He still filters normies from the grave…
>>24821107More like Baudritard
>>24821138You are a bald dullard
>>24821107The Russo-French Theologian Vladimir Lossky had accurate view on Hyperreality/Hyperontology.Baudrillard somewhat nihilistic outlook lead to an incorrect view of there being "nothing more real than reality" (this can't be philosophically justifiable), so his definition of "Hyperreality" is limited to incorrect maps that don't accurately describe the reality they are supposed to overlay. Baudrillard should've more accuratly described these maps as "Hyporeality" as they are incorrect simulations of reality rather than (pre)supposing simulations that are more real than reality.Lossky suggests that God is such a Hyper-being being and this His Will is a Hyperreal map and following His Will will lead to our own Hyperreal Theosis.This is a better version of Baudrillard's work: it's non-nihilistic and treats the Hyperreal as something worthy of achieving/perfecting rather than something to be pessimistically lamenting as an impending entropic doom.
>>24821107Filtering is when some irrelevant retard gets forgotten because he hasn't produced a single thing of worth his entire shitty intellectual life
>>24821167>"Hyporeality" as they are incorrect simulations of reality rather than (pre)supposing simulations that are more real than reality.In this case, if God then Hyperreality would allow for simulation(s) of this reality that would be both universally and particularly preferably to this inhabited ontological territory i.e. Heaven (a constantly better version of our lives). That's the accurate Map we should follow. We should simulate that Heavenly reality here to make this place more like Heaven: Ontological Theosis.Makes sense philosophically/transcendently.
>>24821107Did you guys know that Matrix was a Baudriyar adaptation? Crazy stuff
>>24821190I loved the part in Simulacra and Simulation when Trinity jumps in the air and butterfly kicks the bad guys in slow motion
>>24821167nobody knows of, cares about, or has even heard of Vladimir Lossky. you're not the next Hans Blumenberg discoverer. you're nothing.
>>24821203I'm just saying that Disney World makes a shitty substitute for Heaven. We all know it.Believe in Heaven again.It's possible.
>>24821107>dialectic is pornography for pornogrophers.Of course it continues. Off script.>a trifecta of paradoxes, does it solve anything or only lead to another paradox?>so long as man is enslaved by mere kitchen utensils is there a state of freedom?>some opposing ends are so opposed a detonation can't occur. These result in implosion. New dialectic occurs but the manufactured socialization imposed by the system may deem these to be heretical. Use with care.
>>24821107Baudrillard is unironically tranny philosophy
>>24822092He did have a dialectic on this from his Extreme Phenomena article. It was comical. He blamed the sexual revolution for causing people to exert sex energy for no purpose. At some point people question what they are and it's all over, the revolution never happened. The process is the endless one from Nietzsche and since there are no answers everyone is a tranny for political purposes and no one is a tranny for all intents and purposes.>once the orgy is over there never was liberation.
>>24821167>french theologianDid a new Guenon (pbuh) just drop?>incorrect simulationsReality itself was always an 'incorrect simulation'. It is a consensus film, imposed by reiterated forces. None are more 'real' than the other, only more forceful. Your tendency towards God on the basis of avoiding 'nihilism' is purely utilitarian, less ontological. If anything these religious hyperrealities do already exist and they compete with deadly force.
>>24822150pretty trvkeful i must begrudgingly admit
Jogging won, Baurdrillard and his purple prose lost
I plan on reading him soon
>>24822150>The process is the endless one from Nietzsche and since there are no answers everyone is a tranny for political purposes and no one is a tranny for all intents and purposes.I dont understand how you can be so retarded to act like this is a retarded or ridiculous take especially in our current climate. Its honestly scary how prophetic Baudrillard is.Sometimes it feels like some of you retards use philosophy just to confirm your biases, you dont actually engage with the work, you label and frame it based on whether it can be interpreted to affirm or deny any one or other particular view "Its Nihilistic", "Its Tranny Philosophy", "Its Anti Christ", "Its Sophist", "Its Modern", "Its Post Modern", "The Greeks already refute!" (even though there are completely different/new arguments not considered by the Greeks)Fucking retards. I expect this board to be smarter than this. So disappointing.
>>24822291What's your medium/substack/blog, you seem intelligent
>>24822296He did have a few really good ones when he wasn't just doing it for purely masterbatory purposes but you still have to do those too.>>24823092Baudrillard was eerily prophetic, the guy who hated postmodernism but also wound up as the seminal thinker of postmodernism. His philosophy is still active, multiple academic journals still host responses to him. I've seen some claiming to have solved his paradox, some in favor of conspiratorial thought, comparing his views of seduction and eroticism to other famous thinkers, the list goes on. I'm not sure his paradox can be solved, but this is one people seem to enjoy trying. In order to do it in theory you would have to ward off the apex thinkers from his hypothetical simulative unfoldings. >counterfeit paradox: the Catholic avenger Descartes still scares most counterfeiters off.>industrialist paradox: this seems to be the one most have the easiest time with. The resolution is either sending you back to counterfeiting or launching you into postmodernism. The apex thinker was likely Marx. The resolution is just avoiding it and trying elsewhere.>structural paradox: Baudrillard didn't specify much on this one, likely due to the time of his writing so everything turns theoretical and hypothetical here. This is the phase where most attempted resolutions turn sour. Most generally presume Nietzsche to be the apex, but this is likely due to his reputation and the ease of entry into his philosophy, once you use it enough you eventually realize Nietzsche struggles significantly with epistemic dilemmas exactly of the kind Baudrillard pointed out. The broad net catches replies from everywhere but my personal hypothesis is that Hegel is the apex for this phase and Baudrillard himself my have thought this but couldn't make it work so he just put it out there anyway for people to think about. He even challenged his own simulators at one point. These responses are usually the interesting ones since in the process the applicants bring research to the table, some of the responses are shockingly detailed.
