Man, am I torn...the sort of on anti-intellectualism on display in this thread gets on my wick. These concepts are worth understanding, thinking about and being able to express cogently.
On the other hand I'm an art school refugee and critique-speak can drive me nuts too. When someone looks at something and asks "what are you trying to say?" I wanna say "that would be telling, what do you hear it saying?"
I'm currently taking a class with a lot of art department undergrads and I get to witness the indoctrination. Critiquing is important. Thinking is important. But they are indeed, learning about BS'ing.
I just don't know.
I would have to add that in order for me to display any sort of anti-intellectualism concerning the statement, there would have to be something intellectual about it. At some point it becomes crap, and not even the pontificator understands what they, themselves, are saying. (see: religion) Granted, I have not had the benefit of reading the sentence in context, but as it stands, it is a self contradictory statement, probably meant to baffle and impress, and is typical of certain sorts of people, who are gravely intimidated by clarity. Or it is poor writing, and the author has failed miserably in his attempt to communicate
his conceptual idealization, because his verbage is certainly a realization free of all representative systems. Or, he knows this, and the sentence is, in fact, a symbol, a sort of hieroglyph, that brilliantly illustrates what the sentence fails to communicate, when taken at face value.
Sort of like when reading Aleister Crowely. You have to decipher which bits are lucid and serious, which bits are meant to be an exercise, which bits are kidding, and which bits are from a hallucination.
I could go on, but for some reason I have a headache now, and I'm going to take some aspirin and lie down.