Just to be clear, when reading any of Charles Sanders Pierce i have never gotten a hint of “Charlatanism”. Including Peirce among those names amounts to blasphemy.
Well, exactly. That’s what I meant when I said that it was very confusing to me, as a young grad student in an outside field, to have a course that assigned Peirce and Lacan side by side with a straight face, evidently taking them equally seriously.
Similarly, I’ve read Austin’s How to Do Things With Words. He’s not winning any awards for his prose style, but he has a comprehensible project which he goes about in a rigorous, methodical way.
Just to be clear, when reading any of Charles Sanders Pierce i have never gotten a hint of “Charlatanism”. Including Peirce among those names amounts to blasphemy.
Well, exactly. That’s what I meant when I said that it was very confusing to me, as a young grad student in an outside field, to have a course that assigned Peirce and Lacan side by side with a straight face, evidently taking them equally seriously.
Similarly, I’ve read Austin’s How to Do Things With Words. He’s not winning any awards for his prose style, but he has a comprehensible project which he goes about in a rigorous, methodical way.