OP: In that regard, both books are good for techies to read because every now and then it's good to read something that drags you out of your comfort zone and futzes around in all kinds of obscure nooks and crannies before getting to the mother fucking point -- if indeed it ever does. Getting to the point can be important, but there is more to life (and literature).
Commentor: Philosophy at the end of the day is about arguing a point; it isn't about producing an aesthetic experience. (Even though this statement directly against original post, it's so obvious to author that he does not feel the need to explain, but goes on a tangent how bad the writing is)
Me: Hahah the whole point of op is that there is value in not always having a point, but meandering...
Response: It was a meandering and badly written mess with no point.
Me: ...
You: Leave it to the adults.
Me: ...
You: You're not making a point!!!
(Considering the nature of the first comment and assuming you didnt do it on purpose, you ending with blaming me I'm not making a point is poetic to be honest)
I don't consider "there is value in not always having a point, but meandering" to be itself a point, mainly because you don't give a reason to suppose that that is the case or a reasonable case to consider. It seems itself to be rather meandering, circling a value and a raison d'etre without specifying either. It's the specification that makes it worth considering, as adults do know.
