Cultural Studies versus the "Third Culture"

Zizek, Slavoj.
The South Atlantic Quarterly, Volume 101, Number 1, Winter 2002,
pp. 19-32 (Article)
Published by Duke University Press
For additional information about this article
Access Provided by Istanbul Bilgi Univ, Kustepe at 11/03/10 2:16PM GMT
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/saq/summary/v101/101.1zizek.html
Slavoj iek
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture
Wo aio witnossing today tho stiugglo loi intol-
loctual hogonony (loi who will occupy tho uni-
voisal placo ol tho pullic intolloctual lotwoon
tho advocatos ol postnodoin-doconstiuctionist
cultuial studios and tho cognitivist populaiizois
ol haid scioncos, that is, tho piopononts ol
tho so-callod Thiid Cultuio. This stiugglo, which
caught tho attontion ol tho gonoial pullic ist
thiough tho so-callod do Man aaii (whoio
oppononts ondoavoiod to piovo tho piotolas-
cist iiiationalist tondoncios ol doconstiuction,
ioachod its poak in tho SokalSocial Text aaii.
In cultuial studios, Theory usually iolois to lit-
oiaiy[cinona ciiticisn, nass cultuio, idoology,
quooi studios, and so loith. It is woith quoting
hoio tho suipiisod ioaction ol Richaid Dawkins:
I noticod, tho othoi day, an aiticlo ly a litoiaiy
ciitic callod Thooiy: What Is It? Would you
loliovo it? Thooiy tuinod out to noan thooiy
in litoiaiy ciiticisn. . . . Tho voiy woid thooiy
has loon hiackod loi sono oxtionoly naiiow
paiochial litoiaiy puiposoas though Einstoin
didnt havo thooiios, as though Daiwin didnt
havo thooiios.
1
Dawkins is hoio in solidaiity with his gioat
Tho South Atlantic Quarterly o:, Wintoi zooz.
Copyiight _ zooz ly Duko Univoisity Pioss.
20 Slavoj iek
opponont Stophon Jay Gould, who also conplains that thoios sonothing
ol a conspiiacy anong litoiaiy intolloctuals to think thoy own tho intolloc-
tual landscapo and tho ioviowing souicos, whon in lact thoio aio a gioup ol
nonction wiitois, laigoly lionscioncos, who havo a wholo host ol lascinat-
ing idoas that pooplo want to ioad alout.
2
Thoso quotos cloaily stako tho
toins ol tho dolato as tho ght loi idoological hogonony intho piociso sonso
this toin acquiiod in Einosto Laclaus wiitings: tho ght ovoi a paiticulai
contont that always hogononizos tho appaiontly noutial univoisal toin.
Tho Thiid Cultuio conpiisos tho vast old that ioachos liontho dolatois
ol ovolutionaiy thooiy (Dawkins and Daniol Donnott voisus Gould thiough
physicists doaling with quantun physics and cosnology (Stophon Hawk-
ing, Stovon Woinloig, Fiitol Capia, cognitivo sciontists (Donnott again,
Maivin Minsky, nouiologists (Olivoi Sacks, and tho thooiists ol chaos (Bo-
noit Mandolliot, Ian Stowaitauthois doaling with tho cognitivo and gon-
oial social inpact ol tho digitalization ol oui daily livosup to tho thoo-
iists ol an autopootic syston who ondoavoi to dovolop a univoisal loinal
notion ol soll-oiganizing onoiging systons that can lo appliod to natu-
ial living oiganisns and spocios and social oiganisns (tho lohavioi ol
naikots and othoi laigo gioups ol intoiacting social agonts. Thioo things
should lo notod hoio: ( as a iulo, wo aio doaling not with sciontists thon-
solvos lut (although thoy aio olton tho sano individuals with authois who
addioss a laigo sognont ol tho pullic in a way whoso succoss outdoos ly
lai tho pullic appoal ol cultuial studios (suco it to iocall tho lostsollois ol
Sacks, Hawking, Dawkins, and Gould, (z as in tho caso ol cultuial studios,
wo aio doaling not witha honogonizodoldlut witha ihizonatic nultitudo
connoctod thiough lanily iosonllancos, within which authois aio olton
ongagod in violont polonics lut whoio intoidisciplinaiy connoctions also
ouiish (lotwoon ovolutionaiy liology and cognitivo scioncos, otc., ( as
a iulo, authois activo in this donain aio sustainod ly a nissionaiy zoal, ly
a shaiod awaionoss that thoy all paiticipato in a uniquo shilt ol tho glolal
paiadign ol knowlodgo.
As a kind ol nanilosto ol this oiiontation, ono could quoto tho intio-
duction to The Third Culture, in which tho oditoi (John Biocknan nicoly
piosonts tho laigo naiiativo that sustains tho colloctivo idonticationol thoso
authois.
3
In tho qos and os tho idoa ol a pullic intolloctual was idon-
tiod with an acadonic voisod in solt hunan (oi social scioncos who ad-
diossod issuos ol connon intoiost, taking a stanco towaid tho gioat issuos
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture 21
ol tho day and thus tiiggoiing oi paiticipating in laigo and passionato pullic
dolatos. What thon occuiiod, with tho onslaught ol Fionch postnodoin
doconstiuctionist thooiy, was tho passing ol tho gonoiation ol pullic think-
ois and thoii ioplaconont ly lloodloss acadonicians, ly cultuial scion-
tists whoso psoudoiadical stanco against powoi oi hogononic discouiso
ooctivoly involvos tho giowing disappoaianco ol diioct and actual political
ongagononts outsido tho naiiow connos ol acadonia, as woll as tho giow-
ing soll-onclosuio in an olitist aigon that piocludos tho voiy possilility ol
lunctioning as an intolloctual ongagod in pullic dolatos. Happily, howovoi,
this iotioat ol tho pullic intolloctual was countoiactod ly tho suigo ol tho
Thiid Cultuio, ly tho onoigonco ol a now typo ol pullic intolloctual, tho
Thiid Cultuio authoi, who in tho oyos ol tho pullic stands noio and noio
loi tho ono supposod to know, tiustod to iovoal tho koys to tho gioat sociots
that concoin us all. Tho piollon is again tho gap lotwoon ooctivo haid
scioncos and thoii Thiid Cultuio idoological piopononts who olovato scion-
tists into a suloct supposod to knownot only loi oidinaiy pooplo who
luy thoii volunos, lut also loi postnodoin thooiists thonsolvos who aio
intiiguod ly it, in lovo with it, and supposo that thoy ioally know sono-
thing alout tho ultinato nystoiy ol loing. Tho oncountoi hoio is lailod:
no, populai Thiid Cultuialists do not possoss tho solution that would solvo
tho ciisis ol cultuial studios, thoy do not havo what cultuial studios is lack-
ing. Tho lovo oncountoi is thus lailod: tho lolovod doos not stiotch his hand
lack and iotuin lovo.
It is thus ciucial to distinguish lotwoon scionco itsoll and its inhoiont ido-
ologization, its sonotinos sultlo tiansloination into a now holistic paia-
dign (now codo nano loi worldview. Notions such as conplonontaiity oi
anthiopic piinciplo aio doully insciilod, lunctioning as sciontic and idoo-
logical toins. It is dicult to ostinato ooctivoly tho oxtont to which tho
Thiid Cultuio is inlostod with idoology. Anong its olvious idoological ap-
piopiiations (lut aio thoy noioly socondaiy appiopiiations?, ono should,
again, noto at loast two olvious casos: Fiist, thoio is olton a Now Ago in-
sciiption in which tho shilt in paiadign is intoipiotod as tho supplanting
ol tho Caitosian nochanic-natoiialist paiadign ly a now holistic appioach
liinging us lack to tho wisdon ol tho old oiiontal thought (such as tho Tao
ol physics. Sonotinos this is ovon iadicalizod into tho assoition that tho
22 Slavoj iek
sciontic shilt in tho piodoninant paiadign is an opiphonononon ol tho
lact that hunanity is on tho voigo ol tho liggost spiiitual shilt in its his-
toiy, ol ontoiing a now opoch in which ogotistic individualisn will lo io-
placod with a tiansindividual cosnic awaionoss. Socond, thoio is tho natu-
ialization ol coitain spocic social phononona cloaily discoinillo in tho
so-callod cyloiovolutionisn that iolios on tho notion ol cyloispaco (oi tho
Woild Wido Wol as a soll-ovolving natuial oiganisn. Tho natuialization
ol cultuio (naikot and socioty, loi oxanplo, aio soon as living oiganisns
ovoilaps hoio with tho cultuialization ol natuio (lilo itsoll is concoivod ol
as a sot ol soll-iopioducing inloinationsgonos aio nonos. This now
notion ol Lilo is thus noutial with iospoct to tho distinction ol natuial and
cultuial oi aiticial piocossos, loth tho Eaith (as Gaia and tho glolal nai-
kot appoai as gigantic soll-iogulatod living systons whoso lasic stiuctuio is
donod in toins ol tho piocoss ol coding and docoding, ol passing inloina-
tions, and so on. So whilo cyloispaco idoologists can dioan alout tho noxt
stop ol ovolution in which wo will no longoi lo nochanically intoiacting
Caitosian individuals, in which oach poison will cut his oi hoi sulstantial
link to an individual lody and concoivo ol onosoll as pait ol tho now holis-
tic Mind that livos and acts thiough hin oi hoi, what is olluscatod in such
diioct natuialization ol tho Woild Wido Wol oi naikot is tho sot ol powoi
iolationsol political docisions oi institutional conditionswithin which
oiganisns such as tho Intoinot (oi naikot oi capitalisn can only thiivo.
Wo aio doaling hoio with an all too last notaphoiic tiansposition ol coitain
liological-ovolutionist concopts to tho study ol tho histoiy ol hunanciviliza-
tion, liko tho unp lion gonos to nonosthat is, tho idoa that not only do
hunan loings uso languago to iopioduco thonsolvos and to nultiply thoii
powoi and knowlodgo, lut also, at poihaps a noio lundanontal lovol, lan-
guago itsoll usos hunan loings to ioplicato and oxpand itsoll, to gain now
woalth ol noanings.
Tho standaid countoiaigunont ol piopononts ol cultuial studios to Thiid
Cultuio ciitics is that tho loss ol tho pullic intolloctual lonoanod in thoso
conplaints is ooctivoly tho loss ol tho tiaditional (usually whito and nalo
nodoinist intolloctual. In oui postnodoinist oia ho was ioplacod ly thoo-
ioticians who opoiato in a dioiont nodo (ioplacing concoin with ono Big
Issuo with a soiios ol localizod stiatogic intoivontions and who ooctivoly
addioss issuos that concoin a laigo poition ol tho pullic (iacisn and nulti-
cultuialisn, soxisn, oi how to ioplaco tho Euiocontiist cuiiiculun, loi ox-
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture 23
anplo and thus tiiggoi pullic dolatos (such as tho political coiioctnoss oi
soxual haiassnont contiovoisios. Although this answoi is all too oasy, tho
lact ionains that thonos addiossod ly cultuial studios do stand in tho con-
toi ol tho pullic idoologico-political dolatos (hyliidnulticultuialisnvoisus
tho nood loi a closo connunity idontication, oi aloition and quooi iights
voisus Moial Maoiity lundanontalisn, whilo tho ist thing that stiikos
tho oyo apiopos tho Thiid Cultuio is how its piopononts, lusy as thoy aio
claiilying tho ultinato onignas (ioading tho nind ol God, as Hawking was
onco dosignatod, silontly pass ovoi tho luining quostions that occupy tho
contoi stago ol cuiiont politico-idoological dolatos.
Finally, ono should noto that in spito ol tho nocossaiy distinction lotwoon
scionco and idoology, olscuiantist Now Ago idoology is an innanont out-
giowth ol nodoin scionco itsoll. Fion David Bohn to Fiitol Capia, ox-
anplos alound ol dioiont voisions ol dancing Wu Li nastois toaching
us alout tho Tao ol physics, tho ond ol tho Caitosian paiadign, and tho
signicanco ol tho anthiopic piinciplo and tho holistic appioach.
4
As an old-
lashionod dialoctical natoiialist, whilo I an loiociously opposod to thoso
olscuiantist appiopiiations ol quantun physics and astionony, all I clain
is that thoso olscuiantist spiouts aio not sinply inposod lion outsido lut
lunction as what Louis Althussoi would havo callod a spontanoous idool-
ogy ol sciontists thonsolvos, as a spiiitualist supplonont to tho piodoni-
nant ioductionist-piocoduialist attitudo ol only what can lo piocisoly do-
nod and noasuiod counts. What is noio woiiying than tho oxcossos
ol cultuial studios aio tho Now Ago olscuiantist appiopiiations ol todays
haid scioncos that, in oidoi to logitinizo thoii position, invoko tho authoiity
ol tho scionco itsoll (todays scionco has outgiown tho nochanistic na-
toiialisn and points towaid a now spiiitual holistic stanco. Signicantly,
tho dolondois ol sciontic ioalisn such as Joan Biichnont and Alan Sokal
only liioy ioloi to sono suloctivist loinulations ol Woinoi Hoisonloig
and Niols Bohi that can givo iiso to iolativist[histoiicist nisappiopiiations,
qualilying thon as tho oxpiossion ol thoii authois philosophy and not pait
ol tho sciontic odico ol quantun physics itsoll. Hoio, howovoi, piollons
login: Bohis and Hoisonloigs suloctivist loinulations aio not naiginal
phononona lut woio canonizod as Coponhagon oithodoxy, that is, as tho
ocial intoipiotation ol tho ontological consoquoncos ol quantun physics.
Tho lact is that tho nonont ono wants to piovido an ontological account ol
quantun physics (what notion ol ioality ts its iosults, paiadoxos onoigo
24 Slavoj iek
that undoinino tho standaid connonsonso sciontistic oloctivisn. This
lact is constantly onphasizod ly sciontists thonsolvos, who oscillato lo-
twoon tho sinplo susponsion ol tho ontological quostion (quantun physics
woiks, so do not tiy to undoistand it, ust do tho calculations and dil-
loiont ways out ol tho doadlock (Coponhagon oithodoxy, tho Many Woilds
Intoipiotation, oi sono voision ol tho hiddon vaiiallo thooiy that would
savo tho notion ol a uniquo oloctivo ioality, liko tho ono pioposod ly David
Bohn, lut which nonotholoss involvos paiadoxos ol its own, liko tho notion
ol causality that iuns lackwaid in tino.
Tho noio lundanontal piollon lonoath thoso poiploxitios is this: Can
wo sinply ionounco tho ontological quostionand linit ouisolvos to tho noio
lunctioning ol tho sciontic appaiatus, its calculations and noasuiononts?
A luithoi inpasso concoins tho nocossity to iolato sciontic discovoiios to
ovoiyday languago and to tianslato thon into it. It can lo aiguod that piol-
lons onoigo only whon wo tiy to tianslato tho iosults ol quantun physics
lack into oui connonsonso notions ol ioality, lut is it possillo to iosist
this tonptation? All thoso topics aio widoly discussod in tho litoiatuio on
quantun physics, so thoy havo nothing to do with tho (nisappiopiiation
ol tho scioncos ly cultuial studios. It was Richaid Foynnan hinsoll who,
in his lanous statonont, clainod that nolody ioally undoistands quan-
tun physics, inplying that ono can no longoi tianslato its nathonatical-
thooiotical odico into tho toins ol oui ovoiyday notions ol ioality. Tho in-
pact ol nodoin physics was tho shattoiing ol tho tiaditional naivo-ioalist
opistonological odico. Scioncos thonsolvos oponod a gap in which olscu-
iantist spiouts woio allo to giow, so instoad ol putting all tho scoin on pooi
cultuial studios, it would lo noio pioductivo to appioach anowtho old topic
ol tho piociso opistonological and ontological inplications ol tho shilts in
tho haid scioncos thonsolvos.
On tho othoi hand, tho piollon with cultuial studios is that, at loast in its
piodoninant loin, it does involvo a cognitivo susponsion (tho alandonnont
ol tho considoiation ol tho inhoiont tiuth-valuo ol tho thooiy undoi con-
sidoiation chaiactoiistic ol histoiicist iolativisn. Whon a typical cultuial
thooiist doals with a philosophical oi psychoanalytical odico, tho analysis
locusos oxclusivoly on unoaithing a hiddon patiiaichal, Euiocontiist, idon-
titaiian lias. Tho thooiist doos not ovon ask tho naivo lut nonotholoss noc-
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture 25
ossaiy quostion, OK, lut what is tho stiuctuio ol tho univoiso? How is tho
hunan psycho ioally woiking? Such quostions aio not ovon takon soii-
ously in cultuial studios, sinco its piopononts sinply tond to ioduco thonto
tho histoiicist iooction on conditions in which coitain notions onoigod as
tho iosult ol histoiically spocic powoi iolations. Fuithoinoio, in a typical
ihotoiical novo, cultuial studios donouncos tho voiy attonpt to diawa cloai
lino ol distinction lotwoon, say, tiuo scionco and piosciontic nythology, as
pait ol tho Euiocontiist piocoduio to inposo its own hogonony ly noans
ol tho oxclusionaiy discuisivo stiatogy ol dovaluating tho Othoi as not-yot-
sciontic. In this way wo ond up aiianging and analyzing scionco piopoi,
pionodoin wisdon, and othoi loins ol knowlodgo as dioiont discui-
sivo loinations ovaluatod not with iogaid to thoii inhoiont tiuth-valuo lut
withiogaidto thoii sociopolitical status andinpact (a nativo holistic wisdon
can lo thus considoiod noio piogiossivo than tho nochanistic Wostoin sci-
onco iosponsillo loi tho loins ol nodoin donination. Tho piollon with
such a piocoduio ol histoiicist iolativisn is that it continuos to ioly on a sot
ol silont (nonthonatizod ontological and opistonological piosuppositions
on tho natuio ol hunan knowlodgo and ioality, usually a pioto-Niotzschoan
notion that knowlodgo is not only onloddod in lut also gonoiatod ly a con-
plox sot ol discuisivo stiatogios ol powoi (iopioduction. So it is ciucial to
onphasizo that at this point Jacquos Lacan paits with cultuial studios his-
toiicisn. Foi hin, nodoin scionco is iosolutoly not ono ol tho naiiativos
in piinciplo conpaiallo to othoi nodos ol cognitivo napping, nodoin
scionco touchos tho ioal in a way totally alsont lionpionodoin discouisos.
Cultuial studios has to lo put in its piopoi contoxt. Sinco tho doniso
ol gioat philosophical schools in tho lato ;os, Euiopoan acadonic phi-
losophy itsoll, with its lasic hoinonoutical-histoiical stanco, paiadoxically
shaios with cultuial studios tho stanco ol cognitivo susponsion. Excollont
studios havo iocontly loon pioducod on gioat past authois, yot thoy locus on
tho coiioct ioading ol tho authoi in quostion whilo nostly ignoiing tho naivo
lut unavoidallo quostion ol tiuth-valuonot only Is this tho iight ioading
ol Doscaitoss notion ol lody? Is this what Doscaitoss notion ol lody has to
iopioss in oidoi to iotain its consistoncy? lut also Which, thon, is tho tiuo
status ol tho lody? How do we stand towaid Doscaitoss notion ol lody?
It soons as il thoso piohilitod ontological quostions aio iotuining with a
vongoanco in todays Thiid Cultuio. What signals tho iocont iiso ol quan-
tun physics and cosnology il not a violont and aggiossivo iohalilitation ol
26 Slavoj iek
tho nost lundanontal notaphysical quostions (What is tho oiigin and tho
putativo ond ol tho univoiso?? Tho oxplicit goal ol pooplo liko Hawking is a
voision ol TOE (Thooiy ol Evoiything, that is, to discovoi tho lasic loinula
ol tho stiuctuio ol tho univoiso that ono could piint and woai on a T-shiit
(oi, loi a hunan loing, tho gonono that idontios what I oloctivoly an. So
in cloai contiast to tho stiict piohilition ol diioct ontological quostions in
cultuial studios, tho piopononts ol Thiid Cultuio unalashodly appioach tho
nost lundanontal pio-Kantian notaphysical issuos (such as tho ultinato
constituonts ol ioality, tho oiigins and ond ol tho univoiso, tho natuio ol con-
sciousnoss, and tho onoigonco ol lilo as il tho old dioan, which diod with
tho doniso ol Hogolianisn, ol a laigo synthosis ol notaphysics and scionco,
tho dioan ol a glolal thooiy ol all gioundod in oxact sciontic insights, is
coning alivo again.
In contiast to thoso two voisions ol cognitivo susponsion, tho cognitivist
appioach opts loi a naivo diioct inquiiy into tho natuio ol things (What
is poicoption? How did languago onoigo?. Howovoi, to uso tho woin-out
phiaso, ly thiowing out tho diity watoi, it losos also tho laly, that is, tho di-
nonsionol tho piopoi philosophico-tianscondontal iooction. That is to say,
is tho histoiicist iolativisn(which ultinatoly loads to an untonallo solipsis-
tic position ioally tho only altoinativo to naivo sciontic ioalisn (accoiding
to which, in scioncos and in oui knowlodgo in gonoial, wo aio giadually ap-
pioaching tho piopoi inago ol tho way things ioally aio out thoio, indopon-
dontly ol oui consciousnoss ol thon? Fiontho standpoint ol a piopoi philo-
sophical iooction, it can oasily lo shown that loth thoso positions niss tho
piopoily tianscondontal-hoinonoutical lovol. In what doos this lovol iosido?
Lot us tako tho classical lino ol ioalist ioasoning that clains that tho pas-
sago lionpionodoinnythical thought to tho nodoinsciontic appioachto
ioality cannot lo intoipiotod sinply as tho ioplaconont ol ono with anothoi
piodoninant naiiativo. Tho nodoin sciontic appioach donitoly liings us
closoi to what ioality (tho haid ioality oxisting indopondontly ol tho scion-
tic iosoaichoi ooctivoly is. A hoinonoutic philosophois lasic iosponso
to this stanco would lo to insist that, with tho passago lion tho pionodoin
nythic univoiso to tho univoiso ol nodoin scionco, tho voiy notion ol what
ioality (oi ooctivoly to oxist, ol what counts as ioality, noans has also
changod, so that wo cannot sinply piosupposo a noutial oxtoinal noasuio
that allows us to udgo that, with nodoin scionco, wo cano closoi to tho
sano ioality as that withwhichpionodoinnythology was doaling. As Hogol
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture 27
would havo put it, with tho passago lion tho pionodoin nythical univoiso
to tho nodoin sciontic univoiso, tho noasuio, tho standaid that wo in-
plicitly uso oi apply inoidoi to noasuio howioal is what wo aio doaling with,
has itsoll undoigono a lundanontal chango. Tho nodoin sciontic outlook
involvos a soiios ol distinctions (lotwoon oloctivo ioality and suloctivo
idoas-inpiossions ol it in tho suloct, and lotwoon haid noutial lacts and
valuos that wo, tho udging sulocts, inposo ontho lacts that aio stricto sensu
noaningloss in tho pionodoin univoiso. Ol couiso, a ioalist can iotoit that
that is tho wholo point, that only with tho passago to tho nodoin sciontic
univoiso do wo got an appiopiiato notion ol what oloctivo ioality is, in con-
tiast to tho pionodoin outlook that conlusod lacts and valuos. Against this
tho tianscondontal-hoinonoutic philosophoi would lo lully ustiod to in-
sist that, nonotholoss, wo cannot got out ol tho vicious ciiclo ol piosupposing
oui iosult: tho nost lundanontal way ioality appoais to ustho nost lun-
danontal way wo oxpoiionco what ioally counts as ooctivoly oxistingis
always-alioady piosupposod in oui udgnonts iogaiding what ioally oxists.
This tianscondontal lovol was nicoly indicatod ly Thonas S. Kuhn hinsoll
whon, in his Structure of Scientic Revolutions, ho clainod that tho shilt in a
sciontic paiadign is more than a noio shilt in oui (oxtoinal poispoctivo
on[poicoption ol ioality lut nonotholoss less than oui ooctivoly cioating
anothoi nowioality. Foi that ioasontho standaid distinctionlotwoontho so-
cial oi psychological contingont conditions ol a sciontic invontion and its
oloctivo tiuth-valuo is too shoit hoio. Tho loast ono can say alout it is that
tho voiy distinction lotwoon tho (onpiiical, contingont sociopsychological
gonosis ol a coitain sciontic loination and its oloctivo tiuth-valuo, indo-
pondont ol tho conditions ol this gonosis, alioady piosupposos a sot ol dis-
tinctions (lotwoon gonosis and tiuth-valuo, otc. that aio ly no noans soll-
ovidont. So again, ono should insist that tho hoinonoutic-tianscondontal
quostioning ol tho inplicit piosuppositions in no way ondoisos tho histoii-
cist iolativisn typical ol cultuial studios.
Ol what, thon, consists tho ultinato dioionco lotwoon cognitivisn and
cultuial studios? On ono hand, thoio is noutial oloctivo knowlodgo, that is,
tho pationt onpiiical oxanination ol ioality. Cognitivists liko to onphasizo
that, politically, thoy aio not against tho Lolt, thoii ainis piocisoly to liloiato
tho Lolt lion tho iiiationalist-iolativist-olitist postnodoin lako. Nonotho-
28 Slavoj iek
loss thoy accopt tho distinction lotwoon tho noutial thooiotical (sciontic
insight and tho ovontual idoologico-political lias ol its authoi. In contiast,
cultuial studios involvos tho piopoily dialoctical paiadox ol a tiuth that iolios
on an ongagod suloctivo position. This distinction lotwoon, on ono hand,
knowlodgo inhoiont to tho acadonic institution, donod ly tho standaids ol
piolossionalisn, and, on tho othoi hand, tho tiuth ol a (colloctivo suloct
ongagod in a stiugglo (olaloiatod on ly philosophois lionThoodoi Adoino
to Alain Badiou, anong othois onallos us to oxplain howtho dioionco lo-
twoon cognitivists and cultuial studios thooiists lunctions as a shilloloth.
It is piopoily visillo only lion tho sido ol cultuial studios. So on ono hand,
ono should lully acknowlodgo tho solid scholaily status ol nuch ol tho cog-
nitivist ondoavoi, olton it is acadonia at its lost. On tho othoi hand, thoio is
a dinonsion that sinply oludos its giasp. Lot no olaloiato on this iolation-
ship lotwoon tiuth and tho accuiacy ol knowlodgo ly noans ol a naivolous
thought oxpoiinont ovokod ly Donnott in his Darwins Dangerous Idea: You
and youi lost liiond aio alout to lo captuiod ly hostilo loicos who know
English lut do not know nuch alout youi woild. Both you and youi liiond
know Moiso codo and hit on tho lollowing inpionptu onciyption schono:
loi a dash, spoak a tiuth, loi a dot, spoak a lalsohood. Youi captois, ol couiso,
liston to you two spoak: Biids lay oggs, and toads y. Chicago is a city, and
ny loot aio not nado ol tin, and lasolall is playod in August, you say, an-
swoiing No (dash-dot, dash-dash-dash to whatovoi youi liiond has ust
askod. Evon il youi captois know Moiso codo, unloss thoy can dotoinino
tho tiuth and lalsity ol thoso sontoncos, thoy cannot dotoct tho piopoitios
that stand loi dot and dash.
5
Donnott hinsoll usos this oxanplo to nako tho
point that noaning cannot lo accountod loi in puioly syntactic toins. Tho
only way ultinatoly to gain accoss to tho noaning ol a statonont is to situato
it in its lilo-woild contoxt, that is, to tako into account its sonantic dinon-
sion, tho olocts and piocossos to which it iolois. My point is iathoi dioi-
ont: as Donnott hinsoll puts it, in this caso tho two piisonois uso tho woild
itsoll as a ono-tino pad. Although tho tiuth-valuo ol thoii statononts is not
indioiont lut ciucial, it is not this tiuth-valuo as such that nattois, what
nattois is tho tianslation ol tiuth-valuo into a dioiontial soiios ol plusos
and ninusos (dashos and dots that dolivois tho tiuo nossago in tho Moiso
codo. And is sonothing sinilai not going on in tho psychoanalytic piocoss?
Although tho tiuth-valuo ol tho pationts statononts is not indioiont, what
ioally nattois is not this tiuth-valuo as such lut tho way tho voiy altoination
ol tiuths and lios disclosos tho pationts dosiio. A pationt also usos ioality
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture 29
itsoll (tho way ho oi sho iolatos to it as a ono-tino pad to onciypt his oi
hoi dosiio. In tho sano way, thooiy usos tho voiy tiuth-valuo (accuiacy ol
postthooiotical knowlodgo as a nodiunto aiticulato its own tiuth-nossago.
On tho othoi hand, tho politically coiioct cultuial studios thooiists olton
pay loi thoii aiioganco and lack ol a soiious appioach ly conlusing tiuth
(tho ongagod suloctivo position and knowlodgothat is, ly disavowing tho
gap that sopaiatos thon, ly diioctly suloidinating knowlodgo to tiuth (say,
a quick sociociitical disnissal ol a spocic scionco such as quantunphysics
oi liology without piopoi acquaintanco with tho inhoiont concoptual stiuc-
tuio ol this old. Tho piollon ol cultuial studios ooctivoly is olton tho
lack ol spocic disciplinaiy skills. A litoiaiy thooiist without piopoi knowl-
odgo ol philosophy can wiito dispaiaging ionaiks alout Hogols phallocon-
tiisn. Wo aio doaling with a kind ol lalso univoisal ciitical capacity to pass
udgnont on ovoiything, without piopoi knowlodgo. With all its ciiticisn
ol tiaditional philosophical univoisalisn, cultuial studios ooctivoly lunc-
tions as an oisatz philosophy. Notions aio thus tiansloinod into idoologi-
cal univoisals. In postcolonial studios tho notion ol colonization staits to
lunction as a hogononic notion, it is olovatod into a univoisal paiadign so
that nalo sox colonizos lonalo sox and uppoi classos colonizo lowoi classos.
Espocially with sono piogiossivo intoipiotois ol contonpoiaiy liology,
it is populai to locus on how tho opposing positions aio ovoidotoininod
ly tho politico-idoological stanco ol thoii authois. Doos Dawkinss Chicago
gangstoi thooiy ol lilo, this ioductionist dotoininist thooiy alout solsh
gonos caught in tho doadly stiugglo loi suivival, not oxpioss tho stanco ol
a louigoois individualist conpotitivo socioty? Is Goulds onphasis on sud-
don gonotic chango and ox-aptation not a sign ol a noio supplo, dialoctical,
and iovolutionaiy loltist stanco ol its authoi? Do not thoso (liko Lynn Mai-
gulis who onphasizo spontanoous coopoiationand onoiging oidoi oxpioss
tho longing loi a stallo oiganic oidoi, loi socioty as a coipoiato lody? Do
wo thus not havo tho sciontic oxpiossion ol tho lasic tiiad ol Right, Con-
toi, and Lolt, ol tho oiganicist consoivativo notion ol socioty as a wholo, ol
tho louigoois individualist notion ol socioty as tho spaco ol conpotition lo-
twoon individuals, and ol tho iovolutionaiy thooiist ol suddon chango? (Ol
couiso, tho insistonco on holistic appioach and onoiging oidoi can lo givon
a dioiont accont: it can display tho consoivativo longing loi a stallo oidoi
oi tho piogiossivo utopian loliol in a now socioty ol solidaiistic coopoia-
tion in which oidoi giows spontanoously lion lolow and is not inposod
lion alovo. Tho standaid loin ol tho opposition is tho ono lotwoon tho
30 Slavoj iek
cold nochanicist pioling into causality, displaying tho attitudo ol tho scion-
tic nanipulatoi in tho soivico ol tho oxploitativo donination ovoi natuio,
and tho nowholistic appioachlocusod ontho spontanoously onoiging oidoi
and coopoiation, pointing to what Andiow Ross callod a kindloi, gontloi
scionco. Tho nistako hoio is tho sano as that ol Stalinist Maixisn, which
opposod louigoois to piolotaiian scionco, oi that ol tho psoudoiadical
loninisn that opposos nasculino to loninino discouiso as two soll-
onclosod wholos ongagod in wailaio. Wo do not havo two scioncos, lut one
univoisal scionco split lion within, caught in tho lattlo loi hogonony.
6
Tho acadonically iocognizod iadical thought in tho liloial Wost doos not
opoiato in a void lut is pait ol tho social iolations ol powoi. Apiopos ol ciiti-
cal studios, ono has to ask againtho old Bonaninianquostionnot alout how
it oxplicitly iolatos to powoi lut alout howit is situatod within tho piodoni-
nant powoi iolations. Doos cultuial studios not also lunction as a discouiso
that piotonds to lo ciitically soll-iooctivo and to iondoi visillo tho piodoni-
nant powoi iolations whilo it ooctivoly olluscatos its own nodo ol paitici-
pating in thon? So it would lo pioductivo to apply to cultuial studios tho
Foucauldian notion ol tho pioductivo lio-powoi as opposod to tho iopios-
sivo[piohilitoiy logal powoi. What il tho old ol cultuial studios, lai lion
ooctivoly thioatoning todays glolal iolations ol donination, ts poiloctly
thoii lianowoik, in tho sano way soxuality and tho iopiossivo discouiso
that iogulatos it aio lully conplonontaiy? What il tho ciiticisn ol patiiai-
chal[idontitaiian idoology lotiays an anliguous lascination with it iathoi
than an ooctivo will to undoinino it? Thoio is a way to avoid iosponsilility
and[oi guilt ly onphasizing in an oxaggoiatod way onos iosponsilility oi
too ioadily assuning guilt, as in tho caso ol tho whito nalo politically coi-
ioct acadonic who onphasizos tho guilt ol iacist phallocontiisn and usos
this adnission ol guilt as a stiatagon not to conliont tho way ho as a iadical
intolloctual poiloctly ts tho oxisting powoi iolations ol which ho piotonds
to lo thoioughly ciitical. Ciucial hoio is tho shilt lion English to Anoiican
cultuial studios. Evon il wo nd in tho two tho sano thonos and notions,
tho socio-idoological lunctioning is thoioughly dioiont, and wo shilt lion
tho ongagonont with ooctivo woiking-class cultuio to tho acadonic iadi-
cal chic.
Howovoi, in spito ol thoso ciitical ionaiks, tho voiy lact ol iosistanco
against cultuial studios piovos that it ionains a loioign lody unallo to t
Cultural Studies versus the Third Culture 31
lully into tho oxisting acadonia. Cognitivisn is ultinatoly tho attonpt ol
tho standaid lunctioning ol acadonic knowlodgopiolossional, iational,
onpiiic, and piollon-solving thooiyto iooccupy tho toiiain, to got iid
ol this intiudoi. Tho distinction lotwoon cognitivisn and cultuial studios
is thus not sinply tho distinction lotwoon two doctiinos oi two thooioti-
cal appioachos, it is ultinatoly a nuch noio iadical distinction lotwoon
two totally dioiont nodalitios oi, iathoi, practices ol knowlodgo, inclusivo
ol two dioiont institutional appaiatusos ol knowlodgo. This dinonsion ol
thooiotical stato appaiatusos, to uso tho Althussoiian loinulation, is ciu-
cial. Il wo do not tako it into account, wo sinply niss tho point ol tho an-
tagonisnlotwoon cognitivisnand cultuial studios. No wondoi cognitivists
liko to onphasizo thoii opposition to psychoanalysis. Two oxonplaiy casos
ol such nonacadonic knowlodgo aio, ol couiso, Maixisn and psychoanaly-
sis. Psychoanalysis diois lion cognitivist psychology and psychothoiapy
in at loast thioo ciucial loatuios: ( sinco it doos not piosont itsoll as on-
piiically tostod oloctivo knowlodgo, thoio is tho poionnial piollon (in tho
statos whoio psychiatiic caio is covoiod ly nodical insuianco ol tho ox-
tont to which tho stato oi insuianco will ioinluiso tho pationt, (z loi tho
sano ioason, psychoanalysis has inhoiont dicultios intogiating itsoll into
tho acadonic odico ol psychology oi nodical psychiatiy dopaitnonts, so it
usually lunctions as a paiasitic ontity that wandois aiound, attaching itsoll
oithoi to psychology dopaitnonts oi to cultuial studios oi conpaiativo lit-
oiatuio dopaitnonts, ( as to thoii inhoiont oiganization, psychoanalytic
connunitios do not lunction as noinal acadonic sociotios (liko sociologi-
cal oi nathonatical sociotios. Thoy lunction in a way that, lion tho stand-
point ol noinal acadonic sociotios, cannot lut appoai as a dognatic disci-
plino ongagod in otoinal lactional stiugglos lotwoon sulgioups doninatod
ly a stiong authoiitaiian oi chaiisnatic loadoi. Conicts aio not iosolvod
thiough iational aigunonts and onpiiical tosting lut iosonllo soctaiian
ioligious stiugglos. In shoit, tho phonononon ol (poisonal tiansloionco
lunctions hoio in a way wholly dioiont lion that ol tho standaid acadonic
connunity. (In a slightly dioiont way, tho sano goos loi Maixisn. Just
as Maixisn intoipiots iosistanco to its insights as tho iosult ol tho class
stiugglo in thooiy, as accountod loi ly its voiy oloct, psychoanalysis also
intoipiots iosistanco to itsoll as tho iosult ol tho voiy unconscious piocossos
that aio its topic. In loth casos, thooiy is caught in a soll-ioloiontial loop, it
is in a way tho thooiy alout tho iosistanco to itsoll. Concoining this ciucial
point, tho situation today is ontiioly dioiont lion, alnost tho opposito ol,
32 Slavoj iek
that ol tho oos and oaily ;os, whon naiginal disciplinos (liko tho cul-
tuial studios voision ol psychoanalysis woio poicoivod as anaichic, as liloi-
ating us lion tho iopiossivo authoiitaiian iogino ol tho standaid acadonic
disciplino. What cognitivist ciitics ol cultuial studios play on is tho con-
non poicoption that today (what ionains ol tho cultuial studios voision
ol psychoanalysis is poicoivod as soctaiian, Stalinist, authoiitaiian, and on-
gagod in iidiculous psoudothoological lactional stiugglos in which tho piol-
lons ol tho paity lino piovail ovoi opononpiiical iosoaich and iational aigu-
nont whilo thoy piosont thonsolvos as tho liosh aii that doos away with this
closo and stuy atnosphoio. Finally, ono is lioo to loinulato and tost dioi-
ont hypothosos and is no longoi toiioiizod ly sono dognatically inposod
glolal paity lino.Wo aio thus lai liontho anti-acadonic-ostallishnont logic
ol tho oos. Today acadonia piosonts itsoll as tho placo ol opon lioo dis-
cussion, as liloiating us lion tho stuy constiaints ol sulvoisivo ciitical
studios. Although, ol couiso, tho iogiossioninto authoiitaiianpiophotic dis-
couiso is ono ol tho dangois that thioatons cultuial studios, its inhoiont
tonptation, ono should nonotholoss locus onhowtho cognitivist stanco suc-
coods in unpiollonatically piosonting tho lianowoik ol tho institutional
acadonic univoisity discouiso as tho voiy locus ol intolloctual lioodon.
Notes
John Biocknan, Intioduction: Tho Enoiging Thiid Cultuio, in The Third Culture, od.
Biocknan (Now Yoik: Sinon and Schustoi, o, z.
z Ilid., z.
Soo ilid.
q Soo, as ono anong tho thousands ol paiadignatic passagos, Is thoio, as David Bohnsays,
an inplicato oidoi to nattoi that is loyond oui piosont conpiohonsion and piosunos a
wholonoss to all things? Can wo concoivo ol a tao ol physics, as Fiitol Capias nillion-
solling look toins it, in which Eastoin philosophios paiallol tho nind-wionching paia-
doxos ol tho quantun woild? (Pat Kano, Thoios Mothod in tho Magic, in The Politics
of Risk Society, od. Jano Fianklin jOxloid: Polity, 8|, ;8;.
Soo Daniol Donnott, Darwins Dangerous Idea (NowYoik: Sinon and Schustoi, , qz.
o It is intoiosting to noto how tho opposition ol haid scionco, whoso concoptual stiuc-
tuio onlodios tho stanco ol donination, and gontlo scionco, which is lont on collaloia-
tion, loi oxanplo, conos dangoiously closo to tho Now Ago idoology ol two nontal uni-
voisosnasculino and loninino, conpotitivo and coopoiativo, iational[dissocting and
intuitivo[onconpassingin shoit, to tho pionodoin soxualization ol tho univoiso con-
coivod ol as tho tonsion lotwoon two piinciplos, Masculino and Foninino.