The cartographers became so obsessed with representation that they built a map of great precision, not realizing that representation and reality must have a distinction. Over many generations they became so good at representation that the map covered the entire territory. In time all distinctions were lost until the map became the territory. Representation and reality blended into a boundless hyper-real where few distinctions could be made and no boundary located. The creature's creation became the territory of sensory distinctions in the precession of the hyper-real. Lucidity was lost in a sea of meaning where the sensual sought out pleasure for pleasure's sake. All activity concerned itself with increasing levels of illusion, the illusion of pleasure. All activity blurred into one great orgasmic rush of pleasure where distinction disappeared. The scientist hasn't yet realized that the measurement has become more real than the thing being measured. The idea of sophistication in a system is, the various parts of the system are self correcting. Any system is a flow towards a goal with the flow having some degree of turbulence. If the system has a mechanism to explore state space, we would expect the back flow of information to optimize the outcome. The better this is managed the more the sophistication.

@TheoryPhilosophy

5 жыл бұрын

Rick D. word

One of the better vids on baudrillard on yt.

The negation of mystery, the final mapping of the territory - the general malaise Baudrillard speaks of, really leads to the colonization of space as the next stage in the human story. Either that or the apocalypse and return to hunter gathering. The present exhausted stasis cannot drag on forever.

One issue that I had with Baudrillard in this work is his seemingly reactionary takes on the liberation movement of the 1960’s. I haven’t read any of his other works, so it is definitely possible that I misunderstood what he was saying due to my lack of understanding of his previous works. As I read the Transparency of Evil, Baudrillard reactionarily seemed to attack minorities and their movements to resist and overturn oppression.

@TheoryPhilosophy

3 жыл бұрын

i agree 100%. there is a little more to his thought but I can not seem to look past his reactionary ethos.

@thibaulta.6167

2 ай бұрын

well, one cannot make such a bold statement on Baudrillard's thoughts and not develop further. First, as you wrote above, I suggest you dwelve more deeply into his previous work. Then we can discuss about his so called reactionary ethos. It is a very original and quite ironic take on his work to assume that at some point he "reactionarily seemed to attack minorities and their movements to resist and overturn oppression" when all his writings are in favor of minorities against the system.

What motivates you to do these videos? I find them really interesting and like your voice :P But it must take some effort to keep up the output no?

@TheoryPhilosophy

5 жыл бұрын

Well there were a few things I s'pose. I first had the idea when I wanted to begin recording my notes of various texts for the future. I thought to do this to possibly save me time from having to re-read a bunch of stuff later on and to instead just listen to something. This would also allow me to return to my own thought process at the time of recording. Secondly, I found myself rather frustrated with the trend of explanatory videos and podcasts providing only a surface level analysis encompassing the totality of a given writer's work. I wanted something that would dive into each individual text and that would account for the nuances of each. As for effort, yes it does take some effort--perhaps more than I should be putting in. However, I dig it and find myself continually stimulated by the subject matter!

@Swishead

5 жыл бұрын

@@TheoryPhilosophy That's excellent to hear, I have the same gripes with overviews lots of people are giving. I find it doesn't really help me understand specifics and technicalities. After so long watching videos about Foucault's Panopticon and superficial accounts of what epistemes are, I decided to actually read him (It was much harder than all these videos would have me believe) and your specific video on The Order of Things has been my most invaluable resource. So honestly, for what it's worth, I've found your videos extremely helpful and I'll go back to them for any future texts I read that you've covered.

@TheoryPhilosophy

5 жыл бұрын

Joshua Pimm Ya I completely understand. What is more, many of these ideas are heavily mediated by select figures that govern the way we're supposed to understand them (This is one of the reasons Baudrillard wasn't accepted as a legitimate academic in Paris). Happy to hear that you're getting something from these videos. Those types of comments are the nitrous to push me harder. Out of curiosity, why are you interested in these ideas? School? Hobby?

@Swishead

5 жыл бұрын

@@TheoryPhilosophy I am a STEM student in terms of work, so it really is just a hobby. The field as a whole is fascinating to me but I've started on 'postmodern' texts as they're more recent and would be able to comment on the world as it is currently, so to speak. They can refer to modern phenomena like mass media etc. As someone with no academic background in the humanities it's felt like quite a daunting task at times.

@TheoryPhilosophy

5 жыл бұрын

Joshua Pimm I'm happy to hear you getting into this stuff. It really can be daunting and there's no really clear place to start. It's difficult to understand Baudrillard and Foucault, for example, without understanding Nietzsche. And it's difficult to understand Nietzsche without understanding the Greeks. But then again, can we really understand the Greeks without reading Nietzsche? It's a circular mess of jargon that really is relentless. With time, it might get easier XD

Inspired by your work to make some videos of my own on JB and others... if you ever want to connect or work together I'd love to get in touch

@TheoryPhilosophy

5 жыл бұрын

Infinite Exponent I think you should definitely do that! would be nice to foster a dialogue in that way. As for collaboration, that is something I'd be willing to do even if it's just consistent correspondence :)

@infiniteexponent8599

5 жыл бұрын

@@TheoryPhilosophy Sweet. I have a video up now and I'll be putting up a few more in the next few weeks. If you have anything you want to discuss, not sure how we can get in touch but I can send you my email somehow.

Stefan Molyneux is not a philosopher. The creature is not tuned to survival, it is tuned to the value in the environment. The woman is tuned not as a singular creature but as a composite mother/infant. Perception is the mapping of the material world onto the physical structure of the creature. The map becomes part of the material world.

@TheoryPhilosophy

5 жыл бұрын

You got me thinking about one thing you wrote, "The creature is not tuned to survival, it is tuned to the value in the environment." I'm wondering if not "survival" and "value of the environment" may at times be cut from the same cloth. Any thoughts?

@RickDelmonico

5 жыл бұрын

@@TheoryPhilosophy Hoffman theory of perception. kzread.info/dash/bejne/p5Wszap-e7DMYZM.html

Information is a difference that can make a difference, truth is information that doesn't change and self referential noise is a difference that doesn't make a difference. No matter how much information we use to describe a tree, it will always be incomplete. Levels of description. The only place self referential noise makes a difference is at the knife's edge between subcritical and supercritical boundary conditions in a system (dithering) (Buridan's donkey). Can dimensions undergo a phase transition? drive.google.com/file/d/1olpKiSy0kCeQWBfUe4bN3FCofITLDJiS/view?usp=sharing

I enjoyed your aside on imperfect ai.. If this is in relation to banality of evil then that should not be understood as standing everywhere. it was in relation to Eichman being a self declared kantian applying a system of thought, that he can justify as kantian and this overrules the emotional response that he claims to naturally feel as pro zionist , yiddish speaking lover of jewish culture. banality is the replacement of passion with a system of thought. In her book on totalitarianism she offers up another version in which the only escape from the total oblivion created by a perfect system.. which seems to me very close to Baudrillards idea of evil as the perfect or complete unnuenced undoubting system.. is the creation of more humans.. new children filled with creativity and spontaneity and all the things a totalitarian state seeks to absorb and suppress. The problem you have with his reductive position on binary may be a hegel thing.. and I would think as well as the two opposites forming each other the imbetween area also forms both parts of the binary, so not so reductive when thought of in this way

@TheoryPhilosophy

3 жыл бұрын

Ya I would agree (maybe) about an Arendtian counter-approach to the situation Baudrillard describes. It's hard sometimes though to misconstrue benevolent from malevolent passion. Think if Baudrillard's condemnation of things like obscenity which might, on first glance, appear like a demonstration of passion. Still, I think I agree

No es nada extraño que estos intelectuales postmodernos tuvieran una vida corta, Deleuze dijo que se marchaba pero en vez de salir por la puerta salió por el balcón.... Es imposible vivir mucho tiempo después de decir tal cantidad de estupideces y majaderías. Que por lo visto siguen deleitando a algunos burguesitos actuales hastiados de tanta abundancia y comodidades.