lbo-talk-digest V1 #4737

[Kelley]

At 08:53 PM 8/13/01 -0400, Gordon Fitch wrote:
>Miles Jackson wrote:
> > >I am astounded and appalled that this is all you've heard from everybody's
> > >posts on this.  If you think I'm arguing--or Justin, or Dennis--that
> > >arguments don't matter, your own ability to communicate is severely
> > >impaired.
>
>Kelley:
> > i pretty much agree with ken. very few criticisms have been raised that
> > make any sense. i post at length explaining it all and not one of you has
> > bothered to engage what i've written.  ...
>
>Well, I gave it a light try, but y'all Habermas fans seem
>pretty impervious.  That might seem like "not bothering to
>engage" from the inside.  If you really, really wanted to
>be understood, you'd want to overcome that by understanding,
>but what we have here seems to be a debate, that is, an
>exchange in which no one understands anything and the only
>thing which passes back and forth are moves in the game.
>That's okay, but it's not the thing you seem to be claiming
>to promulgate.  Or do I have that wrong?

you obviously didn't try with me. have you replied to any of the lengthier 
posts where i went into H's theory at length and addressed, point for 
point, nearly, the crits on this thread?  not to my knowledge. neither did 
anyone else.  why?