Talk:Critique of Dialectical Reason: Difference between revisions
(Created page with ' == Outline == Added the volume I outline, which as noted at the English wiki is due to editors, not Sarte, at least according to them. For the terminology, Blundens linked glos...') |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Outline == | == Outline == | ||
Added the volume I outline, which as noted at the English wiki is due to editors, not Sarte, at least according to them. For the terminology, Blundens linked glossary can be used. [[User:Root|Root]] 15:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC) | Added the volume I outline, which as noted at the English wiki is due to editors, not Sarte, at least according to them. For the terminology, Blundens linked glossary can be used. [[User:Root|Root]] 15:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Epiphany == | |||
Some weeks ago it occurred to me to do a search on (i believe the terms were) "Sartre" and "gobbledygook". And what turned up was an article "Erudition or Gobbledygook". As the reader may know, Sarte's work epitiomizes [[:en:Continental philosophy]] and I think I come down on his stuff as Erudite yes, and to some extent Gobbledygook, but not without a cohering underlying point which saves it from being pure nonsense. Filling out the precis/outline with what I gather to be the gist of this thing will fill a gap as I can't find anything equivalent. [[User:Root|Root]] 14:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:54, 16 July 2011
Outline
Added the volume I outline, which as noted at the English wiki is due to editors, not Sarte, at least according to them. For the terminology, Blundens linked glossary can be used. Root 15:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Epiphany
Some weeks ago it occurred to me to do a search on (i believe the terms were) "Sartre" and "gobbledygook". And what turned up was an article "Erudition or Gobbledygook". As the reader may know, Sarte's work epitiomizes en:Continental philosophy and I think I come down on his stuff as Erudite yes, and to some extent Gobbledygook, but not without a cohering underlying point which saves it from being pure nonsense. Filling out the precis/outline with what I gather to be the gist of this thing will fill a gap as I can't find anything equivalent. Root 14:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
