/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12960132]

Thoughts on Baudrillard?

[Anonymous No.12960139]

good

[Anonymous No.12960171]

postmodern neomarxist obscurantist who wants to destroy the western civilization

[Anonymous No.12960186]

>>12960171
Isn’t that the most based thing you’ve typed all day?

[Anonymous No.12960213]

>>12960171
Everyone wants to be a destroyer not a rebuilder

[Anonymous No.12960240]

>>12960213
We need a new Samuel Johnson

[Anonymous No.12960292]

>>12960240
where to start with him

[Anonymous No.12960319]

>>12960292
Rambler No. 4
Preface to Shakespeare
Dictionary of the English Language

[Anonymous No.12960320]

He and Deleuze are the only philosophers who got it exactly right

[Anonymous No.12960328]

>>12960320
and the joker

[Anonymous No.12960361]

>>12960171
>who wants to destroy the western civilization
Citation needed. Baudrillard never commented whether anything was good or bad.

[Anonymous No.12960399]

>>12960132
Okay guy, nice, never in a hurry and always gives good tips.

[Anonymous No.12960475]

>>12960361
you must not see through his jewish obscurantism

[Anonymous No.12960764]

>>12960475
>baudrillard
>jewish

[Anonymous No.12960792]

>>12960361
he thought modern art was garbage

[Anonymous No.12960796]

>>12960132
Pretty good.

[Anonymous No.12960844]

>>12960132
He's too fat to take seriously.

[Anonymous No.12961567]

>>12960764
postmodernism and marxism are the philosophies of the jew

[Anonymous No.12961592]

>>12961567
the philosophies of the jews are the winning ones, anon. up your game, antisemites are halfway there but inevitably cripple themselves on the way up

[Anonymous No.12961624]

>>12960171
Baudrillard disliked postmodernism intensely

[Anonymous No.12961705]

>>12961624
?

[Anonymous No.12961713]

>>12960475
I know his philosophy, and I know he embraces his conclusions. He doesn't think of anything as bad or good. It reminds me of the Ballard quote, "does the angle between two walls have a happy ending?". He was a Nietzschean after all.

>>12960792
He thought it was worthless because contemporary art examined the idea of art, or, it just simulated and emptied itself like everything else. It stopped examining reality and started examining itself. From Baudrillard himself:

"The transference
of art, become a useless function, into a reality that is now integral, since it
has absorbed everything that denied, exceeded or transfigured it. The
impossible exchange of this Integral Reality for anything else whatever. Given
this, it can only exchange itself for itself or, in other words, repeat itself ad
infinitum."
>>12960844
Based

[Anonymous No.12961761]

>>12961705
the easiest way to tell if someones never read Baudrillard is that they call him a postmodernist

[Anonymous No.12961769]

>>12961567
Postmodernism and Marxism are polar opposites. Besides each one of them wants to get rid of the "Jewish" identity

[Anonymous No.12961783]

>>12961761
he is a philosopher of postmodernity even though he is negative towards it.

[Anonymous No.12961787]

>>12960132
>diet chomsky

[Anonymous No.12961801]

>>12961783
>Gentile is a philosopher of communism even though he is negative towards it
>Schopenhauer is a philosopher of Hegelianism even if he is negative towards it
>Nietzsche was a christian even though he was negative towards it

[Anonymous No.12961834]

>>12961761
proofs?

[Anonymous No.12961847]

>>12961801
But what I said was literally true. Baudrillard's philosophy is postmodern thru and thru.

[Anonymous No.12961851]

>>12961834
read Baudrillard
Since you wont, what do you think postmodernism is? just to get some base definitions here.

[Anonymous No.12961864]

>>12961847
no it's not

[Anonymous No.12961871]

>>12960319
>I own the Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism: The Post

[Anonymous No.12961904]

Too much blackpilling

His better works are when he engages with Bataille like in the Seduction book.

[Anonymous No.12961969]

>>12961871
kek

[Anonymous No.12961995]

>>12961851
School of thought based on pluralism as opposed to previous universalistic schools. He recognized simulation? Only postmodernism is able to do it, others treat simulation as inferior/negative.

[Anonymous No.12962029]

>>12961995
>School of thought based on pluralism
oh wow, so Foucault isn't a postmodernist? Or Derrida... well in this case who knows who's postmodern. Isaiah Berlin? Sure, why not.

[Anonymous No.12962126]

>>12961787
kekked and chillpilled

[Anonymous No.12962160]

>>12962029
>Though often cited as a post-structuralist and postmodernist, Foucault rejected these labels, preferring to present his thought as a critical history of modernity.
No idea, from a quick glance he was a historian. Postmodernism would touch higher level domains like ethics and art, not history, history is an established science and doesn't need help from philosophy, does it?

[Anonymous No.12962167]

>>12962160
hoyl shit you can't make this shit up

[Anonymous No.12962191]

>>12961995
>>12962160
alright, let's go all the way with this idea.
here are some of the """postmodern philosophers""":
Empedoclese
Anaxagoras
Aristotle
Wittgenstein
Dahl
Lindblom
Malcolm fuckin' X

[Anonymous No.12962199]

>>12962160
>history is an established science and doesn't need help from philosophy, does it?

[Anonymous No.12962292]

>>12962191
There were accidental pluralistic ideas in the past, but they were obviously in conflict with universalistic thought, detached from systematic knowledge.

[Anonymous No.12962314]

>>12962292
anon I used your definition of postmodernism, please define it properly

[Anonymous No.12962383]

>>12962314
I mean it couldn't exist as a system back then, only as a few accidental ideas without foundation. And Aristotle can't possibly be postmodernist, all his ideas are hardcore universalism, notably ethics.

[Anonymous No.12962432]

>>12961713
Memey performance art is only a subset of contemporary art and far from being alone. Also it's modernistic in structure.

[Anonymous No.12962441]

>>12962383
Aristotle held to a pluralist ontology, but that doesn't matter as it is pretty obvious that the division between pluralism and universalism is not the marker of postmodernism. Postmodernism is two things: a loose historical grouping of thinkers in France in the post-war era (Baudrillard fits here, so do many contradictory/mutually exclusive philosophers). There is another more systematic definition relating to doubt/pessimism towards the historical philosophical tradition (sometimes erroneously considered rejection of "grand narrative"). If we look to the systematic definition, Baudrillard neither doubts the historical philosophical tradition nor rejects "grand narratives" (just read S&S if you doubt this, unlike you suggest, the stages of simulation and simulacra are incredibly universalist). He is a structuralist, like Foucault, but unlike Foucault but he is not a postmodernist in the systematic sense.

[Anonymous No.12962447]

>>12962441
>He is a poststructuralist, like Foucault, but unlike Foucault but he is not a postmodernist in the systematic sense.
apologies for autocorrect

[Anonymous No.12962553]

>>12962441
Baudrillard's language is encrypted, so it will be a pain to read. Universalism differs from pluralism in moral judgement. Universalism sees simulation as inferior to truth and declares it morally negative, because what's not true is lie, and lie is negative. What is universalistic justification to treat simulacra as equal or superior to truth?

[Anonymous No.12962688]

>>12962553
>Universalism sees simulation as inferior to truth
What? Universalism is the idea that there are certain positions or truths which are always valid no matter their application. For instance, metaphysical nihilism, the rejection of all truth, is a universalist position. The reason why certain philosophers seem "encrypted" is because of your tenuous grasp on philosophical terminology.

[Anonymous No.12967101]

>>12960132

One of the worst of the bunch, both in terms of the content of his ideas, and also in terms of his prose style (type "hyperreal" again!)

-Dude It's A Simulation LMAO isn't a new (Descartes, Debord) or particularly helpful thought
-Wishing to "be outside of power" is an impossible absurdity, and consequently childish.
-Ward Churchill-tier anti-Americanism (yes, anti-Americanism is a bad thing).

Even Foucault could express himself clearly and make useful observations with helpful historical contextualization. Not so Baudrillard.

[Anonymous No.12967146]

>>12960171
This. Won't stop pseuds from jerking off to him because he's an "intellectual" however.

[Anonymous No.12967169]

>>12962688
>Universalism sees simulation as inferior to truth
he's just referring to relativism, or anything was exists only in the human mind and isn't "real" Metaphysical nihilism is self defeating but yes it denies the existence of truth including truth humans make up, regardless of how useful it is.

[Anonymous No.12967186]

>>12960132

[Anonymous No.12967200]

>>12967186
The last one is more inline with Evola than Baudrillard.

[Anonymous No.12967368]

>>12960132
He'd've had a field day with 4chan, that's for sure.

[Anonymous No.12967383]

>>12967368
did he say anything about the interwebs

[Anonymous No.12967407]

I haven't been on /lit/ in a while, is pessimistic neo-marxism the new in thing?

[Anonymous No.12967473]

>>12967407
that is one cerebral unit, what a brainy bird that one is, to think of it!

[Anonymous No.12967493]

>>12967407
he wasnt pessimistic and he wasnt a marxist

[Anonymous No.12967617]

>>12967407
>pessimistic neomarxism
It was a thing since Adorno.

[Anonymous No.12967648]

>>12967383
I haven't seen anything from him about the Internet specifically (he was pretty old by the time it was becoming a mainstream thing), but a quick search turned this up. Haven't read it completely, can't speak to its soundness (and it is almost 25 years old!), but it might be entertaining, at least.

http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/cyberspace_internet_virtuality_postmodernity.html

Baudrillard comes closest to discussing Internet in his comments of the French Minitel system in "Xerox and Infinity." He compares this closed system of telematics to the topology of the Mobius strip in which the operator/subject questions and is questioned by the parameters of the computer/object, creating "a superficial conflation of subject and object, within and without, question and answer, event and image, and so on" (Transparency 56). He notes that in function, however, telematics operates as an open system in that it is constantly accelerating with each turn of the Mobius strip. This "extreme phenomenon" is driven by a "fatal" telos in which "the logic that informs a system's expansion then proceeds to devastate it" (Transparency 40). The postmodern moment announces not the breakdown of modernity, but rather its fatal perfection:

So long as there is a dysfunction in a system, a departure from known laws governing its operation, there is always the prospect of transcending the problem. But when a system rides roughshod over its own basic assumptions, supersedes its own ends. . .then we are contemplating not crisis but catastrophe. (Transparency 32)

[Anonymous No.12967714]

>>12967493
wikipedia lists him under marxism

[Anonymous No.12967776]

>>12962688
>rejection of all truth, is a universalist position
OK, but that's too memey, I mean something constructive. Is Baudrillard a nihilist? It didn't look to me that way, but I didn't look too closely.

[Anonymous No.12967796]

>>12967776
He called himself a nihilist, but later claimed that was simply the result of a powerful French naivete

[Anonymous No.12967906]

>>12967714

Wikipedia says a lot of things.

[Anonymous No.12967917]

>>12967714
he began as a Marxist but he quickly found out the changes in material production and consumption has changed the rules so to speak, so he basically was a theorist of why Marxism no longer works

[Anonymous No.12968464]

>>12967796
So what he wrote was nihilistic whining? Ok, then he's not a postmodernist. That I can agree with.

[Anonymous No.12968592]

An intellectual fraud but an absolute expert when it comes to rhetorical tricks. His writings are filled to the brim with trolls truisms and deepities.

[Anonymous No.12968621]

He's considered a borderline right-wing reactionary among French intellectual circles nowadays.

[Anonymous No.12968857]

>>12968621
among French intellectual circles up is down and sodomy is progenitive

[Anonymous No.12968982]

>>12967146
>"intellectual"
What a pseud

[Anonymous No.12969403]

>>12967101
mais ferme ta gueule stp

[Anonymous No.12970919]

>>12967617
Mark Fisher did it best

[Anonymous No.12971298]

>>12960171
go clean your room pete !

[Anonymous No.12971312]

>>12960132
I don't even have to check to see that he's a Jew. Physiognomy is real.

[Anonymous No.12971337]

>>12971312
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174902/

Autism and the development of face processing