As I read this article, I kept thinking, &quot;This seems like the output of a postmodernist essay generator.&quot; Rarely have I read something containing so little information while using so many long, overly-complicated sentences with big, nebulously-defined words.<p>Philosophy is not my specialty, but I&#x27;ve studied a decent amount of it. I&#x27;ve read Anselm, Aquinas, Kant, Descartes, Voltaire, Paine, Hume, Bentham, and others. All of them were more understandable and coherent than this essay. Seriously, can anyone make sense of this:<p>&gt; Wittenberg’s is thus a theory of autonomisation (or, as Niklas Luhmann termed it, differentiation), and of its internalisation of what mandarin scholars used to call extrinsic factors (social issues, content of various kinds, the non-literary or extra-poetic).<p>It&#x27;s as if the writer was <i>trying</i> to be incomprehensible.