It is the task of radical thought, since the world is given to us in unintelligibility, to make it more unintelligible...

>It is the task of radical thought, since the world is given to us in unintelligibility, to make it more unintelligible, more enigmatic, more fabulous
Is he right?

Attached: baudrillard-self1.jpg (328x450, 26K)

French sophistry.

And to make themselves more unintelligible, enigmatic, and fabulous. See: Baudrillard along with every other french philosopher.

t. bugman

Baudrillard just admitted to his own sophistry though. That's what he is saying in the OP.

>MOM I POSTED IT AGAIN
>no U are bugmen!
Why can't lefties help thenselves? Its like a sickness

that's not what sophistry's about

he was a situationist, this is exactly what they would have said

>task
fuck you i wont do what you tell me, cunt

and a pataphysician!

so, a highly eloquent and brilliant critic and part fraudster. in the best French style.

come on Baudrillard is fucking cool. everyone hating on JB ITT should read Cool Memories

Attached: 51eXMzD9NEL._SX491_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (493x500, 45K)

Your task in these dreams is often to pens.

He just admitted his thought wasn't entirely geniune, which is sophistry.

Fate is always at the intersection of these two lines of force. Similarly, radical thought is at the violent intersection of meaning and non-meaning, of truth and non-truth, of the continuity of the world and the continuity of the nothing. Unlike the discourse of the real, which gambles on the fact of there being something rather than nothing, and aspires to being founded on the guarantee of an objective and decipherable world, radical thought, for its part, wagers on the illusion of the world.

Baudrillard looks like the love child of Danny Devito and Larry David

based

Baudrillard is the rightful heir to Nietzsche

Bump

bump

It's parrhesiastic; a sophist (now taken as a pejorative) would act as if his thought was genuine after all (exemplum: dottore Giordano B. Peterson)

I agree with just about everything he says. I think he offers very pertinent insights that help me see the world in a different light.

Yet I still can't shake the feeling that the guy is a massive fuckwit, and what's even worse I just can't figure out *why.*

What's going on Yea Forums? Why do I feel this way about him?

Attached: neutral.png (500x428, 58K)

Alright, you got me interested. Can I pick up any of his books without any preparation or do I need do read some introduction?

He is a sloganeer. He sounds like he needs to have sex.

>Baudrillard is the rightful heir to Nietzsche
More like the rightful heir to Schopenhauer and the true blackpill

how?

I would recommend starting with "America." Then, "The Transparency of Evil," then "The Mirror of Production," then "Seduction," then "simulacra," then "symbolic exchange," then "for a critique," then "fatal strategies," "the perfect crime," then "impossible exchange," then read them all again because they make no sense lol

Herr Doktor Jordler ẞ. Peterheil

>lefties
dude, Baudrillard was the most radical reactionary thinker of the 20th century

how? he was definetly left.

i suppose you could argue being opposed to hegemonic capitalism is "reactionary" in a sense