Is Lacan a worthless fraud who just uses deliberately over-complicated language to hide an incoherent and meaningless argument? Even Chomsky has called him a 'posturing and self-conscious charlatan'.
Also, same question for Zizek, Deleuze, Derrida, Foucalt, etc.
Other urls found in this thread:
>Lacan
yes
>Zizek
yes
>Deleuze
no
>Derrida
a bit
>Foucault
a bit
>Lacan
no
>Derrida
no
>Foucault
yes
oh an analytic dork ranting about euro pomos, so enlightening
You just described all of philosophy. None of them know anything about science so all they can do is bullshit about abstract scenarios.
It's useful advice for the proclivity to pontificate among the French philosophers. I don't doubt he had the conversations he says he had with those guys. Why are you so assblasted by the truth?
Once you understand that the french dont really care about the fate of the world and are more comfortable bitching in a coffee shop than actually trying to fix anything your relationship with their philosophy will be more fruitful.
Don't kill the messenger.
That's a pretty dumb thing to write down, not to mention believing it's true.