Home

From ‘Zizek’s Reality’, an essay (pdf) by Stathis Gourgouris accompanying Zizek’s lecture ‘The Reality of the Virtual’:

Dialectical thinking has nothing to do with unification, even when it pursues
objects as singular, even when it evokes totalities. Rather, it seeks the self-
contradictory condition of the unity of the non-unified, perhaps even the non-
unifiable. But thought, in itself, cannot possibly theorize the non-unifiable. (This is
the elementary radicalism of dialectics.) If thought can be considered this way, by
the strictest standards of theory, it could only as a symptom of a worldly prattein
which establishes itself as ground for thought (Zugrund). In other words, thought
does not occur as a reflection on an outcome (as an instrumental result), but as an
event, a practico-poetic event of the dispersal of the real.

— —

This radical performative (real-virtual) atheism would leave Christianity and all its
social-imaginary mechanisms far behind. It would mean to live not as if God does
not exist but to live as if God does not matter. Such a decision renders belief or
disbelief in God immaterial, much as it renders the question of God’s existence or
nonexistence irrelevant. Even more significantly, it thereby exposes that both
discourses (belief and disbelief) consist in producing an authority materialized out
of the immaterial, which occludes the encounter with worldly things that really
matter. There is no way that the issue can be resolved by taking cover behind some
sort of non-committed agnosticism: “I don’t really know if God exists or not, so I
withdraw judgment in the matter.” As Ludwig Wittgenstein has shown, the strictly
agnostic position is impossible. I cannot presume not to know with the certainty of
knowledge. In Wittgenstein’s (sense of) language, I cannot say “I know that I
don’t know,” Socrates notwithstanding, without compromising the radical power
of non-knowledge (which obviously has nothing to do with ignorance). I cannot
presume not to know because I would have to imagine (therefore, know) what it is
I don’t or cannot know. Living your life by performing the fact that God does not
exist – solely, in the sense that God does not matter, not because you have a stake
on the ontological status of the question “God is or is not” – is to destabilize any
guarantee of providence or destiny.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s