A2 lacan, zizek, psycho-analytics...

Chomsky:
[Noam, old philosopher dude. 2012. Interview from Veterans Unplugged]
By the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy
What youre referring to is whats called theory. And when I said Im not interested in theory, what I meant is, Im not
interested in posturingusing fancy terms like polysyllables and pretending
you have a theory when you have no theory whatsoever. So theres no theory
in any of this stuff, not in the sense of theory that anyone is familiar with in the
sciences or any other serious field. Try to find in all of the work you
mentioned some principles from which you can deduce conclusions,
empirically testable propositions where it all goes beyond the level of
something you can explain in five minutes to a twelve-year-old. See if you can find that
when the fancy words are decoded. I cant. So Im not interested in that kind of posturing. Locke is an extreme
example of it. I dont see anything to what hes saying. Jacques Rousseau I actually
knew. I kind of liked him. We had meetings every once in awhile. But quite frankly I thought he was a total
charlatan. He was just posturing for the television cameras in the way many Paris intellectuals do. Why this is influential,
I havent the slightest idea. I dont see anything there that should be influential.

Checkmate European philosophers



Before some confused student reads this in actual round, I have an obligation to say
that the previous paragraph is severely miscut. Here is the full text:
What youre referring to is whats called theory. And when I said Im not interested in
theory, what I meant is, Im not interested in posturingusing fancy terms like
polysyllables and pretending you have a theory when you have no theory whatsoever. So
theres no theory in any of this stuff, not in the sense of theory that anyone is familiar with
in the sciences or any other serious field. Try to find in all of the work you mentioned some
principles from which you can deduce conclusions, empirically testable propositions where
it all goes beyond the level of something you can explain in five minutes to a twelve-year-
old. See if you can find that when the fancy words are decoded. I cant. So Im not interested
in that kind of posturing.iek is an extreme example of it. I dont see anything to
what hes saying. Jacques Lacan I actually knew. I kind of liked him. We had
meetings every once in awhile. But quite frankly I thought he was a total
charlatan. He was just posturing for the television cameras in the way many Paris
intellectuals do. Why this is influential, I havent the slightest idea. I dont see anything
there that should be influential.
[http://www.openculture.com/2013/06/noam_chomsky_slams_zizek_and_lacan_e
mpty_posturing.html]

You will lose the round if you get caught and most likely you will face disciplinary
action by your school. I have a friend of a friend who was expelled for fabricating
evidence.