“Philosophy, The “Unknown Knowns،” And The Public Use Of Reason” by Slavoj Žižek: Summary and Critique

Philosophy and False Questions

• Žižek begins by asserting that philosophy’s role is not to provide answers but to critically examine the questions themselves, revealing how their framing might obstruct solutions (Žižek, 2006).
• This approach is particularly relevant to contemporary debates on ecological crises, democracy, and terrorism, where “unknown knowns”—hidden presuppositions—shape societal actions.

The Concept of “Unknown Knowns”

• Drawing on Donald Rumsfeld’s statement on epistemological categories, Žižek identifies the “unknown knowns” as unconscious assumptions shaping our worldview (Žižek, 2006).
• He connects this idea to Freudian theory, arguing that such unconscious knowledge forms the ideological basis of public values (Žižek, 2006).

Case Study: James Jesus Angleton’s Paranoia

• Žižek analyzes the CIA counter-intelligence head, James Jesus Angleton, whose belief in a “Monster Plot” led to organizational paralysis (Žižek, 2006).
• This example illustrates how “unknown knowns” can manifest as destructive paranoia, immobilizing effective action and embodying the very threat they aim to counteract.

The Reflexive Twist in Philosophy

• A philosophical gesture, according to Žižek, involves turning suspicion on itself. He uses the metaphor of a worker stealing wheelbarrows to highlight how “unknown knowns” can hide in plain sight (Žižek, 2006).
• Philosophy must expose these blind spots, disrupting the social substance and reorienting our understanding of freedom and unfreedom.

Technological Breakthroughs and Ideological Fantasies

• Žižek examines bio-technological advances, such as brain-machine interfaces, and their implications for free will and humanity’s openness to manipulation (Žižek, 2006).
• He critiques dystopian fears about biogenetics, arguing that such critiques measure the future against outdated standards, rather than exploring its transformative possibilities.

Philosophy as Radical Homelessness

• Žižek aligns with Kant’s vision of philosophy as transcending particular identities, emphasizing its role in inhabiting the “interstices” between communities (Žižek, 2006).
• This philosophical homelessness enables critique of traditional structures and opens space for universal singularity.

Universal Singularity vs. National Identity

• Contrasting Kant with Hegel, Žižek explores the concept of “world-civil society,” where individuals bypass mediation by particular identities to engage with universal principles (Žižek, 2006).
• This engagement is seen as crucial for addressing contemporary global challenges beyond nationalistic frameworks.

Freedom, Censorship, and Liberal Ideology

• Žižek critiques liberal ideology, highlighting how the illusion of freedom often masks deeper unfreedom. The metaphor of “red ink” illustrates how suppressed truths can emerge despite censorship (Žižek, 2006).
• Philosophy, in this context, must expose the mystifications of terms like “war on terror” and “human rights,” which obscure genuine understanding.

Conclusion: Philosophy’s Future Task

• The task of philosophy lies in redefining the standards by which we judge technological and societal advancements. Žižek calls for critical engagement with these transformations, free from ideological biases (Žižek, 2006).

1. Deconstruction and Questioning of Ideological Narratives

• Žižek’s concept of “unknown knowns” aligns with deconstruction’s emphasis on uncovering hidden assumptions within ideological and textual frameworks.
• The focus on implicit beliefs shaping perception echoes Derrida’s analysis of différance and the instability of meaning (Žižek, 2006).

2. Psychoanalytic Literary Criticism

• The idea of the “unknown knowns” is rooted in Freudian psychoanalysis, specifically the unconscious as a reservoir of hidden knowledge.
• Žižek’s interpretation of paranoia, such as Angleton’s Monster Plot, provides a psychoanalytic lens for analyzing characters and narrative conflicts in literature (Žižek, 2006).

3. Ideological Criticism and Marxist Theory

• Žižek critiques the ideological apparatus by exposing how societal values are shaped by “unknown knowns.”
• His critique of liberal terms like “freedom” and “human rights” as mystifications aligns with Althusser’s theory of ideological state apparatuses (Žižek, 2006).

4. Posthumanism

• The discussion of bio-genetic and technological advancements reflects posthumanist concerns about the boundaries of humanity and subjectivity.
• Žižek’s exploration of how such advancements challenge traditional ethical and philosophical standards contributes to the critique of anthropocentrism in literary studies (Žižek, 2006).

5. Hegelian and Kantian Influences in Hermeneutics

• Žižek’s emphasis on the dialectical process of questioning and redefining problems mirrors Hegelian negativity, which is pivotal in interpretative methodologies.
• His advocacy for universal singularity and the “public use of reason” offers a philosophical framework for analyzing texts beyond their historical or national contexts (Žižek, 2006).

6. Postmodern Critique of Metanarratives

• Žižek’s rejection of fixed ideological categories, such as Rumsfeld’s epistemological framing, contributes to the postmodern critique of metanarratives.
• His analysis encourages literary scholars to interrogate the power structures embedded in dominant narratives (Žižek, 2006).

7. Cultural Criticism and Globalization

• The concept of “world-civil society” and Žižek’s critique of nationalism provide insights into the role of literature in addressing global and cross-cultural issues.
• This aligns with postcolonial and cosmopolitan theories that seek to transcend nationalistic literary boundaries (Žižek, 2006).

8. Philosophical Narratology

• By focusing on “unknown knowns” and their role in structuring reality, Žižek highlights how narratives operate within the unconscious frameworks of ideology.
• This perspective informs the study of narrative construction and its ideological implications in literary texts (Žižek, 2006).

9. Ethics and Responsibility in Literary Studies

• Žižek’s exploration of technological manipulation and its implications for free will reflects ethical concerns in literature.
• His approach encourages literary theorists to engage with moral dilemmas in storytelling, especially in speculative and dystopian genres (Žižek, 2006).

1. Ambiguity of “Unknown Knowns”

• The concept of “unknown knowns” can be criticized for its vagueness, making it difficult to operationalize or apply consistently across different philosophical or practical contexts.

2. Overreliance on Paradoxes

• Žižek’s tendency to use paradoxes, such as “freedom masking unfreedom,” has been critiqued for obfuscating rather than clarifying key arguments, potentially alienating readers seeking practical insights.

3. Limited Engagement with Opposing Views

• The critique of liberal ideologies and terms like “freedom” and “human rights” lacks a comprehensive engagement with counterarguments, making it appear overly dismissive of nuanced liberal perspectives.

4. Overgeneralization of Historical Examples

• Žižek’s analysis of figures like James Angleton or Donald Rumsfeld might oversimplify complex historical and political phenomena, reducing them to mere illustrations of ideological paranoia.

5. Theoretical Excess Over Practical Application

• Critics argue that Žižek’s philosophical framework often emphasizes abstract theorization over practical solutions, limiting its utility for addressing real-world problems.

6. Insufficient Exploration of Alternative Philosophies

• While Žižek engages with Kant, Hegel, and psychoanalytic theory, his critique may neglect other philosophical traditions (e.g., analytic philosophy) that could offer complementary or contrasting insights.

7. Potential Technological Determinism

• The discussion on technological manipulation and biogenetics might lean toward determinism, underestimating human agency and social resistance to technological overreach.

8. Ethical Ambiguity

• Žižek’s critique of traditional ethical standards in light of technological advancements raises questions about whether his own framework offers a clear alternative for evaluating such developments.

9. Accessibility of Language

• The dense and abstract language in the article has been criticized for limiting accessibility, making it challenging for readers outside of academic or philosophical circles to engage with the work.