Do people really consider her difficult to read? She writes much more clearly and lucidly than someone like Hegel, partly because the underlying ideas are very simple at the end of the day, it's just regular PoMo>oh that thing you thought was an essence? it's actually a social construct just like everything else, chudapplied to gender
>>23532431You are aware that 90% of philosophy had been differentiating between what is and isn't essence right ? Don't think that's something particular to post modernism and is butler even a post modernist?
>>23532431Writing more clearly than Hegel is a pretty low bar.
has this woman written anything of value or is it all just useless schizophrenia
>>23532486>90% of philosophy had been differentiating between what is and isn't essence more fundamentally, it's about what is and isn't "me"But since it's "me" who is trying to make that distinction, the whole thing is null You have to start from assumed categories of self and non self, which only religion or myth can provide. Good philosophy is just religious runoff.
>>23533168It is all junk. Most of her philosophy is based psychoanalysis from hacks like Lacan which is mostly considered pseudoscience these days. Besides that it is just bog standard french postmodernist style philosophy where she says things that sound deep but dont really mean anything or make logical sense all while using as many big words as possible. Basically it is all just smoke and mirrors and the actual ideas expressed are pretty basic and uninteresting. She is more or less just feminist trying to abolish gender roles The most ironic thing is that a lot of people act like Gender Trouble is the transgender bible or something when it is very obvious that Butler believes that trans identities are just dumb made up shit that can be useful for dismantling patriarchy. Basically her idea is that if normies see a man in a dress enough times they will stop believing that gender has any inherent value and we will be able to abolish it. So basically it will piss off people on both sides of the trans debate. The difference between what the book says and how it is talked about is so stark that I am convinced that 95% of people who namedrop it either did not read it or did not understand it
>>23533686>I am convinced that 95% of people who namedrop it either did not read it or did not understand itcongrats, you now understand twitter
>>23533686>pseudoscienceI don't like psychoanalysis either but I don't think anyone considered Lacan science in the first place.
Why even waste time reading philosophy from a woman?
>>23533686I dont think you even understand her and I consider her to be the "enemy". Honestly, people like you should stop commenting on things they dont understand, its annoying and it pollutes intellectual discourse. Its okay to say "I dont get it, so I'll just leave it at that".
>>23535140well could you answer my original question >>23533168as to the worth of her writing since you understand?
>>23532431Not a difficult read, pretty straight foward tbf, not in accord with a lot she says but it's pretty good tho. She's published some Pol Sci stuff that's pretty good and thorough >>23532754It is actually a low bar, Hegel is impossible to understand, Habermas is another asshole that writes like shit>>23533686Confirmed you didn't read any of itAlso Lacan was always pseudoscience there's no discovery here
>>23532486> is butler even a post modernist?Probably closer to a deconstructionist like Derrida, but don’t even bother explaining the difference>>23533686>t. Hasn’t actually read Butler but still writes two formatted paragraphs about her
>>23536397>it is actually a low bar, Hegel is impossible to understand, Habermas is another asshole that writes like shitthe filtering is working as intended
>>23532431haven't read GT but we covered some of her early career papers in my contemporary philosophy course. it's interesting to see criticism of de beauvoir from a feminist perspective.
