Paroxysm and Paroxysm

Jean Baudrillard writes a number of things which appear to pre-figure my concept of the philosophical paroxysm. Even more convincingly, these statements appear in a book called (aptly enough) 'Paroxysm', however the writings have simultaneously a sense of genius and a sense of lack of achievement. He writes:

"What, then, is the obsession, the secret motive, the endless finality underlying this progression? Finding the irreducible point which gives an unimpeded view of the world." (Paroxysm, p. 113).

This prefigures my concept of the 'mote of meaning'.

However, Baudrillard's quest, unlike my own, ends in despair:

'We must not believe that the truth remains the truth when we strip it of its veil' --- thus, truth has no naked existence. We must not believe that the real remains the real when its illusion has been dispelled --- thus, the real has no objective reality. (Paroxysm, p. 116).

Although this is interesting, and has led me to develop a theory of 'applicationism', on this point I feel that Baudrillard is being contradictory. He is admitting that he has not solved the general problem of the paradox. He is also admitting --- rather than brandishing --- his lack of objective knowledge.

In points like these, I defer to my own work, where it is clear that a paradox can be solved by reaching for the opposite of the most meaningful component terms, in the same order, and that objective knowledge can be reached by finding four polar opposites (in which opposites are located along the diagonal), and combining them in a cyclical order. Statements of wisdom surely would dispell this sexual nihilism that Baudrillard proposes.

HERE IS A LINK TO BAUDRILLARD'S BOOK

HERE IS A LINK TO MY BOOK ILLUSTRATING PAROXYSMS [or search Amazon for 'paroxysms philosophy' to find both: the top two results]

HERE IS A LINK TO ANOTHER OF MY BOOKS WITH OTHER METHODS, INCLUDING A SHORTER SECTION ON PAROXYSMS

More recently I have posted the method on my blog with a full explanation, in the interest of research.