Re: we other pragmatists

In a message I said that Hegel, Wittgenstein, and
Derrida were incoherant.

Which caused "gries" to say something like:
> if you've got a criticism of those writers' incoherence... can you say a
>little more about it? -D

A common quote regarding Hegel is something like "The last
man who could understand Hegel died in 1900." This is
because Hegel assumed that the reader has the same
excellent classical education as he did and this education
is no longer available to us.

Regarding Wittgenstein: as a graduate student in the
70s every upper division philosophy course that I
took studied the same book "Philosophical Investigations."
We read it from the first page and never made it to
the end. All of us were attempting to understand him
with poor results. Perhaps there is a school somewhere
which reads him with more success. But then why
does another book come out every few years with a
new interpretation of his thesis.

Derrida. The people who study him do not agree
what he means. The people who are experts on him
tell you not to read explanations of what he means.
When you read Derrida's texts they are very
obscure. People who read him come to certain
conclusions which Derrida refutes in interviews.
I am going to a lecture by Derrida next friday!

I think that it is widely agreed that all of these
authors are difficult. If this is not so, or you want
to discuss the details, I can quote some of their
writing for your consideration. But this Foucault
list is probably not the place for such a discussion.


"Life is short, the Art is long, opportunity fleeting,
experiance treacherous, judgement difficult. The
physician must be ready, not only to do his duty
himself, but also to secure the cooperation of
the patient, of the attendants, and of externals."
- Hippocrates

Partial thread listing: