Slovene sociologist, philosopher, and cultural critic.
He was born in Ljubljana, Slovenia (then part of SFR Yugoslavia). He received a Doctor of Arts in Philosophy from the University of Ljubljana and studied psychoanalysis at the University of Paris VIII with Jacques-Alain Miller and François Regnault. In 1990 he was a candidate with the party Liberal Democracy of Slovenia for Presidency of the Republic of Slovenia (an auxiliary institution, abolished in 1992).
Since 2005, Žižek has been a member of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
Žižek is well known for his use of the works of 20th century French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan in a new reading of popular culture. He writes on many topics including the Iraq War, fundamentalism, capitalism, tolerance, political correctness, globalization, subjectivity, human rights, Lenin, myth, cyberspace, postmodernism, multiculturalism, post-marxism, David Lynch, and Alfred Hitchcock.
In an interview with the Spanish newspaper El País he jokingly described himself as an "orthodox Lacanian Stalinist". In an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! he described himself as a "Marxist" and a "Communist."
He was born in Ljubljana, Slovenia (then part of SFR Yugoslavia). He received a Doctor of Arts in Philosophy from the University of Ljubljana and studied psychoanalysis at the University of Paris VIII with Jacques-Alain Miller and François Regnault. In 1990 he was a candidate with the party Liberal Democracy of Slovenia for Presidency of the Republic of Slovenia (an auxiliary institution, abolished in 1992).
Since 2005, Žižek has been a member of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
Žižek is well known for his use of the works of 20th century French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan in a new reading of popular culture. He writes on many topics including the Iraq War, fundamentalism, capitalism, tolerance, political correctness, globalization, subjectivity, human rights, Lenin, myth, cyberspace, postmodernism, multiculturalism, post-marxism, David Lynch, and Alfred Hitchcock.
In an interview with the Spanish newspaper El País he jokingly described himself as an "orthodox Lacanian Stalinist". In an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! he described himself as a "Marxist" and a "Communist."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
Read
May 20, 2017The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters is one of several candidates for Slovaj Žižek’s magnum opus. Recently that title was intended for The Parallax View and currently contending is Less Than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism. The Indivisible Remainder is a dense work of systematic philosophical thinking which, once again, gives the lie to the image of Žižek the Clown (“The Elvis of cultural theory”) which our popular media so much enjoys and which Žižek so frequently obligingly plays. Much easier to mock than to read; much easier to take pleasure in Žižek’s dirty jokes and dialectical reversals of our habitual, ideologically enthralled claims than to do the hard work of crunching through his project of philosophical repetition.
The more of Žižek’s works one reads the less one is impressed that his books are merely collections of digressions piled upon digressions and the more one comes to see how tightly and systematically structured they often times are. The first section of The Indivisible Remainder consists of a very close recapitulation of Schelling’s argument from his thrice begun, thrice failed Weltalter (Ages of the World) project which, in the tradition of classic German Idealism’s audacious speculative method, attempts to trace out an account of why something comes out of nothing. Žižek’s project here is to develop a materialist account of the subject, that is, the subject which is conscious, the cartesian-modern subject who in Lacan’s formulation is the “barred subject,” the empty point, and is precisely not an epiphenomenon nor illusion but comes to be by way of excreting a little chunk of the Real, petite objet a. Rather than the non-dialectical project of trying to account for how Freedom arises out of a system of Necessity, as taking natural necessity or reality existing “out there,” as naive Realism would have it, Žižek finds in Schelling’s project the reversal of the question--How does Necessity come to appear out of a primordial subjectless Freedom of the stupid circulation of drive? Žižek’s argument is that Schelling was the first to think Freedom and System simultaneously, that the great tradition of stepping ‘beyond’ Hegel (Kierkegaard through Heidegger to Derrida) begins already with Hegel’s fellow seminarian Schelling. The argument is precise, detailed, and disciplined; no jokes, few films, and just enough Lacan to shed light on Schelling’s positions. This section is Žižek at his best in making his claim for a repetition of the founding gesture of German Idealism.
The second section of The Indivisible Remainder, “Schelling-for-Hegel: The ‘Vanishing Mediator,’” takes us into the--again classic--Žižekian reading of Lacan. Here the systematic presentation of the argument appears to break into a series of digressions and strung-together arguments. I find that I am able to follow the argument at the level of the sentence and even the paragraph, that Žižek’s interpretation of Lacan’s thought and his consideration of other (mis)readings of Lacan, etc., are perspicacious, but when asked to rise to the level of the whole course of the argumentation throughout the section I find that, despite having a clear enough understanding of the trees, the forest does not always come into full outline. This I suspect is because the leading repetition of this section is the repetition precisely of Lacan, which, were Žižek to make his presentation in some kind of more “logical” manner, would immediately falsify the argument. Form follows content here. Most of Žižek’s major theses concerning Lacan are found here, again rather densely packed. The table of contents might be of some interest:
Finally we have the supplemental ‘Related Matters’ which close out the volume with some of Žižek’s major theses regarding the implications of his dialectical materialism for understanding such contemporary deadlocks as cyberspace, irony as ideology, and quantum physics. Again, the table of contents might be fun to gander at:
In my view, reading secondary literature on Žižek is unnecessary. One ought to go directly for the thing-itself and approach the secondary literature as a secondary discussion about his work. The best introduction to Žižek is Žižek-itself, even if The Indivisible Remainder is not the best Itself to initially pick up. Žižek-itself is already largely secondary literature concerning his favored figures of the (dialectical materialist )philosophical tradition, even if that introduction always comes under the heading of For-Žižek. For the present volume I would highly recommend a familiarity with German Idealism but not necessarily Schelling himself. For the Lacan-related material, one may have a more profitable experience with Žižek’s popular Lacan books which tend to illustrate Lacanian topics and concepts rather perspicaciously via cinema.
The more of Žižek’s works one reads the less one is impressed that his books are merely collections of digressions piled upon digressions and the more one comes to see how tightly and systematically structured they often times are. The first section of The Indivisible Remainder consists of a very close recapitulation of Schelling’s argument from his thrice begun, thrice failed Weltalter (Ages of the World) project which, in the tradition of classic German Idealism’s audacious speculative method, attempts to trace out an account of why something comes out of nothing. Žižek’s project here is to develop a materialist account of the subject, that is, the subject which is conscious, the cartesian-modern subject who in Lacan’s formulation is the “barred subject,” the empty point, and is precisely not an epiphenomenon nor illusion but comes to be by way of excreting a little chunk of the Real, petite objet a. Rather than the non-dialectical project of trying to account for how Freedom arises out of a system of Necessity, as taking natural necessity or reality existing “out there,” as naive Realism would have it, Žižek finds in Schelling’s project the reversal of the question--How does Necessity come to appear out of a primordial subjectless Freedom of the stupid circulation of drive? Žižek’s argument is that Schelling was the first to think Freedom and System simultaneously, that the great tradition of stepping ‘beyond’ Hegel (Kierkegaard through Heidegger to Derrida) begins already with Hegel’s fellow seminarian Schelling. The argument is precise, detailed, and disciplined; no jokes, few films, and just enough Lacan to shed light on Schelling’s positions. This section is Žižek at his best in making his claim for a repetition of the founding gesture of German Idealism.
The second section of The Indivisible Remainder, “Schelling-for-Hegel: The ‘Vanishing Mediator,’” takes us into the--again classic--Žižekian reading of Lacan. Here the systematic presentation of the argument appears to break into a series of digressions and strung-together arguments. I find that I am able to follow the argument at the level of the sentence and even the paragraph, that Žižek’s interpretation of Lacan’s thought and his consideration of other (mis)readings of Lacan, etc., are perspicacious, but when asked to rise to the level of the whole course of the argumentation throughout the section I find that, despite having a clear enough understanding of the trees, the forest does not always come into full outline. This I suspect is because the leading repetition of this section is the repetition precisely of Lacan, which, were Žižek to make his presentation in some kind of more “logical” manner, would immediately falsify the argument. Form follows content here. Most of Žižek’s major theses concerning Lacan are found here, again rather densely packed. The table of contents might be of some interest:
Part I. F.W.J. Schelling, or, at the Origins of Dialectical Materialsim
2. Schelling-for-Hegel: The ‘Vanishing Mediator’”
From subjectivization to subjective destitution
Desire versus drive
‘The voice is a voice’
‘And’ as a category
The ambiguous status of lalangue
What is idealism?
The ‘repressed’ genesis of modernity
Die Versagung: from Paul Claudel . . .
. . . to France Prešeren
The dialectical transubstantiation
How does the Spirit return to itself?
There is no subject without an empty signifier
The precipitate identification
The semblance of the ‘objective Spirit’
The symbolic sleight of hand
‘A’ is a
Voice as a supplement
The shofar
How not to read Lacan’s ‘formulas of sexuation’
Femininity as masquerade
In praise of hysteria
‘Desire is the desire of the Other’
Finally we have the supplemental ‘Related Matters’ which close out the volume with some of Žižek’s major theses regarding the implications of his dialectical materialism for understanding such contemporary deadlocks as cyberspace, irony as ideology, and quantum physics. Again, the table of contents might be fun to gander at:
Part II. Related Maters
3. Quantum Physics with Lacan
The ‘wired’ desire
The Cartesian cyberpunk
Cynicism as reflected ideology
Cynicism versus irony
Quantum physics’ ‘thesis eleven’
‘Complementarity’
Against historicism
How does one make a rat human?
Five lessons of the ‘double-slit’
Creatio ex nihilo
In my view, reading secondary literature on Žižek is unnecessary. One ought to go directly for the thing-itself and approach the secondary literature as a secondary discussion about his work. The best introduction to Žižek is Žižek-itself, even if The Indivisible Remainder is not the best Itself to initially pick up. Žižek-itself is already largely secondary literature concerning his favored figures of the (dialectical materialist )philosophical tradition, even if that introduction always comes under the heading of For-Žižek. For the present volume I would highly recommend a familiarity with German Idealism but not necessarily Schelling himself. For the Lacan-related material, one may have a more profitable experience with Žižek’s popular Lacan books which tend to illustrate Lacanian topics and concepts rather perspicaciously via cinema.
Read
June 25, 2024باقیماندهی تقسیمناپذیر؛ دربارهی شلینگ و موضوعات مرتبط/ اسلاوی ژیژک/ علی حسنزاده/ نشر ققنوس
کتاب دو بخشه؛ بخش اول: فردریش ویلهلم یوزف شلینگ یا در سرآغازهای ماتریالیسم دیالکتیکی (که خودش شاملِ دو قسمته: ۱. شلینگ در خود: اُرگاسمِ نیروها ۲. شلینگ برای هگل: میانجی ناپدیدشونده). بخش دوم: موضوعات مرتبط (۳. فیزیک کوانتوم با لاکان)
قضیه با این کتاب شروع شد. فصل اول که تموم شد حس کردم نیاز به پایهی هگل و لاکان دارم. پس اول درنگیدن با امر منفی رو خوندم که در واقع خوانشی از مفهوم کوگیتو در فلسفهس؛ از دکارت تا لاکان. بعد، کژنگریستن: مقدمهای دربارهی لاکان رو مطالعه کردم که در حقیقت توضیح مفاهیم لاکانی از راه سینمای هیچکاک و داستانهای استیفن کینگ و پاتریشیا های اسمیته (یکی از فصلهای درخشان کتاب در مورد مقایسهی ادبیات کاراگاهی کلاسیک (شرلوک هولمز و پوآرو) با ادبیات کاراگاهی مدرن (نویسندگان نوآر مثل دشیل همت) هستش.) آخر سر دوباره برگشتم سر وقت این کتاب و دوباره از اول... به نظرم این کتاب آخر گلِ سرسبد این سه بود. خوانش بینظیر ژیژک از شلینگ (با همراهی هگل و لاکان) که در نهایت ایدهی شلینگ در کتابِ اعصار جهان (مغاک آزادی پیشاآغازین، انعقاد آغازین، انبساط ثانویه) رو به فیزیک کوانتوم و آغاز جهان (خدا) میرسونه و دقتش رو ستایش میکنه. قطعاً یکی از بهترین کتابهایی که خوندم.
.
با این همه آیا همهی آنچه تاکنون پروراندهایم صرفاً استعارهها و قیاسهای سطحی نیست که ابداً مجابکننده و الزامآور نیستند؟ به این انتقاد که خود را با قدرتِ اقناعی بدیهی تحمیل میکند میتوان پاسخی دقیق داد: خودِ اضطرار مقاومت ناپذیر برای کنارگذاری همساختیهای بین جهان کوانتومی و نظم نمادین به مثابه قیاسهایی بیرونی که هیچ شالودهی محکمی ندارند - یا دست کم به مثابه استعارههای صرف - تجلی و یا معلول رویکردِ فلسفی سنتی است که ما را وا می دارد شکافی برناگذشتنی بینِ طبیعت و جهانِ نمادین ایجاد و هرگونه تماس «محرم آمیزانه» بین دو حیطه را ممنوع کنیم. ظهورِ آزادی انسان را تنها میتوان با این امر توضیح داد که خودِ طبیعت واقعیتی «سخت» و همگون نیست ـ یعنی در زیر واقعیت «سخت» بعد دیگری از بالقوگیها و نوسانهای آنها وجود دارد گویی با آزادی انسان این جهانِ غریب بالقوگیها از نو سر بر میآورد، به روشنایی می آید... در نتیجه آدم وسوسه میشود ادعا کند که آزادی شلینگ آزادی به مثابهی امکان هستی محضی که به تنهایی و به قوهی خودش به خود فعلیت میبخشد و وجود کسب میکند، این بزرگترین معما که شلینگ بارها و بارها در تبیین آن شکست خورد در برداشت فیزیک کوانتوم از ظهور (چیزی ذره ای از دل «نیستیِ») نوسان خلأ، انضمامی میشود و یا از پیش ترسیم میشود (در اینجا نیز توالي زماني خطی به حال تعلیق در می آید). آیا این نوسان خلأ همان آزادي شلینگ نیست که هنوز وجود ندارد؟ تکرار ایــن خـردفرایند در سطح کلان کیهان شناسی مُهر تأیید دیگری بر این خوانش می زند: چنانکه پیشتر دیدیم مطابق جسورانهترین فرضیهی کیهانشناسی کوانتومی، جهان ما به خودی خود در کلیتش نوعی نوسان خلأ غول پیکر است؛ این جهان در نتیجه نوعی تعادل به هم خورده از دل هیچ سر برآورده و مقدر است که به هیچ بازگردد. به بیان دیگر آیا مهبانگ نماینده انبساط آغازینی نیست که در پی انعقاد آغازین آزادی به نقطه تكين مطلقاً فشرده ماده میآید؟ مقدم بر انعقاد آغازین فقط خلأ (امکان هستی، هستی توانش) محض وجود داشت آزادی ارادهای که هیچ چیز را اراده نمیکند؛ بر این پسزمینه کاملاً میتوان تعریف شلینگ از ظهور انسان را تصدیق کرد در انسان امکان دیگر به گونهای خودکار تحقق نمییابد بلکه به مثابهی امکان دیرپایی میکند - دقیقاً به این اعتبار انسان نمایندهی نقطهای است که در آن جهانِ مخلوق، از راهِ نوعی اتصال کوتاه مستقیم، مغاکِ آزادی آغازین را باز مییابد.
کتاب دو بخشه؛ بخش اول: فردریش ویلهلم یوزف شلینگ یا در سرآغازهای ماتریالیسم دیالکتیکی (که خودش شاملِ دو قسمته: ۱. شلینگ در خود: اُرگاسمِ نیروها ۲. شلینگ برای هگل: میانجی ناپدیدشونده). بخش دوم: موضوعات مرتبط (۳. فیزیک کوانتوم با لاکان)
قضیه با این کتاب شروع شد. فصل اول که تموم شد حس کردم نیاز به پایهی هگل و لاکان دارم. پس اول درنگیدن با امر منفی رو خوندم که در واقع خوانشی از مفهوم کوگیتو در فلسفهس؛ از دکارت تا لاکان. بعد، کژنگریستن: مقدمهای دربارهی لاکان رو مطالعه کردم که در حقیقت توضیح مفاهیم لاکانی از راه سینمای هیچکاک و داستانهای استیفن کینگ و پاتریشیا های اسمیته (یکی از فصلهای درخشان کتاب در مورد مقایسهی ادبیات کاراگاهی کلاسیک (شرلوک هولمز و پوآرو) با ادبیات کاراگاهی مدرن (نویسندگان نوآر مثل دشیل همت) هستش.) آخر سر دوباره برگشتم سر وقت این کتاب و دوباره از اول... به نظرم این کتاب آخر گلِ سرسبد این سه بود. خوانش بینظیر ژیژک از شلینگ (با همراهی هگل و لاکان) که در نهایت ایدهی شلینگ در کتابِ اعصار جهان (مغاک آزادی پیشاآغازین، انعقاد آغازین، انبساط ثانویه) رو به فیزیک کوانتوم و آغاز جهان (خدا) میرسونه و دقتش رو ستایش میکنه. قطعاً یکی از بهترین کتابهایی که خوندم.
.
با این همه آیا همهی آنچه تاکنون پروراندهایم صرفاً استعارهها و قیاسهای سطحی نیست که ابداً مجابکننده و الزامآور نیستند؟ به این انتقاد که خود را با قدرتِ اقناعی بدیهی تحمیل میکند میتوان پاسخی دقیق داد: خودِ اضطرار مقاومت ناپذیر برای کنارگذاری همساختیهای بین جهان کوانتومی و نظم نمادین به مثابه قیاسهایی بیرونی که هیچ شالودهی محکمی ندارند - یا دست کم به مثابه استعارههای صرف - تجلی و یا معلول رویکردِ فلسفی سنتی است که ما را وا می دارد شکافی برناگذشتنی بینِ طبیعت و جهانِ نمادین ایجاد و هرگونه تماس «محرم آمیزانه» بین دو حیطه را ممنوع کنیم. ظهورِ آزادی انسان را تنها میتوان با این امر توضیح داد که خودِ طبیعت واقعیتی «سخت» و همگون نیست ـ یعنی در زیر واقعیت «سخت» بعد دیگری از بالقوگیها و نوسانهای آنها وجود دارد گویی با آزادی انسان این جهانِ غریب بالقوگیها از نو سر بر میآورد، به روشنایی می آید... در نتیجه آدم وسوسه میشود ادعا کند که آزادی شلینگ آزادی به مثابهی امکان هستی محضی که به تنهایی و به قوهی خودش به خود فعلیت میبخشد و وجود کسب میکند، این بزرگترین معما که شلینگ بارها و بارها در تبیین آن شکست خورد در برداشت فیزیک کوانتوم از ظهور (چیزی ذره ای از دل «نیستیِ») نوسان خلأ، انضمامی میشود و یا از پیش ترسیم میشود (در اینجا نیز توالي زماني خطی به حال تعلیق در می آید). آیا این نوسان خلأ همان آزادي شلینگ نیست که هنوز وجود ندارد؟ تکرار ایــن خـردفرایند در سطح کلان کیهان شناسی مُهر تأیید دیگری بر این خوانش می زند: چنانکه پیشتر دیدیم مطابق جسورانهترین فرضیهی کیهانشناسی کوانتومی، جهان ما به خودی خود در کلیتش نوعی نوسان خلأ غول پیکر است؛ این جهان در نتیجه نوعی تعادل به هم خورده از دل هیچ سر برآورده و مقدر است که به هیچ بازگردد. به بیان دیگر آیا مهبانگ نماینده انبساط آغازینی نیست که در پی انعقاد آغازین آزادی به نقطه تكين مطلقاً فشرده ماده میآید؟ مقدم بر انعقاد آغازین فقط خلأ (امکان هستی، هستی توانش) محض وجود داشت آزادی ارادهای که هیچ چیز را اراده نمیکند؛ بر این پسزمینه کاملاً میتوان تعریف شلینگ از ظهور انسان را تصدیق کرد در انسان امکان دیگر به گونهای خودکار تحقق نمییابد بلکه به مثابهی امکان دیرپایی میکند - دقیقاً به این اعتبار انسان نمایندهی نقطهای است که در آن جهانِ مخلوق، از راهِ نوعی اتصال کوتاه مستقیم، مغاکِ آزادی آغازین را باز مییابد.
May 15, 2018
Mi interés por este libro radicó especialmente en la parte II que hace referencia a "Lacan y la Física Cuántica", a pesar de que el previo repaso por la filosofía de Schelling no dista de ser interesante en sus planteamientos sobre la libertad primordial y su consagración en el plano simbólico.
A mi parecer resulta bastante afortunada la exposición, o al menos la yuxtaposición metafórica realizada por el autor tomando tópicos como la dualidad onda-partícula o la fluctuación cuántica y acercarlos al plano de las pulsiones y las interacciones socio-lingüísticas, no tanto por un afán de prestamos conceptuales sino más bien como metacrítica a fin "de evitar las estrategias mellizas de la naturalización vulgar-materialista del hombre y de la espiritualización oscurantista de la naturaleza".
A mi parecer resulta bastante afortunada la exposición, o al menos la yuxtaposición metafórica realizada por el autor tomando tópicos como la dualidad onda-partícula o la fluctuación cuántica y acercarlos al plano de las pulsiones y las interacciones socio-lingüísticas, no tanto por un afán de prestamos conceptuales sino más bien como metacrítica a fin "de evitar las estrategias mellizas de la naturalización vulgar-materialista del hombre y de la espiritualización oscurantista de la naturaleza".
August 27, 2011
Zizek explores ontology, psychoanalytic symptom/cure, and quantum physics through the lens of Schelling. Through this lens he shows a path to human freedom that has been foreclosed by the problem of determinism as derived from what is understood as Nature. I am still processing this very dense work, but its implications reach into the foundations of how Existence is perceived.
I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in problems concerning the construction (and implications) of the self, psychoanalysis, or ontology. It is fairly dense and some familiarity with Lacan or Hegel would help, but it still offers quite a bit without such a grounding (so to speak). I might give this a 5 if I re-read it and understand more of it. It has given me a lot to think about.
I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in problems concerning the construction (and implications) of the self, psychoanalysis, or ontology. It is fairly dense and some familiarity with Lacan or Hegel would help, but it still offers quite a bit without such a grounding (so to speak). I might give this a 5 if I re-read it and understand more of it. It has given me a lot to think about.
March 17, 2014
How did the universe come into being? How does the self come into being? In using language to encode our world, what is it that is always left out?
This is definitely one of the more challenging things I've read, but Zizek's personable (if a bit manic) style makes it enjoyable. It helps to have a little background, if only a cliff-notes level, of a few people: Hegel, Schelling, Marx, Lacan.
Very unique skill in showing how the simple, obvious and neat is usually not so upon deeper inspection.
This is definitely one of the more challenging things I've read, but Zizek's personable (if a bit manic) style makes it enjoyable. It helps to have a little background, if only a cliff-notes level, of a few people: Hegel, Schelling, Marx, Lacan.
Very unique skill in showing how the simple, obvious and neat is usually not so upon deeper inspection.
March 30, 2014
Had to read a couple of pages of this for my intro to philosophy class. I ended up reading it front to back.
January 27, 2025
No matter the subject matter, Zizek is pathologically incapable of going a sentence without mentioning Lacan… And I wouldnt have it any other way.
His ability to draw psychoanalytic insights into the most unlikely of discourses without being reductive or crude in the process is absolutely unparralleled. Sometimes Lacan/Hegel serve as the lens through which the seemingly unrelated theme at hand is crystallised and brought into relief, and sometimes the complete opposite procedure is at play — not infrequently is Schelling, for example, simply a springboard for explaining Lacan/Hegel.
Even if this is just Zizek taking any oppurtunity to talk about his favourite thinkers, he always does so with great sophistication and the most compelling framing. His grasp of “Lacanese” (as he lovingly terms it) and Hegelian is so watertight that it serves as the most preeminent translation tool between the former and, well, comprehensible english, that I have ever had the pleasure of experiencing.
This is not to say that he neglects a truly detailed exegisis of Schelling — to the contrary, he analyses him with as much reverence as you could hope from Zizek, teasing out his conceptual innovations (not to mention his failures) and taking his progression as a thinker incredibly seriously.
This was my first encounter with anything resembling a serious, sustained, engagement with Schelling, and if Zizek’s intention was to excite my interest in his work and importance to the story of modern philosophy, then mission-bloody-accomplished. Very much looking forward to reading some matter straight from the source, as soon as i can get my hands on it.
Sometimes we forget just how damn sharp of a thinker Zizek was/is. It’s easy to reduce his project down into a series of Lacanian, dialectical reversals of pop culture motifs, but that does a tragic disservice to the man’s contributions and talents. Sure, he’s a goofball and a provocateur, but if you’re struggling to figure out why exactly he was able to accrue the prestige and fame to take the stage in the first place, you could do far worse than starting with The Indivisible Remainder. Just be prepared for flipping between thorough footnotes so often that you’ll have Infinite Jest flashbacks.
Zizek-the-philosopher at his absolute finest. How does he make it look so effortless?!
His ability to draw psychoanalytic insights into the most unlikely of discourses without being reductive or crude in the process is absolutely unparralleled. Sometimes Lacan/Hegel serve as the lens through which the seemingly unrelated theme at hand is crystallised and brought into relief, and sometimes the complete opposite procedure is at play — not infrequently is Schelling, for example, simply a springboard for explaining Lacan/Hegel.
Even if this is just Zizek taking any oppurtunity to talk about his favourite thinkers, he always does so with great sophistication and the most compelling framing. His grasp of “Lacanese” (as he lovingly terms it) and Hegelian is so watertight that it serves as the most preeminent translation tool between the former and, well, comprehensible english, that I have ever had the pleasure of experiencing.
This is not to say that he neglects a truly detailed exegisis of Schelling — to the contrary, he analyses him with as much reverence as you could hope from Zizek, teasing out his conceptual innovations (not to mention his failures) and taking his progression as a thinker incredibly seriously.
This was my first encounter with anything resembling a serious, sustained, engagement with Schelling, and if Zizek’s intention was to excite my interest in his work and importance to the story of modern philosophy, then mission-bloody-accomplished. Very much looking forward to reading some matter straight from the source, as soon as i can get my hands on it.
Sometimes we forget just how damn sharp of a thinker Zizek was/is. It’s easy to reduce his project down into a series of Lacanian, dialectical reversals of pop culture motifs, but that does a tragic disservice to the man’s contributions and talents. Sure, he’s a goofball and a provocateur, but if you’re struggling to figure out why exactly he was able to accrue the prestige and fame to take the stage in the first place, you could do far worse than starting with The Indivisible Remainder. Just be prepared for flipping between thorough footnotes so often that you’ll have Infinite Jest flashbacks.
Zizek-the-philosopher at his absolute finest. How does he make it look so effortless?!
to-keep-reference
March 2, 2016En el capítulo 1 se explica en forma detallada la elección atemporal del propio carácter discutida en Visión de Paralaje Pág.332
June 29, 2012
Useful to help with reading Schelling's Freedom piece
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews