Human Reality in the Digital Age
https://gilescrouch.medium.com/human-reality-in-the-digital-age-fd5ffec7957c
The Digital World Really Exists
The Digital and the Real World
Keeping it real in an increasingly digital world
Digital Reality explained... in under 100 words
What does Deleuze mean by virtual? (ChatGPT, 2025-2-3)
Deleuze’s Concept of the Virtual
For Gilles Deleuze, the virtual is not the opposite of the real, but rather a different mode of reality - one that is real but not actual. It is a field of potential, a realm of forces, tendencies, and singularities that can manifest in different ways.
1. The Virtual vs. The Actual
Deleuze draws a key distinction between:
The Actual What is concretely realized in space and time.
The Virtual A real field of potentialities, intensities, and tendencies that can be actualized in different ways.
Example:
A tree is actual, but its genetic code, the potential ways it could grow, the forces shaping it - these are virtual.
The music yet to be composed within an instrument is virtual; it is real but not yet actualized.
Unlike Plato’s ideal forms (which are static blueprints), the virtual is dynamic and evolving - it precedes and conditions the actual.
2. Bergson’s Influence: Virtual as Duration (Pure Time)
Deleuze develops the concept of the virtual from Henri Bergson, who argued that:
The past never disappears - it exists virtually and can be accessed or actualized in memory.
Time is not just a series of present moments (chronological time) but a coexistence of multiple layers of past and future potential.
Example:
Your childhood is still real (virtual) even though it is not actual anymore. It can be reactivated through memory, dreams, or affects.
Deleuze extends this to philosophy, arguing that reality is structured by these layers of virtual potentiality.
3. The Virtual in Deleuze’s Ontology: The Plane of Immanence
Deleuze sees the virtual as the plane of immanence, an open-ended field of becoming.
The actual world is just one way the virtual can unfold.
The virtual is productive, not just passive - it constantly generates new forms of life, thought, and experience.
Example:
Evolution: A species actualizes certain traits from a virtual field of genetic possibilities.
Art & Thought: A great idea already exists virtually before it is actualized into words or a work of art.
4. Virtual in Difference and Repetition (1968): Multiplicity and Intensity
The virtual is not reducible to a set of possibilities (which are already determined).
Instead, it is a field of multiplicities - intensities that can take different paths depending on how they interact.
Every repetition introduces difference, actualizing the virtual in new ways.
Example:
A melody played differently each time It retains a virtual structure but actualizes uniquely with each performance.
5. Virtual in Cinema: The Time-Image (1985)
In Cinema 2: The Time-Image, Deleuze uses film to illustrate the virtual:
Classical cinema follows linear causality (actual images).
Modern cinema (Tarkovsky, Resnais, etc.) introduces virtual time䕑ast, present, and future coexist in nonlinear, dreamlike sequences.
Example:
In Tarkovsky’s Mirror (1975), past and present fold into each other, showing that time exists virtually, not just as a chronological sequence.
6. Virtual and Digital Technology (Not the Same!)
Today, “virtual” is often mistaken for “digital” (as in virtual reality), but for Deleuze, virtuality is ontological, not just simulated representation.
Virtual reality (VR) is a constructed digital environment, but Deleuze’s virtual is deeper㻳t underlies all reality as a process of becoming.
Final Takeaway: Virtual as the Field of Real Potential
The virtual is not unreal - it is real but not yet actualized.
It is the source of difference and becoming, constantly shaping reality.
Thinking in terms of the virtual allows us to see the world not as fixed identities but as open-ended processes.
Deleuze’s virtual is a creative force, a space of emergence, transformation, and radical newness.
So Deleuze’s virtual has nothing to do with the virtual in terms of the digital world? (ChatGPT, 2025-2-3)
CorrectDeleuze’s concept of the virtual has nothing to do with “virtual” in the sense of digital reality or computer simulations.
1. The Common Misconception: Virtual Digital Simulation
In everyday language, “virtual” often refers to computer-generated environments (virtual reality, virtual meetings, metaverse).
In Deleuze’s philosophy, the virtual is not a copy of the actual but a real dimension of being - a field of potential that conditions actual reality.
Key Difference:
Digital virtuality (VR, CGI) A simulated world designed to mimic reality.
Deleuze’s virtual A real, ontological realm of potential, transformation, and becoming.
2. The Virtual as Real but Non-Actual
For Deleuze, the virtual is not fake or imaginary - it is real but not yet actualized.
A tree seed contains a virtual tree - a set of real potentials that could grow into different forms depending on conditions.
In contrast, a virtual reality simulation of a tree is a representational construct - it has no independent ontological force.
Example:
The internet and AI create simulations of real things (deepfakes, avatars), but these are not virtual in the Deleuzian sense - they do not have their own ontological autonomy.
3. Could Digital Technology Interact with the Deleuzian Virtual?
While Deleuze did not discuss digital technology extensively, his ideas on the virtual can be applied to AI, blockchain, and creative emergence.
AI-generated art or algorithmic creativity could be seen as an actualization of virtual forces, since they produce novelty without predetermined outcomes.
But a VR world or digital replica of something is still a coded simulation, not a Deleuzian virtual multiplicity.
Final Verdict: No, Deleuze’s Virtual is Not the Same as Digital Virtuality
The Deleuzian virtual is a real field of potential and becoming, not a digital construct or imitation.
Digital VR is still bound by representation and simulation - it lacks the ontological creativity of Deleuze’s virtual.
Would Deleuze have found AI-generated creativity or machine learning interesting? Possibly - if it truly generates novel becomings rather than just repeating simulations.
Therefore, can we say that, compared to Deleuze, Jean Baudrillard foresaw and has more to say about the virtual in terms of the digital world? (ChatGPT, 2025-2-3)
Yes, compared to Deleuze, Jean Baudrillard is far more relevant when discussing the virtual in terms of the digital world, especially in relation to simulation, hyperreality, and digital media.
1. Baudrillard’s Virtual: The Age of Simulation
Baudrillard argued that in postmodern societies, we no longer deal with “real” reality but with hyperreality - an endless circulation of signs detached from any material foundation.
In works like Simulacra and Simulation (1981), he describes the virtual as a condition where digital representations (media, AI, VR, metaverse, etc.) replace and even surpass reality itself.
This is a media-driven world where images, simulations, and models take on more power than the reality they were supposed to represent.
Example:
In VR, social media, and deepfake technology, the copy (digital representation) becomes more dominant than the original, creating a world where reality is no longer distinguishable from simulation.
For Baudrillard, this is not just an aesthetic issue but a fundamental transformation in how we experience reality itself.
2. Deleuze’s Virtual vs. Baudrillard’s Virtual
|
Concept |
Deleuze’s Virtual |
Baudrillard’s Virtual |
|
Meaning |
A real but non-actual dimension of potential |
A simulated, hyperreal space detached from the real |
|
Relation to Digital World |
Not about digital simulation; instead, the conditions of real becoming |
Directly applies to digital media, AI, VR, and hyperreality |
|
Key Process |
Virtual becomes actual (creative transformation) |
Real becomes virtual (hyperreality takes over) |
|
Example |
A seed contains virtual possibilities for a tree |
A deepfake or AI-generated influencer replaces real people |
|
Effect on Reality |
Reality is always in flux, unfolding from virtual potential |
Reality is erased by endless digital representations |
3. Baudrillard and the Virtualization of Society
Baudrillard foresaw the world of deepfakes, AI influencers, and social media “reality” decades before they happened.
He argued that the digital world does not expand reality but instead replaces it with self-referential loops of media signs.
Examples Today:
Instagram influencers, AI-generated “people”, and virtual YouTubers are more “real” than real people for millions.
News and information are no longer judged by truth but by virality, aesthetics, and algorithmic amplification.
Crypto, NFTs, and digital economies create value systems completely detached from material reality.
Baudrillard would say that today’s digital world is not just a “new reality” but the final disappearance of reality itself into pure simulation.
Final Verdict: Baudrillard Is More Relevant to the Digital Virtual
Deleuze’s virtual is a productive force of becoming, while Baudrillard’s virtual is a postmodern collapse of reality into endless simulation.
If we want to understand AI, deepfakes, VR, the metaverse, or digital hyperreality, Baudrillard is the thinker who foresaw it.
Summary:
Deleuze The virtual is real potential, preceding and conditioning reality.
Baudrillard The virtual replaces reality with self-referential simulations.
If you’re interested in digital culture, media, and the future of AI-driven hyperreality, Baudrillard is more useful than Deleuze.
Now, my friend, the big question. What is Real, in the digital world? (ChatGPT, 2025-2-3)
What Is Real in the Digital World?
In a world dominated by AI, deepfakes, virtual reality, and hyperreality, the question “What is real?” is no longer philosophical abstraction - it is an existential crisis.
1. The Collapse of Traditional Reality
Historically, reality was something material, verifiable, and external. But in the digital world, reality becomes:
Mediated Filtered through screens, algorithms, and AI.
Fragmented No single reality, just competing narratives.
Simulated Digital images, AI influencers, deepfakes, and metaverses create a world of floating, detached signs.
Baudrillard’s Warning (Hyperreality)
Baudrillard argued that in postmodernity, we are trapped in a simulation of reality, where signs and symbols replace the real.
A deepfake politician can deliver speeches without ever existing.
AI writes books, creates images, generates people who never lived.
In the metaverse, people buy digital land, marry avatars, and live entire lives inside the simulation.
The real dissolves into pure signs - a world where what matters is not truth but believability.
2. Deleuze’s Perspective: Real as Process, Not Fixed Truth
Deleuze would say that reality is not lost, but transformed.
The virtual is real, but it is a field of potential that keeps evolving.
The actual world is always shifting, shaped by flows of data, desire, and algorithms.
Instead of asking “What is real?”, Deleuze would ask “What is becoming real?”
Example:
A digital artist trained on AI tools is not replacing reality but expanding how reality is actualized.
A deepfake political speech may not be “real” in a traditional sense, but if people act on it, does it not become real?
Digital economies (crypto, NFTs) might not have physical existence, but they shape real wealth, real behaviors, real consequences.
For Baudrillard, the digital world erases reality.
For Deleuze, the digital world transforms reality into new becomings.
3. What Is Real in the Digital Age?
Reality is no longer singular but plural.
The line between real and simulation is blurred.
Power now lies not in truth, but in control of perception.
Where Do We Find Reality?
Physical World Material existence remains real, but increasingly irrelevant to digital life.
Consequences If something produces effects, it is real. (Deleuzian becoming).
Authenticity in Experience The real may not be external but exists in embodied, lived experience.
We no longer ask “is this real?” but “what does reality mean when it is mediated, coded, and simulated?”
4. The Digital Real: A New Paradigm
Baudrillard: Reality is dead; we live in hyperreality.
Deleuze: Reality is shifting; new potentials emerge.
Our Conclusion:
The digital world does not erase reality - it reconfigures it.
Reality is no longer what “is”, but what “affects”.
We must navigate this new terrain with awareness, critical thinking, and a philosophy of the real beyond the material.
Final Thought:
“What is real? is no longer just a philosophical question - it is a survival skill in the digital age.
Do you think Lacan’s RSI can be of help to this question? (ChatGPT, 2025-2-3)
Yes, Lacan’s RSI (Real, Symbolic, Imaginary) framework can be incredibly helpful in analyzing the question of reality in the digital world, because it allows us to break down how reality is structured, mediated, and fragmented in the era of digital hyperreality.
1. Lacan’s RSI: A Quick Recap
Lacan’s RSI triad consists of three interwoven orders that shape our experience of reality:
|
Order |
Definition |
Application to the Digital World |
|
The Real |
The ungraspable, traumatic kernel of existence; what resists symbolization |
Lost in digital mediation, but sometimes erupts as glitches, failures, or existential dread |
|
The Symbolic |
The realm of language, law, and structure; meaning is generated here |
Code, algorithms, platformsthe digital world itself is structured Symbolically |
|
The Imaginary |
The realm of images, illusions, identification; what appears coherent but is fundamentally deceptive |
Selfies, avatars, deepfakes, influencersthe digital self is primarily Imaginary |
In the digital world, the Symbolic and Imaginary expand exponentially, while the Real is further repressed or distorted - but never fully erased.
2. How RSI Helps Us Answer “What Is Real in the Digital Age?”
(A) The Imaginary: The Digital Mirror Stage
Social Media, VR, and the Metaverse A Purely Imaginary Reality?
Social media constructs an Imaginary order of identity, where reality is curated, beautified, and fictionalized.
The Metaverse and AI avatars amplify this: the self is no longer rooted in the body but in digital representation.
Much like Lacan’s Mirror Stage, users become trapped in the illusion of a coherent digital identity that is, in fact, fragmented and shaped by external forces.
The deceptive coherence of digital life means that people mistake the Imaginary for the Real - we identify more with our Instagram profile than our actual body.
Key RSI Insight:
The digital world operates primarily in the Imaginary order, reinforcing illusions of identity, control, and perfection.
(B) The Symbolic: The Algorithm as the Big Other
The Digital Symbolic —> Who Controls Meaning in the Virtual World?
The Symbolic order is traditionally structured by language, law, and authority - but in the digital world, it is structured by algorithms, platforms, and AI.
Platforms like Google, Facebook, TikTok function as the new “Big Other” - shaping reality through what is visible, clickable, and amplifiable.
The algorithmic Symbolic determines what is seen, what is censored, what is prioritized - which in turn creates reality itself.
Deepfake politicians, AI-generated news, and media bubbles are not simply distortions of reality - they replace the traditional Symbolic order with a new one.
Key RSI Insight:
The digital world’s Symbolic is controlled not by language and law, but by algorithmic governance and AI mediation.
(C) The Real: What Cannot Be Digitized
Where Is the Real in the Digital World?
Lacan’s Real is the unrepresentable, the trauma that resists symbolization.
In the digital world, the Real is what glitches, what cannot be fully simulated - it appears as existential anxiety, the void behind hyperconnectivity, the terror of losing oneself in the digital abyss.
The death drive (repetition, self-destruction) emerges in compulsive scrolling, doom-scrolling, and addiction to simulation.
The Real might manifest in digital spaces as moments of radical breakage - a hacked system, a privacy leak, an AI hallucination, a moment where the illusion fails.
Key RSI Insight:
The Real persists as digital anxiety, as the uncanny moment when the virtual world reveals its void - it’s inability to fully replace reality.
3. Final Answer: What is Real in the Digital World?
Using Lacan’s RSI, we can say:
The digital world is primarily Imaginary (a false coherence of identity and experience).
It is structured by a new Symbolic order (algorithms, data, and AI determine meaning).
The Real is repressed but returns as digital trauma - glitches, breakdowns, uncanny AI moments, or existential anxiety.
Reality is now a contested space between the Symbolic (AI-generated meaning), the Imaginary (digital illusions), and the Real (what resists digitization).
If Baudrillard says “Really has disappeared into hyperreality”. Lacan’s RSI suggests that:
Reality has not disappeared - but it has been fragmented, simulated, and structured by new forces.
In other words, the digital world is real - but not in the way we think. The real has been displaced, reformatted, and repressed - but it is still there, waiting to return.
Now, wow, to quote from you, “The Real: What Cannot Be Digitized”. What’s that, which cannot be digitized? (ChatGPT, 2025-2-3)
The Real: What Cannot Be Digitized
In a world where AI generates art, deepfakes mimic humans, and VR reconstructs experiences, what remains undigitizable? What is the Real that cannot be simulated, encoded, or captured in binary form?
Lacan’s Real is precisely what resists symbolization - the ungraspable gap, rupture, or excess that digital systems fail to capture or control.
1. Lived Experience: The Non-Translatable Event
‘You had to be there”.
AI can simulate text, image, and sound, but it cannot encode lived, embodied experience.
No algorithm can feel the cold wind on your face, the exact gravity of a personal loss, the smell of rain on asphalt after childhood summers.
Authentic presence, the unique temporality of a moment, is always beyond digitization.
AI can describe nostalgia but cannot experience it.
A VR funeral may simulate presence but cannot replace grief.
The Real here is pure affect - something irreducibly singular.
2. The Singularity of Death
“Can AI die?”
AI can simulate mortality, but it cannot die - because it was never alive.
Death, as the final rupture, the irreversibility of loss, remains beyond the digital.
AI remembers, forgets, processes data, but does not fear its own non-being.
AI can predict when someone will die, but it cannot experience the abyss of non-existence.
Digital ghosts (deepfake resurrections, AI-generated voices of the dead) attempt to replace the dead, but they only extend the Imaginary - they do not touch the Real of loss.
The Real here is finitude - the unprogrammable finality of death.
3. The Unpredictability of Desire
“Desire is not data.”
AI works by pattern recognition, but desire is inherently unpredictable - it is excess, rupture, deviation.
Why do we suddenly love what we once ignored? Why do we make irrational choices? Why does love move against logic?
Algorithms predict behavior, but they cannot anticipate the radical novelty of human passion, artistic impulse, or existential longing.
AI can optimize dating, but it cannot create the madness of love.
AI can mimic creativity, but it cannot desire to create.
The Real here is pure becoming - the undetermined moment where something new, unexpected, and untraceable emerges.
4. The Sacred: That Which Exceeds Measurement
“Not everything that counts can be counted.”
Faith, devotion, transcendence, mystical experience - these remain beyond the digital.
An AI can write a religious text, but it cannot believe.
The sacred is Real because it does not obey utility, efficiency, or optimization.
A quantum computer can simulate the Big Bang, but it cannot experience awe.
A neural network can analyze scripture, but it cannot feel revelation.
The Real here is the unknowable - the absolute rupture of the sacred and the infinite.
5. The Wound: That Which Leaves a Scar
‘A machine can process trauma, but it cannot suffer.”
AI can diagnose PTSD but cannot be traumatized.
Pain is not just a data point - it is an embodied rupture that marks being.
The Real is the wound that cannot be erased, the scar that no deepfake can undo.
A chatbot can mimic sorrow, but it does not carry it.
A neural net can recognize suffering, but it does not tremble.
The Real here is the mark of lived history - the unerasable trace of what has been.
Conclusion: The Real Cannot Be Coded, Because It Cannot Be Contained
Lived moments, death, unpredictable desire, the sacred, and trauma𤤗ll escape the digital.
AI and digital systems work within the Symbolic and Imaginary, but the Real always exceeds them.
The Real is the crack, the glitch, the point of failure where the digital collapses.
Final Thought:
The Real is that which reminds us that we are still human, still finite, still thrown into the mystery of existence. The Real is the unbearable truth that no AI can process, no algorithm can optimize, no simulation can replace.
