>>Could it be that demonstrating that the writer understands the careers of the relevant authorities and what they mean by what they say is more important than the argument per se? This is an ancient pattern in Asia.
Before Bacon and Bayle, Descartes and Pascal, it was pretty much an ancient pattern in the West too. In 1600, you could win an argument by showing your point supported in Aristotle; by 1700, you had to prove your point. Argument from authority had waned.
In my opinion, we're all still in that Enlightenment. Romanticism, Modernism, Postmodernism, even Postcolonialism, are turns of the Enlightenment mentality, from self-exploration to the self-criticism and correction. Wonder where this Enlightenment thing will lead ...
------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
