|
|
|
|
|
|
by naravara
1961 days ago
|
|
|
I agree with you. I also thought it was odd that this piece's author specifically called out "the humanities and social sciences" as the main purveyors of "pseudophilosophy" before directing all his fire at Foucault, a philosopher. And then he concludes that the solution to pseudophilosophy is a philosophical education but I'm not sure who in their right minds would argue that Foucault didn't have one of those? Or Sartre, for that matter, who he also called out as a pseudophilosopher. It starts to make one wonder if his idea of "pseudophilosophy" is really just a new coat of paint over some already well-worn critiques of postmodernism. |
|
|
> It starts to make one wonder if his idea of "pseudophilosophy" is really just a new coat of paint over some already well-worn critiques of postmodernism.
I think pretty clearly yes, along with the preceding continental philosophy and also Sam Harris (?).