like most of my first year students, you believe that you are the implied reader of everything, and that anything that doesn't assume what you assume is too hard or (conversely) that the author should have "worked harder" to approximate your lexicon (and support the fantasy that you're everyreader). at the same time, you, everyreader, think that science is the model of all discourse (not to mention, knowledge), despite the fact that *outside* of scientific communities, -nature-, or -the lancet- are no "clearer" than althusser was to you.
well, my friend, language is never -not- in translation--ie between one lexicon to another. so mathematicians and scientists aren't the arbiters of our language--thank heaven. if you didn't like reading althusser, fine--you wouldn't be alone. but attributing that to althusser's epistemological and linguistic bad faith or infidelity or insufficient work ethic or whatever is a crock. just as it would be if you made those complaints about einstein's general theory or pynchon's -gravity's rainbow-.
best christian