> Well, I disagree. Until one of us comes up with some
> extensive sociological evidence about what people really
> believe, we're stuck on this one. But it's clear that by
> writing long books and arguing that some ideas are better
> than others in more than an atomized, ephemeral way, Ollman
> and Marx are acting as if there are fixed principles even
> while they deny them. It's a sort of reversed form of
> three-card monte.
========= Hah :-)!
It's what happens when dialogues/trialogues/multilogues devolve into argumentation; communicational arms races and all that. Methinks it's a gender issue par excellence.