What the hell am I supposed to say about this?
The parts I understood were hugely inspirational to my own thoughts, if I did indeed understand those parts, which I suspect I did not.
What a shame that someone so clever who had decided that this book was the be-all and end-all to problems in philosophy could only communicate them in a form that often eludes human comprehension.
It's like the saying that if the human brain were simple enough for us to understand it then we would be too stupid to do so, that the brain was not something we were ever going to understand.
Perhaps if someone were indeed smart enough to resolve all problems in philosophy then they could only communicate it in an incomprehensible language.
Then they would decide later that they were wrong anyway.