Here are some interesting articles I’ve come across recently, for your consideration:
The lesson history teaches is tragic. Though I’m slightly more optimistic than the author. (New York Times)
Kant against your Oculus Rift. (Medium)
What is Zizek for? A long, and long overdue, brutal take down of the philosopher-charlatan. (Current Affairs)
And speaking of charlatans, from the other side of the political spectrum: The shadow of Jordan Peterson. Snake-oil, lobsters and lazy-thinking. (Medium)
What the end of modern philosophy would look like. Interesting, though I’m going to disagree on the main point. Would have been nice if the author at least sketched what he thinks comes after modern philosophy. (Philosophical Salon)
How science fiction made me liberal. More than anything, the genre challenges us to imagine beyond the status quo. (Medium)
The magical thinking of weight loss. On major weight loss and praying at the altar of thinness. (Medium)
Philosophy as a Way of Life
Was at a journalism conference Thursday afternoon and Friday. (Sidebar: Trader Joe’s almond butter chocolate cups? Very good.)
Reading the Zizek now. Had heard about the Peterson event with him and how it was a love-in more than huge areas of disagreement. The piece basically is saying more on why.
==
The Peterson piece fails in not calling Jungianism itself snake oil, as I’m sure you’d agree. Other than that, it’s pretty good … but that’s a big caveat.
Liked by 1 person
Yes, the author should have called Jungianism itself into question. Surprising how many people still defend it. And Freudianism.
Like
Oh, having read through that Zizek piece, I’ll add that he’s a crappy philosopher. I mean, an alleged Marxist of some sort clearly misrepresenting dialectical materialism, and also twisting Parmenides? Glad I’ve never read him and I have no reason to now.
Liked by 1 person