Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: Pure Ideology.jpg (343KB, 1200x1532px) Image search:
[Google]
343KB, 1200x1532px
Authors/thinkers with whom you disagree, but nonetheless respect?
Pic related. I think Žižek managed to carve out a nice little niche for himself in Western academia/thought/culture, and to his credit I do think he's mostly sincere, even if he doesn't seem like it at times.
Even though a lot of his writing does seem like Hegelian-Lacanian verbiage, I do like to give him the benefit of the doubt and imagine there's some method in the madness. My issue is that when he is speaking with clarity, his 'profound' statements are often pretty obvious in meaning.
>>
>>8438836
Foucault. You can say he tried.
>>
>>8438880
Tried what?
>>
>>8438922
Propose something new which actually matters.
>>
>>8438994
All he did was hijack Nietzsche for his own ends, whilst making stupid comparisons between schools/prisons/etc.
>"What if, like, the insane are not REALLY insane?"
>>
>>8438880
I tried reading Foucault and found that basically he just took Nietzsche and abstracted it and bent some of the material to fit his narrative.
There's simply nothing new there. >>8439001 is basically correct. D&G / Heidegger are the only three people to do interesting things with Nietzsche in philosophy as far as I am aware based only in my primary source readings.
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1