Mr. Marcel Gauchet is surely a very intelligent person. The proof: he is director of studies at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales. It reckons (yourself!) By reading this title a little snoring there would be low studies, like low aeuvres or low water. If any decision-maker reads this column, I postulate, I am the right man in the right spot (again, fully bilingual). His appointment to this position has had to please his mom. Let. So Gauchet is very smart, as also proves his journey, which took him from the far left to the center Aron and review the debate. As he is very intelligent, he is a recognized academic, he led the usual route of a few dozen people who confiscate speech in France, Gauchet can not do less than to write classics. This is at least what we read everywhere about his book The Disenchantment of the world, simply subtitled A political history of religion. Shuffle Master saw this as a book and an ambition to his measure. Here's his verdict, after reading 37 pages of presentation. Go further would be useless. Mr. Marcel Gauchet is a philosopher. And a good philosopher is a philosopher abstruse. This is confirmed pretty quickly since in these pages, there is a succession of depressions open doors, about the emptiness of being (mis) camouflaged under a syntax that would be deep but that is only heavy and indigestible: accumulation nouns, verbs in the infinitive, adverbs, little or no adjectives, phrases constructions .... in short all the usual clichés philosophical jargon, not forgetting of course the famous PARADOX, used at all sauces. The most beautiful is "Christianity has been the religion of the exit from religion" (page 11). It`s not nice, here, Coco? Another example? With two paradoxes in the same sentence, yes sir; Page 33: "men have unconsciously themselves, including their awareness of themselves, the more freedom it is enigmatic administration of the stress par excellence, one that makes us what we are. " Gauchet however does not control all registers because when it tries to legal, with the "unless ..." phrase, it crashes (always page 33: these transitions fall under a work of pure invention that should be limited to accommodate the mystery except to mutilate it ", which means nothing). Gauchet has nothing to say and more, he says evil. Gauchet dislikes sociologists (page 36). We understand why. Sociologists working on the facts in the rough, proven .... when Mr. Marcel Gauchet did in the test, that is to say the total lucubration, although French disease he is only a demonstrations. Gauchet does not assume its sufficiency: it spreads excuses from page 33 to page 37 of the difficulty of his great aeuvre, making us the blow of the Jesuitical casuistry. Must assume, Marcel, you're director of the School of ..... (see above). In short, a book that deserves to be ignored. Thank you that?