Pill Pod 121 - Obscurantism in French Philosophy: Searle on Foucault & Derrida
Added 2023-04-28 20:25:20 +0000 UTCToday we discuss how to pet your professor's ego to get better marks, and review John Searles sassy attempt to take down Derrida by quoting Foucault gossip. Sources come from Reiterating the Differences: A Reply to Derrida and Limited Inc. (https://amzn.to/3oIfJc0)
Comments
yeah same. This was one of the really interesting podcast lately creating a bit of tension which was really insightful. The fact that obscurantism is so often hammered toward french thinkers need more discussion. I fint it weird that ppl don’t see that they have preference toward what they call clarity and that it’s subjective. i’d rather read something insightful and stylistic and it’s my own subjective preference and i don’t feel why it’s not valid lol
Atelier Minceur
2023-05-10 14:28:25 +0000 UTCI would love a podcast talking about your paper about clarity. I think that's super interesting
Nathan Blazina
2023-05-05 16:59:56 +0000 UTCReally enjoyed this episode. At some point there should be an episode where it's just hammered Eric waxing-philosophical-stream- of-consciousness for an hour or so after a heroic bong rip. I think that would lead to some pretty interesting places haha. Without having read much Derrida and only hearing this response letter, it makes me want to read him (or hear more about him and this general tug of war within philosophy on here). Good to step back and remember that not even golden boi philosophy is immune to arbitrary and artificial rules and limits. Reminds me in some aspect of negative theology, stripping away to essentials, and the paradox that the "Tao that can be spoken of is not the Eternal Tao." I can.and have read the same obscure passage from Chuang Tzu in two different states of mind. In one I'll be hit with a wave of affect and equinimity, in another, I'll skip past the words without feeling or understanding anything. When attempting to express the inexpressible, new ways of thinking, I feel like either the clarity must be left to the reader in a state of beginners mind, or the text must take on an acceptable, conventional norm of explanation, in which case I would agree with some of the sentiment expressed here, that it's doubtful that something new can be said or discovered. Would also agree that philosophy being obscure is definitely not a new thing. Kinda like that astronaut "always has been" meme. It's people swatting around in the darkness of new thought. What else should we expect? It's like Thich Nhat Hanhs kiwi story, you can't tell someone what eating a kiwi is like, they have to just eat it. 57:00 Eric just going off lol. Preach! Preach! I am here for smashed Eric lucid dream-thinking. 42:15 can you (or someone else) elaborate a little on how this trend has made Derrida or his method irrelevant? Are you saying this simply from a standpoint of text proliferation, meaning his method simply cannot "process" so to speak the sheer volume? I replayed it and still felt like I was missing some obvious point. 23:00 loved the sqrt(-1) reference. Used extensively in electrical engineering, but gets buried in Laplace transforms in everyday practice with representation in the s domain, as s = i*w, where i is sqrt(-1) and w is frequency in radians/sec. It's used as a representation of angle and magnitude in polar coordinates and gain/phase relationship between input & output of a system, with each order of a given transfer function represented by Real# + i*Imaginary#. For example, the impedance or resistance to flow of current thru a capacitor is equal to 1/(i*w*C). This represents a magnitude of 1/(w*C) and a phase of -90degrees or -pi/2 radians.
ageOfBumFires
2023-05-03 12:00:08 +0000 UTC
