>
>If Heidegger is only repeating banalities, truisms or propounding
>bad poetry about death, why should he be celebrated as a great philosopher?
That's what I mean. I don't think anybody was overly concerned with celebrating a great philosopher. They were just pointing out that someone spoke to them in important ways.
>makes your impenetrable prose irrelevant and simply a form of obscurantism.
I never get this either. If somebody says they understand something, then how is it impenetrable?