/lit/ - Literature

>>8708165

I wouldn't call the ones on the bottom of the list 'charlatans'.
But the ones on the top, I don't know, there's something distinctly "bullshit-y" about them, even if I don't mind reading them. I don't get the same type of profundity from them as when I read Heidegger, who on the surface looks like a word salad of the same type, he most definitely isn't.

Especially when you consider the dumb theatrics with which French philosophers talk.

Example, Lacan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ogyq0z6KDGM