View source for Research talk:5c/YT/BaudrillardPostmodernStockMarket

{{NickelBank| postmodern stock market
 |h2 = {{caps|The Death of the Economy}}: Baudrillard's Financial Simulacrum
 |nickel = YT/BaudrillardPostmodernStockMarket |Contents=y}}

<dl class="wikitable hue">
{{HueRoster|P=channel| {{E:Q618/ES|SoyGnostic Philosophy}} }}
{{HueRoster|EP=P34| {{E:Q618/ES|Q=51,85|postmodern philosophy}} | {{E:Q618/ES|Q=51,85|postmodern economics}} }}  <!-- en: field -->
</dl>

=== Links ===
* YouTube: {{a|datetime=2026-08-12T19:25:28Z|href=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8tIs1QBORo}}
<!--
* <s>Original:</s> {{a|datetime=|href=}}
* Wayback Machine: {{a|datetime=|href=}} -->

=== Nickel usage or significance ===
* (fill in later)
<!--
== Usage notes ==
-->
== Motifs or claims ==
<ol class="hue clean reset">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}It is appropriate to use Baudrillard to analyze the economy  ->  why do people think this? if I'm not mistaken, he didn't even write about economics.<br/>
truth value: not likely true due to possible category error.

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Many of Baudrillard's early works were about economics  ->  this feels like it needs to be tested, and like it could actually be false. find one work by Baudrillard that is supposedly about economics and analyze it, and if it clearly is not saying anything relevant to economics in a serious material way then the probability of all Baudrillard's "early works" not being about economics goes up.

{{li|I=S2/LR|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Revenue is a test of whether something works in reality {{YouTube|g8tIs1QBORo}}  ->  it's somewhat fair to slam that one because it doesn't cover things like whether a product is novel versus old, in-print versus out-of-print; something that is highly useful and effective could make next to no profit at all precisely because it doesn't drive growth and speculation.

{{li|I=S1/ES|tradition=BM, ES|Q=618|Q2=618}}postmodern economics  ->  well, I didn't think this was even possible, but the postmodernists showed me I guess.

{{li|I=S1/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}consumerism (postmodern economics) {{YouTube|g8tIs1QBORo}}  ->  didn't know this one was a separate motif either! postmodernists are really telling on themselves with these videos.

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Most stock trading is not done by humans but by algorithms {{YouTube|g8tIs1QBORo}}  ->  so... when people say it's not possible to predict the future, or not possible to predict the economy, why do these exist?

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}The economy mostly moves in response to other signals within the system {{YouTube|g8tIs1QBORo}}  ->  isn't that how all material objects work, though? no acknowledgement of dialectical materialism / special relativity. this is one of the bluest statements I've ever seen.

{{li|I=S2/ML|tradition=ES, MN|Q=618|Q2=618}}Illusion can exist where it does not announce itself as illusion; it can exist outside media and culture {{YouTube|g8tIs1QBORo}}  ->  all right, technically true.<br/>
I do have a silly question though: how can you be a postmodernist and believe that hidden illusions can actually exist and maliciously deceive people if you can't know what's illusion and what's real in the first place? Marx can figure out there are hidden illusions but... for a postmodernist, haven't they already said that the existence of illusions is just their own opinion? how is discovering illusions actually in any way actionable if you view things that way? haven't you set up a framework where it's a perfectly valid "opinion" to be deceived and you can't tell people they shouldn't want to be deceived?

{{li|I=S2/BM/Aa|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Fiat currency is a floating signifier {{YouTube|g8tIs1QBORo}}  ->  hmm! that's an actually interesting claim. I'm not sure it's true. and I'm not sure this is an economics statement rather than a psychology statement, either.<br/>
fiat currency actually does {{em|something}}, however minimal. there's a real difference between a dysfunctional Third World currency that's wildly inflated and the US dollar. the US dollar is doing something the broken currency isn't doing. the ratio between the US dollar and the broken currency reflects some actual relationship between the population with the functioning fiat currency and the population with the broken one. I don't think I can say more than that {{em|with certainty}}, but I do love to idly think about what might be happening there.

{{li|I=F2/BM|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Expectations of expectations float around above reality  ->  no.

</li></ol>

== Motifs or claims (in Baudrillard) ==
<ol class="hue clean reset">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/MX|tradition=|Q=19,58|Q2=1958}}{{book|Symbolic Exchange and Death}} (Baudrillard 1976) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_Exchange_and_Death]

{{li|I=S1/Aa|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}floating signifier / extermination of references and finalities (of final references; of referents) / mere information signals devoid of material content / the digital, programmatic sign, which has a purely tactical value (sic)

{{li|I=S1/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}the code ({{book|Symbolic Exchange and Death}})

{{li|I=S1/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}structuralist linguistics and economics / linguistic structuralism and economics  ->  that's somewhat okay because structuralist linguistics was basically describing the relationship between words and reality, how words have to shift with shifting material contradictions/antagonisms. so the question is, how did Baudrillard ruin it?

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=ES, ML|Q=618|Q2=618}}Commodity value is defined relative to other commodities  ->  wow, what a breakthrough!!

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Picture is not pipe / A signified object is not a referent (Saussure) / A signified object (phenomenon; mental object; replica image; thought; mental model; narrative) is not a referent (noumenon; physical object; material object; universe); this is to imply that the signified object beneath a signifier (name; term; symbol; arbitrary identifier; outward object identity; outward object-kind identity; metaphysical identity of object) is an ontological model composed of propositions

</li></ol>

== Subjective themes ==
<ol class="hue clean reset">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/MX|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Baudrillard isn't a real postmodernist  ->  if he actually distinguishes between reality and simulations enough to accuse the economy of improperly being a simulation, then is he really doing postmodernism? or is this just post-structuralism or something?

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Game theory isn't real (Baudrillard) / Game theory problems are detached from society  ->  game theory and so-called "feedback processes" are a consequence of physics, more than a lot of postmodernist theories are a consequence of physics, really.

{{li|I=S1/Aa|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}floating signifier / the digital, programmatic sign, which has a purely tactical value  ->  does he think photons exchanged between physical objects have a purely tactical value, too?


</li></ol>


[[Category:Nickel links (NickelBank)]]  <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly URLs incoming
redirects:   (none)
duplication hint:   copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNNN|other nickel]]
-->