feelings are intense, words are trivial...

In his characteristic fashion, Jim Dedman has "replied" to my post. More precisely, he has taken this opportunity to once again refuse to address any substantive issues raised by my previous post, and instead shows us all what a good little contrarian he is. Because if Jim Dedman is anything, he is a contrarian. A true contrarian. He is such a cool dude. Because he's so contrarian. Let's observe just how contrarian he is:

Quoth the Self-Described Contrarian: "Xavier's attacks are usually of the ad hominem variety - a logical faux pas upon which his Harvard law professors would likely frown." Here, we can see Jim's unnatural fixation with all things Harvard. I don't think that even Harvard people talk about Harvard as much as he does. (See his post about Bush and Harvard, his post about Protestors at Harvard, and his post about Caterpillar Eggs at Harvard.) For someone who has no discernible connection to Harvard, I must say this is rather odd. A glimpse into Jim's insecurities, no doubt. At any rate, any fan of Nietzsche will recognize the validity of the ad hominem. When testing a particular view, we should always ask ourselves, "What kind of person would believe this?" Opinions are often fronts for the motives that prompt them. A sour view held by a sick person may serve as a symptom of the sickness, and a reason to discount it. Indeed, most of Jim Dedman's views can be discounted on precisely this rationale.

Quoth the Self-Described Contrarian: "Throwing quite the temper tantrum, he postures and quibbles and laments about the most minor turns of phrases about something as silly as the decision to post (or not) a Best of 2003 list -- illustrating that perhaps he just wanted some attention (which, of course, with this response I begrudgingly bestow)." And of course, our great Contrarian has never wanted attention.

Quoth the Self-Described Contrarian: "Best of all, there's this utterly meaningless gem: 'This could not be a more misinformed attempt at a conclusion.' Eh?" In this awe-inspiring bit, Jim amazes us all through his uncanny ability to take a sentence out of context.

Quoth the Self-Described Contrarian: "Best take on Morales, though, comes from the unsinkable Molly Bresnen who, in an instant message, observes, 'Have you ever noticed none of his 'unfashionable observations' are really particularly unfashionable?' Indeed." Is that the girl from Sixteen Candles and Pretty in Pink? I hope so, because otherwise I'd find it sad that the only thing Jim and Molly have to talk about in a private IM conversation is me.