> The problem that Andy is describing, however, is more that pomo provides
> nasty ammunition to those who want to score discursive points as a means of
> defeating opponents without having to debate the real issues. But that
> didn't start with pomo and I'm pretty sure won't end with it.
>
The latter is part of what I'm wondering about. Argumentative fallacy and rhetorical point-scoring are as old as the hills, but I wonder about the genealogy of a particular toolset and style.
-- Andy "It's a testament to ketchup that there can be no confusion."