|
zizek? why?
i've read alot of his stuff, and i don't see him as that interesting. but hey, maybe that's just me.
contemporary philosophers means what exactly?
for what i'm up to, cornelius castoriadis, claude lefort, maurice merleau-ponty (not exactly contemporary as he died in 1961), especially his later work...all are interesting and to my mind important thinkers. michel foucault as well, but his stuff has been caught in that curious cycle of academic fashion, marked as someone who has been "done" even as i don't think his work has been particularly well read or understood. henri atlan is interesting as well.
alot depends on where you are working and what you define philosophy to be. most contemporary philosophical work happens as commentary. i think that's a problem. there are a number of experimental writers whose work is a kind of philosophy--working with performative sentences--but i don't know if they'd count here or not because i don't know where philo starts and stops in this context.
now the list of the over-rated is much longer.
we could start with john rawls.
maybe it's better not to.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|