Comment

Comment by whimsicalism

I agree that this article is rehashing the age-old continental vs. analytical debate, I disagree that because the debate is old, it is thus worthless.

I see many defending the "perfectly clear" meaning of continental philosophers, even if they don't obviously build up a clear argument from assumptions like a "10 year old" analytic philosopher might do.

Many, in my view, are forgetting just quite how obscurant many of these philosophers are. I am a little older than 10 years old now, but this passage (from Judith Butler), for instance, is close-to-incomprehensible to me

> The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton