It was, of course, to do with Matt, and specifically with your comment:
"Matt is of the very reasonable school of only responding when he thinks I am talking bollocks."
I brought Homer in (could have been Hesiod, I suppose, or if we want to talk about foundational myths, even Gilgamesh) for one reason and one reason only, and I'm beginning to suspect that it makes no sense whatsoever.
People have been interpreting, and reinterpreting, and rere and rerere and this obviously is where the word "reiterating" comes from, except that interestingly it doesn't for two entirely opposite reasons ...
I'll start again.
I don't doubt, for a moment, that Matt is being entirely reasonable. (I do suspect that both of you are far more "right wing," for what that is worth, than you were when you were at college.)
It isn't so much the quality of Matt's response (which was unimpeachable).
It was about the stupid and thoughtless reference, and the obvious fact that the reference in question did not match up to the documentation.
Incidentally, are you ever going to complete your PhD, or at least publish an abridged version of it?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-01-28 02:17 am (UTC)It was, of course, to do with Matt, and specifically with your comment:
"Matt is of the very reasonable school of only responding when he thinks I am talking bollocks."
I brought Homer in (could have been Hesiod, I suppose, or if we want to talk about foundational myths, even Gilgamesh) for one reason and one reason only, and I'm beginning to suspect that it makes no sense whatsoever.
People have been interpreting, and reinterpreting, and rere and rerere and this obviously is where the word "reiterating" comes from, except that interestingly it doesn't for two entirely opposite reasons ...
I'll start again.
I don't doubt, for a moment, that Matt is being entirely reasonable. (I do suspect that both of you are far more "right wing," for what that is worth, than you were when you were at college.)
It isn't so much the quality of Matt's response (which was unimpeachable).
It was about the stupid and thoughtless reference, and the obvious fact that the reference in question did not match up to the documentation.
Incidentally, are you ever going to complete your PhD, or at least publish an abridged version of it?