Zizek Argument Analysis

Having a difficult time understanding the text leaves me feeling a bit at a loss for writing this essay. I am hoping that in my attempt to put something together on paper it will somehow make sense and hold some relation to the task that has been appointed. As I understand the difference between an argument of definition or causality I am left confused after reading the Zizek chapter three times. It seems that the text and his ideas although are supposed to be about ecology tend to take paths into other ideas, that I cannot seem to keep up with. When first reading the chapters I was feeling that his argument was more of an argument of causality; the idea that there is a cause and effect happening in with the word ecology and what it supposed to mean and what it actually means. There was a part in the …show more content…
When the idea that artificial intelligence would take over the world and destroy the human race as we know it, people got scared. The fear of the unknown set in and people didn’t want anything to do with it. However, what we now is that DNA is a miracle breakthrough in the science world; creating artificial organs so that people, who need them to live, can. There was a great example of cause and effect with DNA and artificial life.
Ultimately I don’t feel that is the basis or the concept that Zizek is trying to unfold in his segment in Examine Life, but more towards the idea of an argument based on definition. Throughout his segment he continues to go back and forth between ecology and ideology and when he talks about ideology he speaks about it, “in the traditional sense of an illusory, wrong way of thinking and perceiving reality.” (2010) If his idea is to address ecology the same as ideology then are we to think about ecology in with a sense of dreaming false