Simulacra and Simulation

Philosophers who study the way that humans process meaning posit that people make sense of the world by interpreting signs. For instance, the red coil of a stove is a sign that communicates several messages, such as purpose of the coil and the danger it poses. Different branches of philosophy study this type of meaning-making from various angles. Epistemologists seek answers to how humans gain and create knowledge. Phenomenologists attempt to construct the nature of conscious experience. Meanwhile, semioticians—those who study semiotics—focus on the study of signs and symbols and how they connect to meaning. In the case of the red coil, semioticians investigate how humans interpret it and how it comes to symbolize danger and heat, highlighting the relationship between external objects and their meanings.

The term “semiotics” comes from the Greek word meaning “observant of signs.” Ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle in Rhetoric and Plato in Phaedrus noted that humans develop an understanding of the world through the interpretation of signs; they also noted that humans use these signs not only to convey meaning but also to manipulate it, influencing others and sometimes obscuring the truth. A sign is anything that conveys meaning, including objects, words, gestures, and images. The Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure is often regarded as the founder of 20th century  semiotics, or as he preferred to call it, “semiology.” He said that signs are composed of two parts: the signifier and the signified. The signifier is the physical form of the sign—such as the red coil—while the signified is the concept or meaning the sign conveys—in this case, the notion that the coil is something to cook on and that it is hot.

Philosophers and linguists like Charles Sanders Peirce and Roman Jakobson built on Saussure’s work, showing that the relationship between signifier and signified is not fixed; rather, it is influenced by human interpretation and meaning making. This is because meaning is often influenced by several factors like individual experience and culture. The word “freedom,” for example, has a variety of interpretations, each shaped by personal experiences and socio-political contexts.

By the 1960s, the intellectual and cultural movement known as postmodernism overtook philosophy and art, challenging fixed truths and grand narratives by emphasizing complexity and deconstruction. In contrast to modernism, postmodernism rejected utopian ideals of progress. Instead of seeing society as marching toward a grand truth of industrial prosperity, postmodernists emphasized the fragmentation and loss of meaning in contemporary life. Semioticians like Jean Baudrillard already recognized that the relationship between the signifier and the signified was never straightforward, and postmodernism expanded on this idea by deconstructing the meanings behind cultural symbols and narratives.

In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard argues that contemporary society has completely severed the relationship between signs and the external reality they once represented. He argues that humans now exist in a simulation; all signs are imitated and replicated in an unending chain of copies called “simulacra.” In Baudrillard’s view, a castle at a theme park replaces the experience of a real castle, and fast food simulates a the sensation of a home-cooked meal. He claims that postmodern life is defined by a series of copies that no longer have any connection to their original meaning. So, humans live in a “hyperreality,” where the simulacra are more real than reality itself. This postmodernist stance emphasizes the loss of authentic experience, further fragmenting society.

Although Baudrillard distanced himself from the postmodern label, Simulation and Simulacra became a foundational text within the movement. The concept of hyperreality, where simulations dominate and distort authentic experience, contributed to postmodernism’s pursuit of deconstruction, which breaks down concepts, texts, and art to challenge grand narratives and binary oppositions.