Jacques Lacan

Only in certain aspects for sure. Don't know much bout psychoanalysis though.

>>1463748
His theories are interesting as fuck to read about. Seriously

File: Pierre Boutang.jpg (61KB, 638x440px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 638x440px

>>1463748
Yes, right on par with Deleuze and Guattari.
Pic not related, it's the greatest French philosopher.

>>1463766
Unnecessarily ridden with jargon to overcomplicate the simplicity and common knowledge of his theories.

>>1463777

Oh fuck, yeah. Deleuze was a mega hipster. Capitalism & Schizo is literally brain farts. Anyone claiming to understand them is lying.

>>1463801

deleuze is not that difficult to understand if you have even the slightest bit of patience.

>>1463748
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashionable_Nonsense

Rekt

>>1463748
Lacan's ideas are interesting, if even less falsifiable than traditional Freudian psychoanalysis, but if you read about his actual practice with patients you will see that he was a huge narcissistic charlatan.

So is Slavoj Zizek a charlatan too? Or just unfortunate to use Lacan in his philosophy?

>>1464979
>So is Slavoj Zizek a charlatan too?
Of course he is.

>>1465265
He is entertaining tho. But yea.

All this circlejerk and you haven't named one of Lacan theories, and/or why it's nonsense.

For example, what do you think about the big other?

>>1464979
>>1465265
Actually Zizek criticize the form in wich lacan's work is written, but takes the substance.
There's a work of him called "how to read lacan" on this matter.

Anyway, what do you know about lacan theories? are you steamfags or something?

>>1463827
is this Zizek?

>>1465495
Lacan created hilarious jargon to explain simplicities. For instance, Winnicott and Klein had better, more grounded explanations to the "object petit a" (imo), which Lacan overcomplicates in order to glamourize his theory.

Then you have absurd pandering with his matheme, which further raises questions about the legitamacy of his ideas. There is a lot about him that just feels as a reflection of the superficial, intellectually disingenuous artistic circles he was part of during his whole adult life.

>>1465584
>Anyway, what do you know about lacan theories? are you steamfags or something?
I've read enough Zizek to know that I don't care about his theories.

>>1465584
>steamfag
wat
>>1465288
The purpose of scholarship is not entertainment. The fact that he is entertaining is what makes him such an awful charlatan. If it weren't for that, he'd just be another no-name academic.

>>1465675
he probably meant STEMfag lol