Anti-postmodernism, cont.

[Dave Monroe]

Why is it every time I hear "ad hominem" I also can't
help but hear "Ayn Rand"?  Well, we'll see ...

--- jolly <jollyrogerx99 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Count upon po-mo clowns to resort to ad hominem
> (gormless, wow man) when their precious continental
> schtick that they have worked so long at
> perfecting-- between Starbucks and sucking the dicks
> of the pretentious, confused windbags that now pass
> for English professors)--is exposed as the hoax that
> it is. 

Why also is it every time I hear "ad hominem" I tend
also to hear a rather less latinate backlash as well? 

 
> I note that the Waste-org. po-mo'sters seem fond of
> renouncing Chomsky's theories.  Lately I’ve been
> reading “Language and Problems of Knowledge”; I
> don’t know if the Chomsky has now repudiated this or
> not, but it’s not bad reading.  Here’s a claim near
> the end ....

[...]
 
> That is sort of the main thesis of the book and of
> much of the UG project. Is that too hard for you to
> grasp?  We may or may not assent to this, but it is
> debatable, and inductive methods may prove it
> correct or incorrect.  It is, as he asserted, a
> refutable hypothesis.  Did Derrida or Lacan ever
> put forth a refutable hypothesis?   

You tell us, Sir Karl Pooper.  They need to?   Maybe I
ought to have taken one for the team and covered that
Farina intro at that, but I've barely been able to
post to, much least read, the List of late, so ...