/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12611386]

>French theorist A cites French Theorist B, claiming that B "has shown" or "demonstrated" such-and-such in his (B's) text, when in fact no such thing took place and B was just bullshitting poetic/aesthetic ideas devoid of substance, and A is just namedropping B to show off his education in bullshit per French intellectual cultural norms

[Anonymous No.12612189]

>>12611386
More like >American humanities student/scholar cites French "theorist" …

[Anonymous No.12612201]

And there is nothing wrong with that you working class pleb

[Anonymous No.12612205]

As OP demonstrates in his post (>>12611386, 2019) many works of French philosophy are problematised by their intertextual dependence, reinforced by what he (OP) aptly diagnoses as intellectual vices particular to “French...cultural norms.”

[Anonymous No.12612216]

>bullshitting poetic/aesthetic ideas devoid of substance

this is like 80% of philosophy but it turns out to actually be the good stuff because the pragmatic life lesson stuff doesnt make any real difference in your life and the analytic stuff is just pretending to be a mathematician to justify the 80% bullshit

[Anonymous No.12612225]

>>12612205
By and large the philosophical community considers French theory to be "bullshit" charlatanism. [>>12611386] [>>12612205] [>>12612216]

[Anonymous No.12612719]

>>12612225
>the philosophical community
the philosophical community is french abruti

[Anonymous No.12612733]

>>12612189
This. Anyone not in the philosophy department should not be allowed near philosophy.

[Anonymous No.12612763]

>>12611386
>philosopher A expands a complex logical system based on fundamental assertions that cannot be proved or disproved so he rambles on and on until publishing his work.
>his work is then judged mostly on how fashionable it is and how intelligent it makes the reader feel despite offering little more value than a complex fairytale with it's own system of logic formed of base assertions/assumptions
Literally all phillsophy

[Anonymous No.12612787]

>>12612763
Only white people do this. Asian philosophy is a lot more centered on understand human universals like transcience and suffering. Asians don't spend 1000 pages talking about nothingness ala Satre.

[Anonymous No.12612793]

>>12612719
this.
You wouldn't even hear about 'French theory' if you study philosophy seriously, that is, in France.
American retards are the only people fapping on 'French theory' then shitting on it. Nobody else cares. except Edouard Louis

[Anonymous No.12612835]

>>12612787
Ping pong isnt a philosophy, Chang.

[Anonymous No.12613063]

>>12612835
Nobody ever claimed the Yijing is supposed to be philosophy. If you want to look at Asian philosophy, read Nagarjuna or Shankara. I've never read any Chinese or Japanese Buddhist philosophy, but I know much of it follows along the same lines as its Indian Buddhist predecessors.

[Anonymous No.12614461]

>>12611386
french theory is honestly such a fking hoax it's not even funny, yet in contemporary humanities it's takes as gospel

[Anonymous No.12614494]

>>12611386
>French theory

Why do I feel like it's a blanket term coined by Americans, ever-eager to co-opt their transatlantic counterpart into politico-semiotics games the latter never wished to play ?

Do you think guys like Baudrillard and Foucault would label themselves "French theorist" ? Perhaps to compare themselves to Italian theorists and German theorists and the list, but certainly not as a "school of thought" denomination.

Also why do I feel this so-called "French theory" isn't gonna include any French catholic philospher (Boutang, Ricoeur, Weil, Bespaloff), any phenomenologist or disciple of Bergson (Merleau-Ponty, Jankelevitch), any philospher serously informed by a practice of empirical science (Bachelard, Caguilhem).

TL;DR: "French theory" is an american meme, not really a French thing

[Anonymous No.12614525]

>americlaps ruin everything