Baudrilliard Simulation/Simulacra

[jankuiper3422]

I like many of the concepts, but wonder why post-modernism can make it so difficult to grasp. The sokal-affaire mocked this, scientists as Dawkins mock it, asking what would remain if you would strip the idea of all the complicatedness. Same goes for Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialektik der Aufklarüng, it's got good idea's but because of its abstract writing you can give it a spin, the idea can get abused more easily. If you can't understand it but think you do, you have a second-order simulacrum.

[7th75thCallaghan]

@jankuiper3422 Maybe he just wasn't a good enough writer to say it in simpler terms? They are only men after all. Or perhaps, as often happens, he was just an academic protecting his livelihood by making it seem inaccessible, something that a lot of people are guilty of. Or maybe the over-complexity of it was in itself a form of rhetoric, encouraging a more active reading of the subject, straying from the notion that we might derive entertainment from it, aiding us to fight the simulacra.

[jankuiper3422]

@7th75thCallaghan

From what I've heard/read (a good while ago, so not sure) you are correct about it being a form of rhetoric. They knew very well what the effect would be, but it often agitated against science (and absolutes), and against blind conformism. So a 'fuzzy' and very abstract style was adopted to make sure it had to be read with the utmost care. Guess it's about what one prefers....

[miljenko1]

this is the first passage in Simulacra and Simulation

[olanmatt]

People asking for an easier to grasp version are asking for meaning to be stripped of it as it will have to be brought down to a lower level. But... he is explaining the simulacrum, the simulated world we live in that covers reality itself. Like he said, imagine a map that's so big that it covers the area that it was mapping entirely. The map (simulacrum) covers the place it was mapping (reality) and causing us to forget what is real. Just my understanding of it. Hope it helps, we are living it.

[cpostelwait]

oh now i get it, this video is a simulation of knowledge.

[cpostelwait]

i don't get it. this guy realizes he is part of the problem right? he's creating noise, just not the helpful type.

[noisepuppet]

He is talking about the privileging of sign over referent.

The Nike Swoosh used to refer to a set of shoes manufactured by a certain company. They market the shoes so that when you see the Swoosh, you know those are the shoes. You buy the shoes.

Now they market the Swoosh, and you buy the Swoosh.

Or so goes the theory. And it seems to explain things that are not otherwise explainable.

[WarmSoulWithin]

........What?! ....Was there absolutly no way of portraying that ridiculous amount of information in a simpler more comprehensible manner? my mind was still trying to digest and translate what was being said during the first 5 seconds of it!

[robvidtime9000]

this guy seems to have a lot of nothing to say

[jdriscoll2000]

@robvidtime9000 idiot

[182Nym182]

I'm getting goosebumps.... this guy's good! Nailed it!

[jdriscoll2000]

@182Nym182 he's reading from baudrillard's book

[Tosh220]

Just think about it ;) while reading.

[buskotteke]

Baudrillard is silly. A postmodern for postmodern's sake.

[ryguillian]

Good text: lackluster reading.