[MD] continental and analytic philosophy

[X Acto]

Matt said to DmB:

 I remain 
unconvinced that your way of sorting out concepts is a 
useful way of sorting the concepts out.  The rhetoric of error 
and confusion typically lends credence to the Platonic 
notion of demonstration, to notion of dialectic over rhetoric.  
Since there is no method of demonstration in the area, one 
that satisfies the Greek urges it was first formulated in (I 
think philosophy will ever remain the one area where this 
will always be true), I think the rhetoric of error and 
confusion should be laid aside.  It is the kind of rhetoric the 
early analytics used, is it the kind of thing that gives 
professional philosophy a bad name, and it is the kind of 
thing I wish you didn't like about professional philosophy.

Ron:
Although the analytic traditon of the dialectic style is a tradgedy
to our understanding of truth, it does not mean the endeavor of
what it means to make a truth statement and how they are formed
should suffer. Elenchus was to induce aporia not a "truth" conclusion.

Error and confusion have consequences in experience yet you seem
to want to insinst on argueing it from a forum of certain types of
popular assumption.
I think this is what Dave bases his critique on.