Slavoj Žižek famously declares that "wisdom is what I hate most, it is absolute conformist stupidity". Instead of viewing wisdom as the ultimate intellectual achievement, the Slovenian philosopher argues that it functions as a pacifying ideological tool designed to prevent radical change and keep individuals trapped in existing social structures.
Why Wisdom is "Conformist Stupidity"
It serves as psychological rationalization: Žižek compares traditional wisdom to Freud’s concept of rationalization. It functions as a defense mechanism to mask reality.
It justifies any outcome retroactively: A "wise" person always has a proverb ready to normalize reality. If a business risk succeeds, wisdom says "only those who risk profit". If it fails, wisdom shifts to "you cannot urinate against the wind".
It relies on empty contradictions: Completely opposite statements can both sound profoundly "wise" if delivered with the right tone. Telling someone to “seize the day because life is short” sounds deep. Telling them to “ignore earthly illusions and focus on eternity” also sounds deep.
It acts as a market commodity: Modern wisdom has been reduced to easily digestible, surface-level spiritual slogans. These allow people to decouple themselves from the painful, complex realities of the world.
The Ideological Danger of the "Wise" Person
In his writings on his Substack, Žižek expands on how wisdom limits political and social imagination: Enforces incremental change: Wisdom counsels moderation, compromise, and the belief that "the truth lies in the middle". This automatically neutralizes any real challenge to power.
Accepts systemic failure: Wisdom tells people to accept the flaws of systems like global capitalism and simply work within them, rather than demanding their abolition.
Philosophy vs. Wisdom
Žižek points out that true philosophers should naturally be opposed to wisdom. He frequently cites Søren Kierkegaard, who rejected wisdom as a pagan concept. For Žižek, disruptive figures like Jesus Christ or revolutionary thinkers were never "wise"—they were provocative, excessive, and unconditional. Dealing with systemic crises like ecological collapse or severe inequality requires an embrace of rupture and radical action, which is precisely what wisdom advises against.
-FJ states... "He [Žižek] frequently cites Søren Kierkegaard, who rejected wisdom as a pagan concept."
Where is this found -FJ? Give us the rabbit trails to actual writings, as opposed to AI or You Tube commentaries. That way I can read it from the source.
Source text where he rejects pagan wisdom and Greek philosophy
Kierkegaard’s rejection of pagan wisdom and Greek philosophy is primarily developed across three foundational source texts. Writing mostly under the pseudonyms Johannes Climacus and Anti-Climacus, he explicitly contrasts the limits of the Greek worldview with the reality of Christian faith.
The primary source texts and their specific arguments include:
1. Philosophical Fragments (1844)
Writing as Johannes Climacus, Kierkegaard uses this entire text to contrast Socratic Recollection (Greek pagan wisdom) with the Christian Encounter (Divine Revelation).
The Core Argument: Climacus asks whether truth can be discovered from within human nature. He uses Socrates to represent the pinnacle of pagan wisdom: the belief that the human mind already possesses the truth and only needs a teacher to help "recollect" it.
The Rejection: Kierkegaard rejects this, arguing that humans are fundamentally in "Error" (sin) and lack the capacity to discover ultimate truth on their own. Truth cannot be recollected; it must be brought from the outside by God acting as a Savior in a specific historical moment.
2. The Sickness Unto Death (1849)
Writing under the pseudonymous persona Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard directly attacks the Greek ethical framework regarding human wrongdoing.
The Core Argument: He explicitly critiques the definition of sin found in ancient Greek philosophy, particularly the Socratic view that "virtue is knowledge" and "vice is ignorance".
The Rejection: Kierkegaard argues that the Greek view is shallow because it assumes that if a person knows what is right, they will do it. He counters that pagan wisdom fails to comprehend the true nature of sin, which is not a intellectual mistake or a lack of understanding, but a conscious, willful defiance of the human will against God.
3. Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846)
In this massive sequel to Philosophical Fragments, Johannes Climacus further delineates where Greek intellectualism falls short.
The Core Argument: He examines the concept of "Subjectivity" and how an individual relates to eternal truth.
The Rejection: While he deeply admires Socrates for practicing "essential knowing" in daily life, he clarifies that pagan inwardness is capped by human limitation. Pagan wisdom operates within immanence (the natural, rational world), whereas Christianity demands a "leap of faith" into the Absolute Paradox—the mathematically absurd claim that the eternal God entered linear human history as a man.
Wisdom and Justice are Opposing (parts of) Virtues. The "Wiser" you become, the more "Unjust" you must become. The more "Just" you become, the less "Wise" you are. It's a Yin-Yang thing. That doesn't mean you must settle in the "middle" (Meden agan), but the perfectly Just are not Wise, and the perfectly Wise are not Just.
"There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true."
Kierkegaard hardly "rejects wisdom". This describes the foolish gullibility and willful ignorance of MAGA, religion, and other forms of authoritarianism. And we all know what Hitler's and Trump's idea of justice is by now. Punish everyone you hate. It is both unjust and unwise.
Sort of like -FJ's values with his fealty to Trump's authoritarian rule. (Except when it happens to them.)
One can replace "wisdom" with "conservatism/capitalism" in his words and it will more accurately frame our reality.
Let's try it: Accepts systemic failure: Wisdom (Conservatism/capitalism) tells people to accept the flaws of systems like global capitalism and simply work within them, rather than demanding their abolition.
Dealing with systemic crises like ecological collapse or severe inequality requires an embrace of rupture and radical action, which is precisely what wisdom (Conservatism/capitalism) advises against.
This is why conservatism and capitalism spawn and at minimum tolerate atrocities, starvation, racism, ethnic cleansing, genocide, austerity, wars, and every injustice under the sun. It's just "business as usual". (Except when it happens to them.)
No wonder "justice" scares the crap out of them.
Excluding his Christian dogma, Kierkegaard's wisdom boils down to this.
"The thing is to understand myself: the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die. That is what I now recognize as the most important thing. It is very important in life to know when your cue comes.
Life has its own hidden forces which you can only discover by living. The highest and most beautiful things in life are not to be heard about, nor read about, nor seen but, if one will, are to be lived.
Loving just one is too little; loving all is being superficial; knowing yourself and loving as many as possible, letting your soul hide all the powers of love in itself, so that each gets its particular nourishment while consciousness nevertheless embraces it all – that is enjoyment, that is living."
This is NOT conservatism. It's more like Buddhism. And wisdom.
But Dave... you can't separate Kierkegaard from his Christian dogma any more than Descartes could empty himself of his prior biases as he began his meditations on the existence of God.
I think you can choose to unbelieve, but the essence of those beliefs are always with you, influencing and moving you.
Dave, I see your point. I could have phrased it as, "In addition to his Christian dogma". Somewhere between religious dogma and abstract metaphysics lies ethics, which is grounded in our interpersonal relationships and personal convictions. This is why I find Marcus Aurelius and his Meditations as a better philosophy for mankind. It's the closest the West came to Buddhism, but without the mysticism and reincarnation. As the parrots on Huxley's Island say, "Karuna" (compassion) and "Here and now, boys" (living in the moment). We don't need the pie in the sky promise and mythology to know right from wrong and how to treat one another. Nobody killed and died to promote or defend stoicism. It wins points just for that.
The proof is in all the Christians, Jews, and Muslims who are always waging wars and suppressing anyone not of their faith. Their idea of peace and justice is when THEY have all the power.
While the Buddhists sit in their meditation closets allowing wild elephants to run rampant through their villages... good thing there are few elephants in Nepal (but for China and India).
And right now that power, held by the USA since 1945 with its Zionist Genocidal butchers in Israel, is shifting. As the American/Zionist Empire's decline accelerates the East will rise again and become the dominant economic abd political power of the planet.
Through this nation's ignorance and arrogance we have become the architects of our own decline and eventual demise.
Slavoj Žižek famously declares...So what? He gets to define wisdom as capitulation to the status quo or reduce it to trite aphorisms. That straw man is easy to knock over.
Instead of a reading assignment, just say what you want to say. Defend your boy's dissing something as subjective as 'traditional wisdom'. If you're able.
No problem Les. I was referencing FJ's copy and paste of Zizek's screed on traditional wisdom. It's Thirsty's M.O. to inject some "authority" (philosopher or some dude on YouTube) as if that's the last word on anything. He seems incapable of formulating an argument on his own.
My beef with the Zizek is he's using his own narrow definition of wisdom to conclude Wisdom is "Conformist Stupidity". Seems like strawmanning and unwise.
Wisdom that this nation and its government is oblivious to, the result of its national narcissism, self righteousness, and lack of self awareness.
ReplyDeleteI'll get by with a little help from my friends.
ReplyDeleteSlavoj Žižek famously declares that "wisdom is what I hate most, it is absolute conformist stupidity". Instead of viewing wisdom as the ultimate intellectual achievement, the Slovenian philosopher argues that it functions as a pacifying ideological tool designed to prevent radical change and keep individuals trapped in existing social structures.
Why Wisdom is "Conformist Stupidity"
It serves as psychological rationalization: Žižek compares traditional wisdom to Freud’s concept of rationalization. It functions as a defense mechanism to mask reality.
It justifies any outcome retroactively: A "wise" person always has a proverb ready to normalize reality. If a business risk succeeds, wisdom says "only those who risk profit". If it fails, wisdom shifts to "you cannot urinate against the wind".
It relies on empty contradictions: Completely opposite statements can both sound profoundly "wise" if delivered with the right tone. Telling someone to “seize the day because life is short” sounds deep. Telling them to “ignore earthly illusions and focus on eternity” also sounds deep.
It acts as a market commodity: Modern wisdom has been reduced to easily digestible, surface-level spiritual slogans. These allow people to decouple themselves from the painful, complex realities of the world.
The Ideological Danger of the "Wise" Person
In his writings on his Substack, Žižek expands on how wisdom limits political and social imagination:
Enforces incremental change: Wisdom counsels moderation, compromise, and the belief that "the truth lies in the middle". This automatically neutralizes any real challenge to power.
Accepts systemic failure: Wisdom tells people to accept the flaws of systems like global capitalism and simply work within them, rather than demanding their abolition.
Philosophy vs. Wisdom
Žižek points out that true philosophers should naturally be opposed to wisdom. He frequently cites Søren Kierkegaard, who rejected wisdom as a pagan concept. For Žižek, disruptive figures like Jesus Christ or revolutionary thinkers were never "wise"—they were provocative, excessive, and unconditional. Dealing with systemic crises like ecological collapse or severe inequality requires an embrace of rupture and radical action, which is precisely what wisdom advises against.
-FJ states... "He [Žižek] frequently cites Søren Kierkegaard, who rejected wisdom as a pagan concept."
DeleteWhere is this found -FJ? Give us the rabbit trails to actual writings, as opposed to AI or You Tube commentaries. That way I can read it from the source.
Source text where he rejects pagan wisdom and Greek philosophy
DeleteKierkegaard’s rejection of pagan wisdom and Greek philosophy is primarily developed across three foundational source texts. Writing mostly under the pseudonyms Johannes Climacus and Anti-Climacus, he explicitly contrasts the limits of the Greek worldview with the reality of Christian faith.
The primary source texts and their specific arguments include:
1. Philosophical Fragments (1844)
Writing as Johannes Climacus, Kierkegaard uses this entire text to contrast Socratic Recollection (Greek pagan wisdom) with the Christian Encounter (Divine Revelation).
The Core Argument: Climacus asks whether truth can be discovered from within human nature. He uses Socrates to represent the pinnacle of pagan wisdom: the belief that the human mind already possesses the truth and only needs a teacher to help "recollect" it.
The Rejection: Kierkegaard rejects this, arguing that humans are fundamentally in "Error" (sin) and lack the capacity to discover ultimate truth on their own. Truth cannot be recollected; it must be brought from the outside by God acting as a Savior in a specific historical moment.
2. The Sickness Unto Death (1849)
Writing under the pseudonymous persona Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard directly attacks the Greek ethical framework regarding human wrongdoing.
The Core Argument: He explicitly critiques the definition of sin found in ancient Greek philosophy, particularly the Socratic view that "virtue is knowledge" and "vice is ignorance".
The Rejection: Kierkegaard argues that the Greek view is shallow because it assumes that if a person knows what is right, they will do it. He counters that pagan wisdom fails to comprehend the true nature of sin, which is not a intellectual mistake or a lack of understanding, but a conscious, willful defiance of the human will against God.
3. Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846)
In this massive sequel to Philosophical Fragments, Johannes Climacus further delineates where Greek intellectualism falls short.
The Core Argument: He examines the concept of "Subjectivity" and how an individual relates to eternal truth.
The Rejection: While he deeply admires Socrates for practicing "essential knowing" in daily life, he clarifies that pagan inwardness is capped by human limitation. Pagan wisdom operates within immanence (the natural, rational world), whereas Christianity demands a "leap of faith" into the Absolute Paradox—the mathematically absurd claim that the eternal God entered linear human history as a man.
On Negating the 'surplus' jouissance in language (imagination). The surplus that strips the imaginary qualities (ie -beauty) in language and reduces them to stark "realities"..
ReplyDeleteWisdom and Justice are Opposing (parts of) Virtues. The "Wiser" you become, the more "Unjust" you must become. The more "Just" you become, the less "Wise" you are. It's a Yin-Yang thing. That doesn't mean you must settle in the "middle" (Meden agan), but the perfectly Just are not Wise, and the perfectly Wise are not Just.
ReplyDelete
Delete"There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true."
Kierkegaard hardly "rejects wisdom". This describes the foolish gullibility and willful ignorance of MAGA, religion, and other forms of authoritarianism.
And we all know what Hitler's and Trump's idea of justice is by now. Punish everyone you hate. It is both unjust and unwise.
Sort of like -FJ's values with his fealty to Trump's authoritarian rule. (Except when it happens to them.)
One can replace "wisdom" with "conservatism/capitalism" in his words and it will more accurately frame our reality.
Let's try it:
Accepts systemic failure: Wisdom (Conservatism/capitalism) tells people to accept the flaws of systems like global capitalism and simply work within them, rather than demanding their abolition.
Dealing with systemic crises like ecological collapse or severe inequality requires an embrace of rupture and radical action, which is precisely what wisdom (Conservatism/capitalism) advises against.
This is why conservatism and capitalism spawn and at minimum tolerate atrocities, starvation, racism, ethnic cleansing, genocide, austerity, wars, and every injustice under the sun. It's just "business as usual". (Except when it happens to them.)
No wonder "justice" scares the crap out of them.
Excluding his Christian dogma, Kierkegaard's wisdom boils down to this.
"The thing is to understand myself: the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die. That is what I now recognize as the most important thing. It is very important in life to know when your cue comes.
Life has its own hidden forces which you can only discover by living. The highest and most beautiful things in life are not to be heard about, nor read about, nor seen but, if one will, are to be lived.
Loving just one is too little; loving all is being superficial; knowing yourself and loving as many as possible, letting your soul hide all the powers of love in itself, so that each gets its particular nourishment while consciousness nevertheless embraces it all – that is enjoyment, that is living."
This is NOT conservatism. It's more like Buddhism. And wisdom.
But Dave... you can't separate Kierkegaard from his Christian dogma any more than Descartes could empty himself of his prior biases as he began his meditations on the existence of God.
DeleteI think you can choose to unbelieve, but the essence of those beliefs are always with you, influencing and moving you.
Dave,
DeleteI see your point.
I could have phrased it as, "In addition to his Christian dogma".
Somewhere between religious dogma and abstract metaphysics lies ethics, which is grounded in our interpersonal relationships and personal convictions.
This is why I find Marcus Aurelius and his Meditations as a better philosophy for mankind. It's the closest the West came to Buddhism, but without the mysticism and reincarnation.
As the parrots on Huxley's Island say, "Karuna" (compassion) and "Here and now, boys" (living in the moment). We don't need the pie in the sky promise and mythology to know right from wrong and how to treat one another.
Nobody killed and died to promote or defend stoicism.
It wins points just for that.
The proof is in all the Christians, Jews, and Muslims who are always waging wars and suppressing anyone not of their faith. Their idea of peace and justice is when THEY have all the power.
ReplyDeleteWhile the Buddhists sit in their meditation closets allowing wild elephants to run rampant through their villages... good thing there are few elephants in Nepal (but for China and India).
DeleteAnd right now that power, held by the USA since 1945 with its Zionist Genocidal butchers in Israel, is shifting. As the American/Zionist Empire's decline accelerates the East will rise again and become the dominant economic abd political power of the planet.
ReplyDeleteThrough this nation's ignorance and arrogance we have become the architects of our own decline and eventual demise.
Slavoj Žižek famously declares...So what? He gets to define wisdom as capitulation to the status quo or reduce it to trite aphorisms. That straw man is easy to knock over.
ReplyDeleteHi -fj, fancy seeing you here as Craig. One of your many faced sock puppets.
DeleteActually, Les, Craig is a legit commenter here. He’s not a sock puppet.
DeleteMy error then.
DeleteThe only person I recall who has referenced Slavoj Zizek has been -fj.
Jumping to conclusions gets one egg in the face.
Thanks for correcting me.
Perhaps you should introduce yourself to Zizek's "Antigone", Craig. She's no trite conformist. Neither is his Lenin.
DeleteOr perhaps a little less intensly anti-status quo, Melville's "I'd rather not" Bartleby the Scrivener.
DeleteInstead of a reading assignment, just say what you want to say. Defend your boy's dissing something as subjective as 'traditional wisdom'. If you're able.
DeleteGood to see you Craig...
ReplyDeleteNo problem Les. I was referencing FJ's copy and paste of Zizek's screed on traditional wisdom. It's Thirsty's M.O. to inject some "authority" (philosopher or some dude on YouTube) as if that's the last word on anything. He seems incapable of formulating an argument on his own.
ReplyDeleteMy beef with the Zizek is he's using his own narrow definition of wisdom to conclude Wisdom is "Conformist Stupidity". Seems like strawmanning and unwise.
Thanks, Craig.
DeleteI suppose wisdom can be conformity when it's unquestioned and simply accepted. Which of course applies to cults. MAGA immediately comes to mind.
Wisdom, to a large extent needs to be grounded in experiential knowledge. Not in canned media hype or political gibberish.
Thanks Dave.
ReplyDeleteIf you feel like it, could you elaborate on this?
I think you can choose to unbelieve, but the essence of those beliefs are always with you, influencing and moving you.?
Unbelieve what and which beliefs are always with you? Just curious.