1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,839 Welcome to the Deep Dive. Today we are strapping 2 00:00:02,839 --> 00:00:05,879 in for, well, it's definitely one of those conceptually 3 00:00:05,879 --> 00:00:09,539 challenging journeys we've taken, but also I 4 00:00:09,539 --> 00:00:12,740 think fundamentally essential. Absolutely. We're 5 00:00:12,740 --> 00:00:15,660 really wrestling with the question of truth itself. 6 00:00:16,100 --> 00:00:18,859 Yeah, specifically truth in an age where, frankly, 7 00:00:19,019 --> 00:00:22,199 technology seems to have made reality optional. 8 00:00:22,280 --> 00:00:24,500 That's a good way to put it. And our guides for 9 00:00:24,500 --> 00:00:28,699 this are two absolute titans of postmodern thought. 10 00:00:30,230 --> 00:00:33,189 John Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation. 11 00:00:33,350 --> 00:00:35,369 Which is revolutionary, really. Oh, completely. 12 00:00:35,710 --> 00:00:38,850 And Jean -François Léotard's foundational text, 13 00:00:39,009 --> 00:00:41,310 The Postmodern Condition. Now, these are, look, 14 00:00:41,390 --> 00:00:43,170 they're not easy reads, let's be honest. No, 15 00:00:43,229 --> 00:00:45,429 definitely not. You pick them up, you feel that 16 00:00:45,429 --> 00:00:47,869 theoretical density, and maybe you put them down 17 00:00:47,869 --> 00:00:50,119 again. I get it. Right. But the ideas in there 18 00:00:50,119 --> 00:00:52,079 about the hyper real, about these things called 19 00:00:52,079 --> 00:00:54,880 metanarratives, about what happens when the copy 20 00:00:54,880 --> 00:00:57,420 sort of overtakes the original. They are just 21 00:00:57,420 --> 00:00:58,920 crucial. They're like the intellectual keys, 22 00:00:59,020 --> 00:01:01,140 really, to understanding our current moment. 23 00:01:01,240 --> 00:01:03,840 Right. You know, misinformation, deep fakes, 24 00:01:03,840 --> 00:01:06,659 political theater. It all connects back. It really 25 00:01:06,659 --> 00:01:09,379 does. So our mission for you today, it's simple, 26 00:01:09,500 --> 00:01:13,269 but yeah, ambitious. We want to distill the core 27 00:01:13,269 --> 00:01:15,939 concepts. The simulacrum, the crisis of grand 28 00:01:15,939 --> 00:01:17,560 narratives. We want to try and make it clear 29 00:01:17,560 --> 00:01:20,140 why, starting around the late 20th century, this 30 00:01:20,140 --> 00:01:24,540 whole idea of the real started to, well, dissolve. 31 00:01:24,840 --> 00:01:26,879 And how that's left us where we are now, maybe 32 00:01:26,879 --> 00:01:29,260 with systems that are just designed for performance, 33 00:01:29,340 --> 00:01:32,760 not necessarily substance. Exactly. And we absolutely 34 00:01:32,760 --> 00:01:35,000 have to start with Baudrillard's big opening 35 00:01:35,000 --> 00:01:38,019 idea, the procession of simulacra. Right. The 36 00:01:38,019 --> 00:01:40,819 famous Borgia story. Yes. He kicks off with Borgia's 37 00:01:40,819 --> 00:01:44,219 allegory about the cartographers. These mapmakers, 38 00:01:44,319 --> 00:01:46,519 they create this incredibly detailed map of the 39 00:01:46,519 --> 00:01:49,120 empire. So detailed. And it covers the territory 40 00:01:49,120 --> 00:01:51,400 exactly. It becomes the territory in a sense. 41 00:01:51,640 --> 00:01:54,120 Precisely. Yeah. Conterminous with it. But then 42 00:01:54,120 --> 00:01:57,359 the empire declines and the map itself starts 43 00:01:57,359 --> 00:02:00,099 to decay, leaving these sort of shreds of abstraction, 44 00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:02,939 ruins in the desert. It's such a powerful image, 45 00:02:03,000 --> 00:02:05,359 isn't it? Very melancholic and captures that 46 00:02:05,359 --> 00:02:08,340 idea of representation failing, you know, trying 47 00:02:08,340 --> 00:02:10,460 so hard to capture reality that reality gets 48 00:02:10,460 --> 00:02:13,319 smothered by the picture. It defines that relationship. 49 00:02:13,780 --> 00:02:18,039 Map. Territory. Representation. And then Baudrillard 50 00:02:18,039 --> 00:02:21,520 just pulls the rug out. Immediately. He says 51 00:02:21,520 --> 00:02:24,979 that fable. It's unusable for us now. Unusable. 52 00:02:25,039 --> 00:02:29,199 Why? Because, he argues, we're way past that 53 00:02:29,199 --> 00:02:31,240 stage. The age of representation, imitation, 54 00:02:31,639 --> 00:02:34,889 maps, and territories. That's over. We are now 55 00:02:34,889 --> 00:02:37,030 deep in the age of simulation. Okay, that's a 56 00:02:37,030 --> 00:02:39,750 huge shift. If the map and territory defined 57 00:02:39,750 --> 00:02:42,229 representation, what defines this age of simulation? 58 00:02:42,710 --> 00:02:44,629 It's not about resemblance anymore. It's about 59 00:02:44,629 --> 00:02:47,090 operating through models. Bordiard talks about 60 00:02:47,090 --> 00:02:50,389 things like genetic miniaturization, matrices, 61 00:02:50,590 --> 00:02:52,870 memory banks. So the real isn't something you 62 00:02:52,870 --> 00:02:55,969 copy. No, it's something you produce from these 63 00:02:55,969 --> 00:02:59,150 tiny operational units. And it could be reproduced 64 00:02:59,150 --> 00:03:01,080 endlessly. You know, without ever needing an 65 00:03:01,080 --> 00:03:03,199 original in the old sense. Wow. So that gap, 66 00:03:03,280 --> 00:03:04,740 the difference between the map and the land it 67 00:03:04,740 --> 00:03:07,280 represents, the thing that gave abstraction its 68 00:03:07,280 --> 00:03:11,379 charm, as he puts it, that's just gone. Vanished. 69 00:03:11,659 --> 00:03:13,479 We're not dealing with a reflection of reality. 70 00:03:13,520 --> 00:03:15,800 We're dealing with a manufactured reality. Yeah. 71 00:03:15,819 --> 00:03:18,000 One that just floats free with no anchor to anything 72 00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:22,810 external. And that manufactured reality, that's 73 00:03:22,810 --> 00:03:24,810 the hype reel. That's the charm, yes. The hype 74 00:03:24,810 --> 00:03:28,569 reel. It's no longer really the reel. He says, 75 00:03:28,590 --> 00:03:30,669 because there's no imaginary wrapped around it 76 00:03:30,669 --> 00:03:33,990 anymore. It's generated, synthesized from these 77 00:03:33,990 --> 00:03:38,599 combinatory models in a kind of hyperspace without 78 00:03:38,599 --> 00:03:42,039 atmosphere. It's purely operational. Operational, 79 00:03:42,080 --> 00:03:44,400 meaning it just works. It functions. Exactly. 80 00:03:44,439 --> 00:03:47,520 The whole era of simulation kicks off by liquidating 81 00:03:47,520 --> 00:03:49,639 all the referentials. It throws out the real 82 00:03:49,639 --> 00:03:52,039 thing and replaces it with just the signs of 83 00:03:52,039 --> 00:03:54,259 the real. OK, and this leads directly to that 84 00:03:54,259 --> 00:03:56,500 incredibly jarring quote, the one that just stops 85 00:03:56,500 --> 00:03:58,039 you in your tracks when you first read it. Oh, 86 00:03:58,039 --> 00:04:00,419 yeah. The simulacrum is never what hides the 87 00:04:00,419 --> 00:04:02,780 truth. It is truth that hides the fact that there 88 00:04:02,780 --> 00:04:05,479 is none. The simulacrum is true. It just completely 89 00:04:05,479 --> 00:04:07,340 flips everything upside down. Our whole search 90 00:04:07,340 --> 00:04:10,319 for truth. It fix it. His point is that our constant 91 00:04:10,319 --> 00:04:12,419 digging for the real truth underneath everything. 92 00:04:13,060 --> 00:04:15,180 It's maybe just a way to deny that the foundation 93 00:04:15,180 --> 00:04:17,920 itself has evaporated. The simulacrum is true 94 00:04:17,920 --> 00:04:20,720 not because it matches reality, but because its 95 00:04:20,720 --> 00:04:23,009 appearance is all that's left. There's nothing 96 00:04:23,009 --> 00:04:25,470 else for it to be true to. Okay, let's dig into 97 00:04:25,470 --> 00:04:28,290 that. The blurring of true and false. We need 98 00:04:28,290 --> 00:04:30,029 to really get the difference between simulation 99 00:04:30,029 --> 00:04:34,129 and just pretending because that's key, right? 100 00:04:34,269 --> 00:04:36,209 Absolutely essential. Most people mix them up. 101 00:04:36,790 --> 00:04:39,629 Dissimulation or pretending is simple enough. 102 00:04:39,910 --> 00:04:42,670 You hide something that's actually there. Like 103 00:04:42,670 --> 00:04:44,889 faking a headache. Right. If I pretend I have 104 00:04:44,889 --> 00:04:47,149 a headache, I know the truth is I don't. I'm 105 00:04:47,149 --> 00:04:50,269 just masking my real state of health. So dissimulation 106 00:04:50,269 --> 00:04:52,930 leaves the basic principle of reality intact. 107 00:04:53,110 --> 00:04:55,910 It acknowledges there's a reality to hide. But 108 00:04:55,910 --> 00:04:58,410 simulation, that's different. He says it threatens 109 00:04:58,410 --> 00:05:00,389 the difference between the true and the false, 110 00:05:00,550 --> 00:05:04,189 the real and the imaginary. How? Because it's 111 00:05:04,189 --> 00:05:06,610 not about hiding symptoms. It's about producing 112 00:05:06,610 --> 00:05:09,310 them. Think about his medical example. If someone 113 00:05:09,310 --> 00:05:10,949 simulates an illness, they actually generate 114 00:05:10,949 --> 00:05:14,269 some of the real physical symptoms. Now, medicine 115 00:05:14,269 --> 00:05:16,569 traditionally relies on finding objective causes 116 00:05:16,569 --> 00:05:19,569 for real illnesses. But if the simulator produces 117 00:05:19,569 --> 00:05:22,129 symptoms that look identical to the real thing, 118 00:05:22,639 --> 00:05:26,100 well, medicine is stuck. It can't definitively 119 00:05:26,100 --> 00:05:28,319 separate the simulation from the reality based 120 00:05:28,319 --> 00:05:30,970 on the symptoms alone. The undiscoverable truth 121 00:05:30,970 --> 00:05:33,449 of the illness vanishes. So if you can produce 122 00:05:33,449 --> 00:05:36,389 any symptom, then any illness could potentially 123 00:05:36,389 --> 00:05:39,129 be simulated. And the whole certainty of medicine 124 00:05:39,129 --> 00:05:41,730 based on objective causes starts to crumble. 125 00:05:41,910 --> 00:05:44,810 Exactly. The line between the true cause and 126 00:05:44,810 --> 00:05:47,129 the manufactured effect just dissolves. And the 127 00:05:47,129 --> 00:05:49,149 practical consequences are huge. He talks about 128 00:05:49,149 --> 00:05:51,970 the military. Yeah, the military logic. Historically, 129 00:05:51,970 --> 00:05:54,389 the army wants to find the malingerer, the faker, 130 00:05:54,529 --> 00:05:57,620 and punish them. But what if they face a really, 131 00:05:57,680 --> 00:06:00,259 really good simulator? Someone who produces all 132 00:06:00,259 --> 00:06:03,040 the signs of, say, madness or a heart condition 133 00:06:03,040 --> 00:06:05,379 perfectly. Right. The army might just end up 134 00:06:05,379 --> 00:06:07,839 discharging them as exactly equivalent to someone 135 00:06:07,839 --> 00:06:11,180 genuinely ill or mad. The simulator becomes functionally 136 00:06:11,180 --> 00:06:13,319 the same as the real thing. And the inability 137 00:06:13,319 --> 00:06:16,220 to tell the difference. That's the problem. It's 138 00:06:16,220 --> 00:06:18,720 the worst kind of subversion, Baudrillard says, 139 00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:21,899 against classical reason. Because reason needs 140 00:06:21,899 --> 00:06:25,310 clear distinctions. True, false, sane, mad, real, 141 00:06:25,410 --> 00:06:28,529 imaginary. Simulation just bypasses all of that. 142 00:06:28,649 --> 00:06:30,550 It makes the difference irrelevant. It doesn't 143 00:06:30,550 --> 00:06:33,310 just offer a fake copy. It makes the whole idea 144 00:06:33,310 --> 00:06:36,449 of a stable reality seem like a simulation itself. 145 00:06:36,750 --> 00:06:39,569 So back to this idea of the hyperreal being purely 146 00:06:39,569 --> 00:06:41,990 operational. We're setting that against something 147 00:06:41,990 --> 00:06:44,550 being rational. Yes. If something's rational, 148 00:06:44,689 --> 00:06:46,290 it needs to connect back to some fundamental 149 00:06:46,290 --> 00:06:48,839 truth, some verifiable cause and effect. A reason. 150 00:06:48,959 --> 00:06:51,079 But the operational system. Doesn't need that 151 00:06:51,079 --> 00:06:53,199 external justification. It doesn't need a rational 152 00:06:53,199 --> 00:06:55,639 framework. It's generated from codes, matrices, 153 00:06:55,800 --> 00:06:58,740 models. And it works simply because it's programmed 154 00:06:58,740 --> 00:07:01,339 to work that way. It's effective because it's 155 00:07:01,339 --> 00:07:04,980 efficient, not because it's true. It's sheltered 156 00:07:04,980 --> 00:07:07,160 from the imaginary, as he puts it. Sheltered 157 00:07:07,160 --> 00:07:09,399 from any clear line between real and imaginary. 158 00:07:09,579 --> 00:07:11,399 It's like a closed loop. Self -perpetuating. 159 00:07:11,899 --> 00:07:13,959 And the critical thing, then, is that the real 160 00:07:13,959 --> 00:07:15,899 never gets a chance to emerge on its own anymore. 161 00:07:16,139 --> 00:07:19,199 The model, the simulation, takes over that generative 162 00:07:19,199 --> 00:07:21,399 function. It preempts the real. And if the real 163 00:07:21,399 --> 00:07:23,860 is truly gone, Baudrillard says we get nostalgic 164 00:07:23,860 --> 00:07:27,730 for it, which explains this almost... frantic 165 00:07:27,730 --> 00:07:30,889 energy in contemporary culture. This panic -stricken 166 00:07:30,889 --> 00:07:33,129 production of the real and of the referential. 167 00:07:33,329 --> 00:07:36,310 Exactly. We see this constant escalation of demanding 168 00:07:36,310 --> 00:07:39,069 the true, the authentic, the lived experience. 169 00:07:39,290 --> 00:07:41,990 A desperate attempt to resurrect the figurative, 170 00:07:42,110 --> 00:07:44,689 even when the actual substance has vanished. 171 00:07:44,949 --> 00:07:47,110 And this panic, this is what he means by hyper 172 00:07:47,110 --> 00:07:49,430 -reality as a kind of cultural deterrence. We 173 00:07:49,430 --> 00:07:52,490 try to protect the last bits of real. Yes, we 174 00:07:52,490 --> 00:07:54,649 create these protective bubbles around what's 175 00:07:54,649 --> 00:07:57,160 left. trying to guarantee they'll survive. But 176 00:07:57,160 --> 00:08:00,660 the very act of protecting them is what turns 177 00:08:00,660 --> 00:08:03,120 them into simulations. Like the Tassaday tribe 178 00:08:03,120 --> 00:08:06,079 example. It's really quite tragic. It is. Ethnology 179 00:08:06,079 --> 00:08:09,180 as a field kind of needed the primitive to exist 180 00:08:09,180 --> 00:08:12,699 to justify itself. So the ethnologists, they 181 00:08:12,699 --> 00:08:15,259 cordon off the Tassaday, keep them pure. Right. 182 00:08:15,319 --> 00:08:17,939 They surround them with virgin forests, supposedly 183 00:08:17,939 --> 00:08:20,600 to save them from contamination. preserve them 184 00:08:20,600 --> 00:08:22,579 by freezing them in time in their original state. 185 00:08:22,959 --> 00:08:25,259 But the moment they do that, they become exhibits. 186 00:08:25,579 --> 00:08:28,639 They become referential simulacra instantly. 187 00:08:28,980 --> 00:08:31,639 They stop being, you know, living people in their 188 00:08:31,639 --> 00:08:33,940 own context and become the sign of the savage. 189 00:08:34,220 --> 00:08:37,179 Protected to death, as he says. Ethnology basically 190 00:08:37,179 --> 00:08:40,200 sacrifices its living subject to save its own 191 00:08:40,200 --> 00:08:43,080 reason for existing. It reinvents the savage 192 00:08:43,080 --> 00:08:45,539 to keep itself going. And that's why he says 193 00:08:45,539 --> 00:08:49,590 we're all simulacral Indians now. Our whole world, 194 00:08:49,669 --> 00:08:53,789 cataloged, analyzed, preserved, it's all artificially 195 00:08:53,789 --> 00:08:56,669 resurrected under the banner of the real, driven 196 00:08:56,669 --> 00:08:59,870 by this kind of collective hallucination of truth. 197 00:09:00,090 --> 00:09:01,830 You see the same thing with historical sites, 198 00:09:01,909 --> 00:09:03,990 right? Like the Lascaux Caves. Perfect example. 199 00:09:04,230 --> 00:09:06,250 The original cave paintings were being damaged 200 00:09:06,250 --> 00:09:09,950 by, well, us. By people breezing on them, the 201 00:09:09,950 --> 00:09:12,049 moisture. So they closed the original cave. They 202 00:09:12,049 --> 00:09:14,029 did. And what did they do instead? Built a perfect 203 00:09:14,029 --> 00:09:16,029 hoppy right next door. Lascaux the second, looks 204 00:09:16,029 --> 00:09:18,529 exactly the same, feels the same. And that act 205 00:09:18,529 --> 00:09:21,210 of duplication, that perfect replica, immediately 206 00:09:21,210 --> 00:09:23,970 makes both of them artificial. The original locked 207 00:09:23,970 --> 00:09:26,730 away becomes just this inaccessible reference 208 00:09:26,730 --> 00:09:29,649 point for the copy. And the copy, because it's 209 00:09:29,649 --> 00:09:32,389 perfect and accessible, becomes the memory. Future 210 00:09:32,389 --> 00:09:35,029 generations remember the replica, not the real 211 00:09:35,029 --> 00:09:37,230 thing they can never see. It's pure deterrence. 212 00:09:37,899 --> 00:09:41,100 You deter decay by replacing the decaying original 213 00:09:41,100 --> 00:09:44,200 with its perfect immortal sign. The simulation 214 00:09:44,200 --> 00:09:47,759 replaces the real to preserve it. This preservation 215 00:09:47,759 --> 00:09:50,240 mania even extends to how we handle death and 216 00:09:50,240 --> 00:09:53,120 history. Baudrillard's take on the mummy of Ramses 217 00:09:53,120 --> 00:09:56,460 II is, well, bizarre, but it makes sense in this 218 00:09:56,460 --> 00:09:58,740 context. It really does. This mummy was apparently 219 00:09:58,740 --> 00:10:01,220 just left kind of decaying in a museum for ages. 220 00:10:01,340 --> 00:10:04,100 Then suddenly, late 20th century, there's this 221 00:10:04,100 --> 00:10:07,000 huge panic. We have to save Ramses. Fly him to 222 00:10:07,000 --> 00:10:10,690 France. Give him military honors. Why? Why the 223 00:10:10,690 --> 00:10:12,690 sudden urgency? It's not like Ramses himself 224 00:10:12,690 --> 00:10:15,409 means anything personal to us now. No, it's because 225 00:10:15,409 --> 00:10:17,570 the mummy, as this visible piece of the past, 226 00:10:17,750 --> 00:10:19,950 it guarantees that accumulation has meaning. 227 00:10:20,230 --> 00:10:22,750 Our whole culture is built on this idea of linear 228 00:10:22,750 --> 00:10:25,590 progress, accumulating history. We need these 229 00:10:25,590 --> 00:10:28,230 stockpiles of the visible past to reassure ourselves 230 00:10:28,230 --> 00:10:30,389 that our story makes sense, that it's continuous. 231 00:10:30,750 --> 00:10:32,730 But the act of saving him is actually incredibly 232 00:10:32,730 --> 00:10:35,629 violent, isn't it? It destroys the original meaning. 233 00:10:36,769 --> 00:10:39,399 Embalming. in its original symbolic context, 234 00:10:39,659 --> 00:10:43,379 was about mastering decay, a slow ritual transformation, 235 00:10:43,820 --> 00:10:47,519 dragging Ramses out, subjecting him to modern 236 00:10:47,519 --> 00:10:51,720 science, museums, historical analysis. It condemns 237 00:10:51,720 --> 00:10:54,019 that older symbolic order to death and replaces 238 00:10:54,019 --> 00:10:56,620 it with a hyper -real museum piece. We kill the 239 00:10:56,620 --> 00:10:58,779 symbolic depth just to celebrate the sign of 240 00:10:58,779 --> 00:11:01,639 the past, museumification as the ultimate simulation. 241 00:11:02,039 --> 00:11:05,019 Absolutely. So if Baudrillard is showing us the 242 00:11:05,019 --> 00:11:08,080 death of the real object, the referent, we need 243 00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:10,139 to bring in Lyotard here because he gives us 244 00:11:10,139 --> 00:11:13,360 this incredibly powerful parallel analysis. The 245 00:11:13,360 --> 00:11:15,419 death of the foundation, the grand narratives. 246 00:11:15,480 --> 00:11:17,799 That's a great transition. Moving from dead objects 247 00:11:17,799 --> 00:11:19,919 like the mummy to dead stories like the idea 248 00:11:19,919 --> 00:11:22,279 of inevitable progress. It feels like the same 249 00:11:22,279 --> 00:11:23,879 kind of collapse, just on a different level. 250 00:11:24,039 --> 00:11:26,179 It really is. Both thinkers are seeing the foundations 251 00:11:26,179 --> 00:11:28,279 crumble, the things we used to use to legitimize 252 00:11:28,279 --> 00:11:30,659 knowledge, society, everything. So Leithard, 253 00:11:30,779 --> 00:11:32,799 in the postmodern condition, he starts by saying 254 00:11:32,799 --> 00:11:35,860 knowledge itself is changing. Its status is different 255 00:11:35,860 --> 00:11:37,820 now, especially since the late 50s in Europe, 256 00:11:37,879 --> 00:11:40,500 as we moved into this post -industrial, postmodern 257 00:11:40,500 --> 00:11:43,779 age. And the defining feature for him, the crisis 258 00:11:43,779 --> 00:11:47,250 of the narratives. or metanarratives. These are 259 00:11:47,250 --> 00:11:49,669 the big overarching stories, the ones that gave 260 00:11:49,669 --> 00:11:52,669 everything meaning and purpose. Exactly. Stories 261 00:11:52,669 --> 00:11:54,929 like the emancipation of humanity through reason 262 00:11:54,929 --> 00:11:57,389 and science, or the eventual realization of a 263 00:11:57,389 --> 00:12:00,129 universal spirit, or the Marxist narrative of 264 00:12:00,129 --> 00:12:03,509 achieving a classless society. These grand narratives 265 00:12:03,509 --> 00:12:06,129 were what gave science and politics their ultimate 266 00:12:06,129 --> 00:12:09,049 justification, their moral compass. But what 267 00:12:09,049 --> 00:12:11,610 happens when people stop believing in those big 268 00:12:11,610 --> 00:12:13,990 stories? Where does science get its legitimacy 269 00:12:13,990 --> 00:12:16,710 then if it's not about saving humanity anymore? 270 00:12:16,909 --> 00:12:19,590 Well, that's the crisis. Lyotard argues it shifts 271 00:12:19,590 --> 00:12:22,590 towards eminence, meaning the rules for validating 272 00:12:22,590 --> 00:12:25,429 knowledge become entirely internal, self -referential. 273 00:12:25,730 --> 00:12:27,990 So science just justifies itself based on its 274 00:12:27,990 --> 00:12:30,110 own rules, its own language, its own consensus. 275 00:12:30,230 --> 00:12:32,490 Pretty much. It gets divorced from any larger 276 00:12:32,490 --> 00:12:35,750 external moral goal or grand narrative. It becomes 277 00:12:35,750 --> 00:12:37,789 about what works within the system of science 278 00:12:37,789 --> 00:12:40,850 itself. And this loss of external foundations 279 00:12:40,850 --> 00:12:43,570 connects directly to that shift towards just 280 00:12:43,570 --> 00:12:47,129 performance and efficiency, which Lyotard was 281 00:12:47,129 --> 00:12:48,970 really focused on and which sounds a lot like 282 00:12:48,970 --> 00:12:52,440 Baudrillard's operational hyperreal. Absolutely. 283 00:12:52,740 --> 00:12:57,120 Lyotard saw how the idea of society as this unified 284 00:12:57,120 --> 00:12:59,879 whole, you know, like in Parsons' sociology, 285 00:13:00,220 --> 00:13:02,639 was morphing into something much harder, much 286 00:13:02,639 --> 00:13:05,519 more technocratic. The goal became optimizing 287 00:13:05,519 --> 00:13:09,720 rationality purely for system performance. Especially 288 00:13:09,720 --> 00:13:12,259 in the context of global competition, the economic 289 00:13:12,259 --> 00:13:15,240 war he talks about from the 60s onwards. Right. 290 00:13:15,299 --> 00:13:17,700 It's all about... output efficiency. And the 291 00:13:17,700 --> 00:13:19,779 moment optimization and performance become the 292 00:13:19,779 --> 00:13:22,220 main goals, you've shifted away from seeking 293 00:13:22,220 --> 00:13:24,059 truth in the old sense, haven't you? You're just 294 00:13:24,059 --> 00:13:25,919 seeking maximum efficiency. Which is precisely 295 00:13:25,919 --> 00:13:28,179 the kind of operational reality Baudrillard describes. 296 00:13:28,480 --> 00:13:30,919 It's the efficient reality that Lyotard is critiquing. 297 00:13:30,919 --> 00:13:32,460 Okay, let's get deeper into that connection. 298 00:13:32,740 --> 00:13:36,340 Performance, control. Lyotard saw limits to this 299 00:13:36,340 --> 00:13:38,600 drive for total efficiency, didn't he? He did. 300 00:13:38,860 --> 00:13:42,179 He uses the idea of Laplace's demon, this imaginary 301 00:13:42,179 --> 00:13:44,759 being that could predict the entire future of 302 00:13:44,759 --> 00:13:47,990 the universe. if it just knew the position and 303 00:13:47,990 --> 00:13:50,250 momentum of every particle right now. That's 304 00:13:50,250 --> 00:13:52,309 like the ultimate dream of system control, right? 305 00:13:52,490 --> 00:13:54,750 Right. Total knowledge equals total prediction 306 00:13:54,750 --> 00:13:57,909 equals maximum performance. It's the ideal. But 307 00:13:57,909 --> 00:14:00,370 Lyotard points out, much like Baudrillard, that 308 00:14:00,370 --> 00:14:02,690 the attempt to achieve that kind of total knowledge 309 00:14:02,690 --> 00:14:05,509 is actually self -defeating. He uses a version 310 00:14:05,509 --> 00:14:08,250 of the Borges map story again. How so? He says, 311 00:14:08,350 --> 00:14:10,450 think about the energy it would take just to 312 00:14:10,450 --> 00:14:12,389 measure the initial state of the system perfectly, 313 00:14:12,610 --> 00:14:16,000 to map every single variable. It might require 314 00:14:16,000 --> 00:14:18,100 an amount of energy equal to what the system 315 00:14:18,100 --> 00:14:20,559 itself uses over its entire existence. So the 316 00:14:20,559 --> 00:14:23,419 mapping consumes the territory. The effort to 317 00:14:23,419 --> 00:14:25,860 gain perfect control becomes totally dysfunctional. 318 00:14:25,940 --> 00:14:28,700 Exactly. The bureaucracy needed for that level 319 00:14:28,700 --> 00:14:30,879 of control, the endless measuring and monitoring, 320 00:14:31,039 --> 00:14:33,340 it can just swamp the system it's trying to optimize. 321 00:14:33,519 --> 00:14:35,480 You get negative feedback loops, inefficiency, 322 00:14:35,620 --> 00:14:38,399 maybe even collapse. So, realizing that total 323 00:14:38,399 --> 00:14:41,899 control is a fantasy, Lyotard rejects that idea 324 00:14:41,899 --> 00:14:45,529 of society as some unified, predictable machine. 325 00:14:46,129 --> 00:14:48,970 What does he propose instead? He says the social 326 00:14:48,970 --> 00:14:51,450 bond, the connections between people are complex, 327 00:14:51,769 --> 00:14:54,470 always shifting, and fundamentally agonistic. 328 00:14:54,710 --> 00:14:57,789 Agonistic, meaning competitive, conflictual. 329 00:14:57,929 --> 00:15:00,909 Yes, exactly. Society isn't this harmonious whole 330 00:15:00,909 --> 00:15:04,210 aiming for equilibrium. Instead, think of individuals 331 00:15:04,210 --> 00:15:07,169 as constantly moving nodes in communication networks. 332 00:15:07,370 --> 00:15:09,669 We're always exchanging different kinds of messages. 333 00:15:09,870 --> 00:15:12,070 What kinds of messages? Well, denotative ones. 334 00:15:12,539 --> 00:15:14,860 Statements about facts. Prescriptive ones, rules, 335 00:15:15,120 --> 00:15:17,480 commands, orders. And performative ones, statements 336 00:15:17,480 --> 00:15:19,659 that actually do something, like making a promise 337 00:15:19,659 --> 00:15:22,100 or declaring something open. So it's like an 338 00:15:22,100 --> 00:15:24,139 information battlefield. In a way. The system 339 00:15:24,139 --> 00:15:26,419 sends out prescriptive messages. Maximize performance. 340 00:15:26,799 --> 00:15:29,659 Be efficient. But the individuals, the nodes, 341 00:15:29,899 --> 00:15:32,419 they aren't just passive receivers. They can 342 00:15:32,419 --> 00:15:34,279 question those prescriptions, send back different 343 00:15:34,279 --> 00:15:37,240 kinds of messages. The social link is this constant, 344 00:15:37,320 --> 00:15:40,039 unstable negotiation, a battle of messages where 345 00:15:40,039 --> 00:15:42,610 certainty is always temporary. And this focus 346 00:15:42,610 --> 00:15:46,070 on instability, it shows up in postmodern science, 347 00:15:46,309 --> 00:15:49,769 too. Definitely. Science in this era, Lyotard 348 00:15:49,769 --> 00:15:51,970 argues, isn't just looking for smooth, predictable 349 00:15:51,970 --> 00:15:54,830 laws anymore. It's actually seeking out the limits, 350 00:15:54,889 --> 00:15:57,529 the points of instability, the unpredictable. 351 00:15:57,610 --> 00:16:00,409 Things like quantum mechanics, chaos theory. 352 00:16:00,899 --> 00:16:03,580 Precisely. Or Mandelbrot's fractals. Think of 353 00:16:03,580 --> 00:16:06,299 a coastline. It's continuous, but it's jagged, 354 00:16:06,320 --> 00:16:08,899 irregular. You can't describe its slope at any 355 00:16:08,899 --> 00:16:11,100 given point easily. It has a fractional dimension, 356 00:16:11,419 --> 00:16:13,639 mathematically somewhere between a simple line 357 00:16:13,639 --> 00:16:16,600 and a flat surface. It suggests irregularity 358 00:16:16,600 --> 00:16:19,679 is fundamental, not just noise. Or that catastrophe 359 00:16:19,679 --> 00:16:22,669 theory example with the dog. Right, René Tom's 360 00:16:22,669 --> 00:16:24,970 idea. You have continuous changes in the dog's 361 00:16:24,970 --> 00:16:27,330 internal state, rage and fear increasing steadily. 362 00:16:27,529 --> 00:16:29,710 But then suddenly you hit a threshold and boom, 363 00:16:29,789 --> 00:16:32,250 a discontinuous jump. The dog flips instantly 364 00:16:32,250 --> 00:16:34,649 from attack mode to flight mode. The system had 365 00:16:34,649 --> 00:16:36,429 these inherent points of sudden, unpredictable 366 00:16:36,429 --> 00:16:38,990 change. Okay, so if the system wants stability, 367 00:16:39,230 --> 00:16:41,250 maximum performance predictability like Laplace's 368 00:16:41,250 --> 00:16:44,330 demon, then the goal of knowledge for Leotard 369 00:16:44,330 --> 00:16:46,509 should be the opposite. That's his ethical point, 370 00:16:46,570 --> 00:16:49,679 really. He proposes the goal for postmodern knowledge 371 00:16:49,679 --> 00:16:52,259 should be the search for paralogy. Paralogy. 372 00:16:52,299 --> 00:16:55,419 It means going against the grain, resisting consensus, 373 00:16:55,779 --> 00:16:58,580 actively seeking out the new rules of the game, 374 00:16:58,659 --> 00:17:01,460 the unexpected move, the differentiating statement. 375 00:17:01,460 --> 00:17:05,019 It's about finding the instabilities, the paradoxes, 376 00:17:05,019 --> 00:17:07,359 the things that don't quite fit the established 377 00:17:07,359 --> 00:17:09,599 rules. So it's a form of intellectual resistance 378 00:17:09,599 --> 00:17:13,279 against the system's demand for just... Smooth 379 00:17:13,279 --> 00:17:15,720 performance. Exactly. By looking for paralogy, 380 00:17:15,759 --> 00:17:18,619 for dissent, for the unforeseen move, knowledge 381 00:17:18,619 --> 00:17:21,460 actually moves forward and it pushes back against 382 00:17:21,460 --> 00:17:24,000 that totalizing drive for control and efficiency. 383 00:17:24,359 --> 00:17:26,880 Which brings us right back to the political implications 384 00:17:26,880 --> 00:17:29,500 of all this. We have Lyotard's system demanding 385 00:17:29,500 --> 00:17:32,359 performance, Baudrillard's hyperreal, that only 386 00:17:32,359 --> 00:17:35,160 exists to function. And the consequence seems 387 00:17:35,160 --> 00:17:37,440 to be the death of political reality as we knew 388 00:17:37,440 --> 00:17:39,539 it. Absolutely. When your referentials collapse, 389 00:17:39,819 --> 00:17:42,539 when truth is secondary to the circulation of 390 00:17:42,539 --> 00:17:46,000 signs and optimizing performance, political struggles 391 00:17:46,000 --> 00:17:48,160 just get sucked into the simulation. Creating 392 00:17:48,160 --> 00:17:50,039 that vertigo of interpretation you mentioned 393 00:17:50,039 --> 00:17:52,640 earlier, like the Italian bombing example. Right. 394 00:17:52,680 --> 00:17:54,740 It was the leftists, right -wing provocateurs, 395 00:17:54,880 --> 00:17:58,259 a centrist false flag. Baudrillard's chilling 396 00:17:58,259 --> 00:18:01,859 insight is all of this is simultaneously true. 397 00:18:02,480 --> 00:18:05,700 Not factually true, obviously, but true within 398 00:18:05,700 --> 00:18:07,960 the logic of simulation. How can they all be 399 00:18:07,960 --> 00:18:10,259 true? Because the models come first now. The 400 00:18:10,259 --> 00:18:13,079 event itself is almost secondary. It's generated 401 00:18:13,079 --> 00:18:15,119 by all the possible interpretations circulating 402 00:18:15,119 --> 00:18:17,599 at once. Their truth isn't about matching facts. 403 00:18:17,799 --> 00:18:20,039 It's just about their ability to be exchanged 404 00:18:20,039 --> 00:18:22,559 within this cycle of interpretations. They all 405 00:18:22,559 --> 00:18:25,670 function as possible explanations. If all interpretations 406 00:18:25,670 --> 00:18:28,029 are equally valid in the simulation, how can 407 00:18:28,029 --> 00:18:30,509 you have political action? How can you have justice 408 00:18:30,509 --> 00:18:32,650 or accountability if you can never pin down the 409 00:18:32,650 --> 00:18:35,269 real story? That's the problem. It doesn't really 410 00:18:35,269 --> 00:18:37,069 function in the old way. The political system 411 00:18:37,069 --> 00:18:39,690 kind of runs on this indecision now. The complexity, 412 00:18:39,869 --> 00:18:42,589 the inability to fix meaning becomes the operating 413 00:18:42,589 --> 00:18:44,910 principle. If a politician says something like, 414 00:18:44,950 --> 00:18:46,970 you know, the opposition won't really change 415 00:18:46,970 --> 00:18:50,279 capitalism, that statement... carries all possible 416 00:18:50,279 --> 00:18:52,279 interpretations simultaneously. Maybe they're 417 00:18:52,279 --> 00:18:54,059 weak, maybe they don't want power, maybe power 418 00:18:54,059 --> 00:18:56,660 itself doesn't exist anymore. All those meanings 419 00:18:56,660 --> 00:19:00,259 circulate. So power itself, sensing its dissolving 420 00:19:00,259 --> 00:19:03,240 into signs, tries to fight back by constantly 421 00:19:03,240 --> 00:19:06,720 trying to re -inject the real staging crises. 422 00:19:07,240 --> 00:19:08,859 That's the panic -stricken production again, 423 00:19:09,039 --> 00:19:11,680 but in the political sphere. The system needs 424 00:19:11,680 --> 00:19:14,480 us to believe. Believe in the reality of society, 425 00:19:14,700 --> 00:19:16,920 the seriousness of the economy, the importance 426 00:19:16,920 --> 00:19:19,460 of production. Believe the stakes are real, even 427 00:19:19,460 --> 00:19:22,039 if they're simulated. Baudrillard's really radical 428 00:19:22,039 --> 00:19:25,619 claim is that actual effective power has vanished. 429 00:19:26,019 --> 00:19:28,619 All that's left are the signs of power, like 430 00:19:28,619 --> 00:19:30,980 a mannequin. The mannequin of power. That's stark. 431 00:19:31,059 --> 00:19:33,019 He applies this specifically to presidents, right? 432 00:19:33,059 --> 00:19:35,339 Yeah. He makes this distinction. Someone like 433 00:19:35,339 --> 00:19:37,839 Kennedy, he argues, was assassinated because 434 00:19:37,839 --> 00:19:40,099 he still embodied something real, a political 435 00:19:40,099 --> 00:19:43,019 force, a hope, a threat. His death was a genuine, 436 00:19:43,059 --> 00:19:45,440 tragic political event. But later presidents? 437 00:19:45,779 --> 00:19:48,039 They only get phantom attempts, simulated murders. 438 00:19:48,420 --> 00:19:50,880 Why simulate an assassination attempt? Because 439 00:19:50,880 --> 00:19:53,740 these later figures, in his view, are just mannequins. 440 00:19:54,079 --> 00:19:56,380 They don't represent a real political force anymore. 441 00:19:56,680 --> 00:19:59,180 They're just functioning signs within the simulation 442 00:19:59,180 --> 00:20:01,920 of power. They have to feign being in danger, 443 00:20:02,039 --> 00:20:04,400 stage these threats to preserve the illusion, 444 00:20:04,640 --> 00:20:07,380 the blessing of power. To convince us all that 445 00:20:07,380 --> 00:20:09,880 power is still real, still meaningful, still 446 00:20:09,880 --> 00:20:12,500 worth attacking. So power isn't a structure anymore, 447 00:20:12,599 --> 00:20:14,920 not a relationship of force. It's just out there, 448 00:20:14,980 --> 00:20:17,460 circulating like money or language. Exactly. 449 00:20:17,460 --> 00:20:20,619 It's just an object of social demand. a commodity 450 00:20:20,619 --> 00:20:23,079 that depends on mass consumption of its signs. 451 00:20:23,319 --> 00:20:26,160 The whole fiction of a political world is kept 452 00:20:26,160 --> 00:20:28,819 alive by constantly staging its own importance, 453 00:20:28,920 --> 00:20:31,559 its own gravity. And technology, especially mass 454 00:20:31,559 --> 00:20:34,880 media, is the engine driving all this, the ultimate 455 00:20:34,880 --> 00:20:37,160 hyperreal machine. Let's talk about the China 456 00:20:37,160 --> 00:20:39,160 syndrome example. Right, the movie about a potential 457 00:20:39,160 --> 00:20:41,859 nuclear meltdown that came out just before the 458 00:20:41,859 --> 00:20:44,140 real Three Mile Island incident at Harrisburg. 459 00:20:44,319 --> 00:20:47,660 It was uncanny. And Baudrillard saw a deep connection 460 00:20:47,660 --> 00:20:50,670 there. He argued. The film showed the supremacy 461 00:20:50,670 --> 00:20:53,289 of the televised event over the nuclear event. 462 00:20:53,529 --> 00:20:56,670 He saw both TV and nuclear power plants as cold 463 00:20:56,670 --> 00:21:00,150 systems of deterrence. TV, for him, performs 464 00:21:00,150 --> 00:21:03,049 this kind of television of the real. It cools 465 00:21:03,049 --> 00:21:06,250 down events, neutralizes their meaning by turning 466 00:21:06,250 --> 00:21:09,650 them into instant, consumable images. So the 467 00:21:09,650 --> 00:21:11,609 drama in the movie The Murderer Plot, it kind 468 00:21:11,609 --> 00:21:13,789 of stands in for the real potential catastrophe. 469 00:21:14,089 --> 00:21:18,059 The simulation becomes the main event. Yes. Simulation 470 00:21:18,059 --> 00:21:20,720 holds the power, not the underlying threat. And 471 00:21:20,720 --> 00:21:22,980 the core function of constantly simulating catastrophe, 472 00:21:23,460 --> 00:21:26,079 whether it's nuclear meltdown, pandemics, economic 473 00:21:26,079 --> 00:21:28,680 collapse, is to get us used to the ideology and 474 00:21:28,680 --> 00:21:31,160 the discipline of absolute security. How does 475 00:21:31,160 --> 00:21:33,480 simulating disaster create security? That seems 476 00:21:33,480 --> 00:21:35,660 counterintuitive. By constantly showing us the 477 00:21:35,660 --> 00:21:37,740 worst case scenario, the system performs a kind 478 00:21:37,740 --> 00:21:40,200 of mental destructuration. It makes us accept 479 00:21:40,200 --> 00:21:42,519 extreme control measures, constant surveillance, 480 00:21:42,779 --> 00:21:45,559 preemptive actions, all in the name of preventing 481 00:21:45,559 --> 00:21:47,519 the simulated catastrophe from becoming real. 482 00:21:47,819 --> 00:21:50,559 It deters us from any actual event that might 483 00:21:50,559 --> 00:21:52,799 genuinely shake things up. Which leads to his 484 00:21:52,799 --> 00:21:55,880 big media theory statement. Information devours 485 00:21:55,880 --> 00:21:59,160 its own content. Right. The sheer speed and volume 486 00:21:59,160 --> 00:22:01,900 of information just leads to entropy, meaning 487 00:22:01,900 --> 00:22:04,440 collapses. There's no clear separation anymore 488 00:22:04,440 --> 00:22:06,980 between the media and the reality it's supposedly 489 00:22:06,980 --> 00:22:09,400 reporting on. The medium implodes into the real. 490 00:22:09,500 --> 00:22:12,339 Creating this hyper -real nebula, as he calls 491 00:22:12,339 --> 00:22:16,319 it, a fog where meaning is just indecipherable. 492 00:22:16,500 --> 00:22:18,700 Which is why trying to start a revolution just 493 00:22:18,700 --> 00:22:20,559 by changing the content of the media or even 494 00:22:20,559 --> 00:22:23,400 its form is probably futile. The medium itself 495 00:22:23,400 --> 00:22:25,759 has already neutralized meaning. It's a system 496 00:22:25,759 --> 00:22:29,700 of deterrence. Like reality TV, TV verite. It 497 00:22:29,700 --> 00:22:31,720 seems to get closer to reality, but... But it 498 00:22:31,720 --> 00:22:34,220 subjects that reality to this manipulative gaze, 499 00:22:34,380 --> 00:22:36,940 this phony exactitude and excessive transparency. 500 00:22:37,380 --> 00:22:39,539 That's actually another form of control. It's 501 00:22:39,539 --> 00:22:41,539 not the old panopticon anymore where one guard 502 00:22:41,539 --> 00:22:44,220 watched many prisoners. Now it's just total transparency, 503 00:22:44,420 --> 00:22:46,539 instant circulation. The goal isn't punishment 504 00:22:46,539 --> 00:22:48,400 after the fact. It's preventing any deviation 505 00:22:48,400 --> 00:22:50,779 from the smooth operation of the system. Okay. 506 00:22:50,940 --> 00:22:55,519 So we've traced this path from... a real world 507 00:22:55,519 --> 00:22:58,440 with foundations through simulation to this hyper 508 00:22:58,440 --> 00:23:00,799 real state which is purely operational purely 509 00:23:00,799 --> 00:23:03,640 functional the whole idea of a single objective 510 00:23:03,640 --> 00:23:07,460 truth seems well completely undermined by technology 511 00:23:07,460 --> 00:23:10,460 by social systems geared for circulation and 512 00:23:10,460 --> 00:23:12,200 control Yeah, it's a profound challenge. And 513 00:23:12,200 --> 00:23:14,200 we've seen this amazing convergence, haven't 514 00:23:14,200 --> 00:23:16,700 we? Lyotard showing how the performance -driven 515 00:23:16,700 --> 00:23:19,759 system throws out those foundational grand narratives. 516 00:23:19,920 --> 00:23:21,559 Yeah, and Baudrillard showing how the hyperreal 517 00:23:21,559 --> 00:23:24,119 doesn't need truth or rationality. It just needs 518 00:23:24,119 --> 00:23:26,460 to function to be efficient to keep the science 519 00:23:26,460 --> 00:23:28,700 flowing. It's the same endpoint described from 520 00:23:28,700 --> 00:23:30,980 slightly different angles. So in this world where 521 00:23:30,980 --> 00:23:33,200 meaning is imploding, where control works through 522 00:23:33,200 --> 00:23:36,460 simulation, what's left? Is resistance even possible? 523 00:23:37,289 --> 00:23:39,150 Baudrillard's take on nihilism is interesting 524 00:23:39,150 --> 00:23:42,349 here. He sees it as passive now. Not the dramatic, 525 00:23:42,430 --> 00:23:46,089 active nihilism of the past. No, it's the procession 526 00:23:46,089 --> 00:23:48,490 of the neutral, he says. Indifference, a kind 527 00:23:48,490 --> 00:23:50,890 of melancholy fascination with watching the real, 528 00:23:51,009 --> 00:23:54,079 the social, just disappear into the simulation. 529 00:23:54,519 --> 00:23:57,240 If the stage for critique for dialectic is empty, 530 00:23:57,460 --> 00:24:00,319 there's no therapy of meaning left, as he puts 531 00:24:00,319 --> 00:24:02,660 it. But he does leave us with this final, maybe 532 00:24:02,660 --> 00:24:04,920 hopeful paradox. It loops right back to that 533 00:24:04,920 --> 00:24:08,029 first... shocking statement about the simulacrum 534 00:24:08,029 --> 00:24:10,569 being true. What's the paradox? He says, OK, 535 00:24:10,650 --> 00:24:13,410 meaning, meaning is mortal. It rises, it falls, 536 00:24:13,529 --> 00:24:16,769 it changes, it dies. But the thing meaning always 537 00:24:16,769 --> 00:24:20,170 tried to conquer to get rid of appearances, those 538 00:24:20,170 --> 00:24:23,789 are immortal. Appearances are invulnerable to 539 00:24:23,789 --> 00:24:26,529 the nihilism of meaning or of non -meaning itself. 540 00:24:26,849 --> 00:24:29,890 Wow. So if truth, meaning the real itself, have 541 00:24:29,890 --> 00:24:32,329 all collapsed into their simulated copies, if 542 00:24:32,329 --> 00:24:34,549 the foundations are gone. then the only thing 543 00:24:34,549 --> 00:24:37,109 left that lasts forever is just the surface, 544 00:24:37,289 --> 00:24:39,690 the appearance, the image, the sign. That seems 545 00:24:39,690 --> 00:24:41,789 to be his final provocative suggestion. So what 546 00:24:41,789 --> 00:24:43,710 does that mean for you listening now, in your 547 00:24:43,710 --> 00:24:46,190 life? If appearances completely detached from 548 00:24:46,190 --> 00:24:48,269 any grounding truth are the only immortal thing 549 00:24:48,269 --> 00:24:50,630 left in this hyper -real fog, does fighting for 550 00:24:50,630 --> 00:24:53,410 objective truth become pointless, a losing battle 551 00:24:53,410 --> 00:24:56,809 against the simulation? Or does Leotard's idea 552 00:24:56,809 --> 00:24:59,730 of parology... of creating new unstable rules 553 00:24:59,730 --> 00:25:01,990 within the game, challenging the consensus. Does 554 00:25:01,990 --> 00:25:03,990 that become the only meaningful ethical path 555 00:25:03,990 --> 00:25:06,890 left? Finding the glitches, the unexpected moves 556 00:25:06,890 --> 00:25:09,190 within the system of appearances. That's the 557 00:25:09,190 --> 00:25:10,930 paradox, the simulacrum. That's the thought we'll 558 00:25:10,930 --> 00:25:11,289 leave you with.