Who would win in this debate?

Zizek vs Peterson. How do you think it would go?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8YamAsbzPKA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

nobody cares

Zizek has no chance. He supported the marxist SIRIZA and Tsipras.

youtube.com/watch?v=8YamAsbzPKA
Where is your god now, Peterson?

Î…Anti-Capitalist"

It would be a total shit show. Peterson would make non sequiturs about postmodernism constantly while Zizek would ramble on about perverted Yugoslav jokes and so on. They would totally talk passed each other.

Whoever wins, everyone loses

Zizek would dismantle him and peterson would curl up into a ball and start crying
If he lost to Sam Harris, he stands no chance against anyone except lightweights like Cathy Newman and Joe Rogan

peterson is pseudo-intellectual incarnate. he would stand no chance.
that said, zizek is still wrong on many things

ZOG

Doesnt matter if zizek is wrong, his demeanor will still eat up peterson, he's too aggressive

In these type of debates, no one truly wins. Sides have different points of view, first principles regarding existence. Because of this, leftists would claim Zizek won because his points appeal to their view and principles. The same with right wingers and Peterson.
However, this debate would be interesting to listen to.

Would zizek get his coke hit beforehand ?

*sniffs*

> No wonder Foucault, *sniff* Deleuze's Other, was practicing fisting: *sniff* is fist-fucking not the sexual invention *sniff**sniff* of the twentieth century, a new model of eroticism and pleasure? *sniff* It is no longer genitalized, but *sniff**sniff* focused just on the penetration of the surface, with the role of the *sniff* phallus *sniff* being taken over by the hand, the autonomized partial object par excellence *sniff*.
Brainlets BTFO! That's some big brained nibba shit right there.

>*schniff
>It's no joke, man!
>ideology and sho on and sho on
>you think you can handle Nietzsche, but you can't. It will tear you apart, man

I don't care who wins, but I'd pay to watch it.

Debates you'll never hear:
Peterstein v. Taylor
Peterstein v. Alt Hype
because Peterstein doesn't debate """collectivists""".

> self-improvement meme man vs. hedonistic cockehead who peddles psychoanalysis

Peterson is more articulate, Zizek is a mess.
I don't understand why people even listen to Zizek, he doesn't make arguments, he just makes analogies, I mean Hegelian dialect failed a long time ago, it's an useless relic just like psychoanalysis.
Just listen to Zizek debate, he jumps from movie analogies to a picture he saw or a commercial and then jumps to insults and self insults. He's like a well read moron in the '50s. All he does is try to overpower/ overwhelm with speech and gesture. Also he thinks that the syntagm "I don't understand" is a quick way to defeat the opponent's argument. He's a buffoon.

Zizek would throw the debate because he is actually a crypto-fascist.

t. RedKahina

peterson would wipe the floor with that grubby commie trash

Zizek is very entertaining even if he is difficult to listen to, he has a lot of thoughts going in all directions. His writing is a lot easier to take in.

zizec would just take a shit in his hand and feed it to peterson

all commies are crypto-fascists
it's built into the ideology
this is the reason antifa fighting "fascism" is ridiculous
Mussolini was a communist too before he invented his own ideology which honestly is just a national glory seeking version of the same thing

>flag
I already said buffoon, didn't I?!

"See, that's the thing with you bloody Marxists, you...you...well, let's put it this way. It's like you go to the store to get some bread, but then the bread isn't there. Now you are staring at an anomaly. You've come down from the trees and you're looking at a snake, you're looking at the dragon. And might I add, the man with the biggest club is who gets the ladies, because he is the one who keeps the troop safe from the dragon, he ventures out into the chaos of the unknown to save the virgin and get the gold in the dragon's belly. But you bloody Marxists, you just get to the store and see there is no bread there and say, 'well, I guess it's time to flip over the dominance-hierarchy', and then you're in chaos, then you're in hell. It's no joke, I've had patients who have followed no bread all the way down to genocide."

"*sniff*...yes...but what I believe you are forgetting is that there is another *sniff* dimension that structures our view of reality, which is ideology. It's not that the dominance hierarchy is the reality behind the illusion, it is the reality within the illusion itself. *sniff* We are not constrained by our illusions, *sniff* but rather it is our spontaneous reaction to reality itself. That is to say *sniff* we enjoy the comfort of the, as we say in Psychoanalysis, we enjoy the comfort of The Big Other. And here, I take a more pessimistic view, that if we identify too much with our maternal superego, we end up destroying ourselves. That is to say *sniff* it is the implicit rules that have to be hidden from The Big Other in order to maintain our sense of reality."

go away sargon

Zizek would win because Peterson himself knows he isn't good with Philosophy and is one of his weak points.
He is just a glorified Psychologist take his advice for what it is, he's not the answer to all your questions(specifically the jewish question)

>Pic related is him on TV 10 years ago giving the same advice he is now

Zizek would, bucko
*sniffs*

Uneducated brainlets really think Peterson would stand a chance against Zizek, (((Sup Forums))) in a nutshell.

>Zizek would win because Peterson himself knows he isn't good with Philosophy and is one of his weak points.
>He is just a glorified Psychologist take his advice for what it is, he's not the answer to all your questions

This guy completely gets it and you would be wise to listen to him.

Fisting, the postmodern thinking mans fetish

I was going to post something like this. He's a bumbling doofus who spends his time ruminating and then enunciating things that have jack shit to do with the actual world, let alone anything practical.

He is, in its worst sense, a scholar and an intellectual.

Needless to say Peterson would rekt his shit with two syllables.

>Murray Rothbard will never come back to life for one day to dismantle this commie slob

W-would that be a dialectic?

Who is this black psychology professor?

lol zizek a kvetching frothball i never understodd why leftists keep him around he is anti nigger-infestation after all

zizek says some interesting things once in a while... but i can't stand to listen to him talk.

He makes disgusting slobbering noises and it triggers me.

Nobody. Both licking jewish ass.

I thought he beat sam handily in their 2nd talk

>"Criticising society while participating in it! Curious!"

ahahah kek'd

...

not on argument

Peterson looks alpha as fuck here

>Zizek vs Peterson. How do you think it would go?

Who cares? we have debates of our own.

He speaks like a retard and looks like shit...... Obviously a 21th century genius...

>I thought he beat sam handily in their 2nd talk
peterson looked like a complete moron in that debate. harris subtley pointed out hi contradictions and was a gentleman, but peterson came off like a total brainlet, shifting his definition of truth at least three times. also, he has no idea what darwinian means.

...

glorious

Jordan would tell facts.
Zizek the sophist would bring non arguments wraped in 12 layers of logic noone can comprehed.

zizek is pure postmodern con artistry
peterson is annoying now but his logic still revolves mostly around facts

zizek would just talk indecipherable garbage so he would probably lose but postmodernists don't believe there being such a thing as winning or losing so maybe he would win