3 ms·

You may find Lacan's conceptualization of The Real, The Imaginary, and The Symbolic as helpful in navigating this space. There's some obvious connections betwee

You may find Lacan's conceptualization of The Real, The Imaginary, and The Symbolic as helpful in navigating this space. There's some obvious connections between Baudrillard and Lacan but it's best summed up like so > There is no clear evidence that Baudrillard deployed Lacan’s theory consistently, as Baudrillard himself did his best to erase the footprints of employed sources; yet, Baudrillard’s knowledge and use of Lacan is something taken for granted by most Baudrillardian scholars[1]. I'll point out that the study of the Real requires a certain suspension of disbelief or a willingness to sit with the tension of not understanding something for a very long time before it starts to make sense. It comes with the reward of understanding or at least feeling like having an understanding of where your subjectivity comes from. And this requires a vulnerability in admitting that a lot of us are quite a bit more subjective than we're willing to admit to ourselves. 1. https://baudrillardstudies.ubishops.ca/the-invention-of-history-lacan-in-baudrillard-part-i-first-simulation-stage-the-classic-age/ https://baudrillardstudies.ubishops.ca/the-invention-of-hist...

bowsamic 3y ago
To be honest, I already am more in favour of pure subjectivity than of anything objectively real. For example, I am a physicist, but I don't think the laws of physics exist. I am just interested in what the others think
- I_Am_Nous 3y ago
  The phenomena which causes particles to exist to have quirky rules governing their interactions is definitely real. Whether that's simulated reality setting parameters on particle interactions or any other kind of reality, it continues to hold our experienced reality in existence. We study the hourglass from inside of the hourglass, and are subject to what happens TO the hourglass. If it's shaken or broken, it can never exist in its previous state again. Likewise we can only guess what everything is like outside of the hourglass. Our reality is inside the hourglass, and we probably can't get out.
  - bowsamic 3y ago
    > The phenomena which causes particles to exist to have quirky rules governing their interactions is definitely real. How do you know?
    - I_Am_Nous 3y ago
      If we live in a simulated universe, "phenomena causing particles to exist" would be a process driven by whatever is running the simulation. It would "feel" objective to us inside the simulation, but theoretically zooming out a bit would show that our "objective" simulation is actually subjectively based on whatever parameters the simulation computer imposes. In this instance, I argue that the computer we exist on is real as it is imposing laws we are subject to. There's no way to prove it isn't a Russian Nesting Doll where it's simulations all the way down (and up), but if we can't leave our reality to check out the one above us, this is more the realm of philosophy than physics. In a non-simulated universe, the laws of physics as we experience them are imposed by something. Whether that something is just our frame of reference as a collective species trapped in a single area of spacetime or the grand unifying theory we keep searching for, there is some objective measure which regulates physics. Maybe if we find it, we can find how to make it subjective and abuse physics like a speedrunner does in a video game.

bowsamic 3y ago

To be honest, I already am more in favour of pure subjectivity than of anything objectively real. For example, I am a physicist, but I don't think the laws of physics exist. I am just interested in what the others think

I_Am_Nous 3y ago
The phenomena which causes particles to exist to have quirky rules governing their interactions is definitely real. Whether that's simulated reality setting parameters on particle interactions or any other kind of reality, it continues to hold our experienced reality in existence. We study the hourglass from inside of the hourglass, and are subject to what happens TO the hourglass. If it's shaken or broken, it can never exist in its previous state again. Likewise we can only guess what everything is like outside of the hourglass. Our reality is inside the hourglass, and we probably can't get out.
- bowsamic 3y ago
  > The phenomena which causes particles to exist to have quirky rules governing their interactions is definitely real. How do you know?
  - I_Am_Nous 3y ago
    If we live in a simulated universe, "phenomena causing particles to exist" would be a process driven by whatever is running the simulation. It would "feel" objective to us inside the simulation, but theoretically zooming out a bit would show that our "objective" simulation is actually subjectively based on whatever parameters the simulation computer imposes. In this instance, I argue that the computer we exist on is real as it is imposing laws we are subject to. There's no way to prove it isn't a Russian Nesting Doll where it's simulations all the way down (and up), but if we can't leave our reality to check out the one above us, this is more the realm of philosophy than physics. In a non-simulated universe, the laws of physics as we experience them are imposed by something. Whether that something is just our frame of reference as a collective species trapped in a single area of spacetime or the grand unifying theory we keep searching for, there is some objective measure which regulates physics. Maybe if we find it, we can find how to make it subjective and abuse physics like a speedrunner does in a video game.