Title: Intellectual Pretension
Product review: This book only has one useful function, and that is to demonstrate how NOT to construct a solid, sound, logicical argument. The problem is that everything dissolves basically into Butler's bizarre form of "logic" and "thinking": "IF this is so, then..." Read this book and check out how often she employs this way of writing. Well...the IFS multiply and multiply, and could be thoroughly challenged and critiqued at every single stage. However, she needs these extremely thin "IFs" to construct the bogus positions she wants to "deconstruct." Her reading of Lacan--which she then goes on to "challenge"-- is a total fantasy, specious, and wrong. How can we seriously consider anything she says when her mode of writing is so untenable to begin with? Do not be blinded by Butler's pretensions to being a deep thinker, she is not, she is merely a person with decided OPINIONS, and that's all this book is, someone mouthing off about their opinion. But it is not a real work of thought.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
