3 ms·

I enjoy reading Bond's stuff, he's enviably erudite. But he tends to NOT say what he is (as an identity) now, even though he's pretty clear about what he is not

I enjoy reading Bond's stuff, he's enviably erudite. But he tends to NOT say what he is (as an identity) now, even though he's pretty clear about what he is not. A somewhat analogous awakening in my life came when I realized that scientists (ones with real PhDs, grants, and grad assistant) were really quite petty and insecure (like the rest of us.)

aridiculous 13y ago
>>> "I enjoy reading Bond's stuff, he's enviably erudite. But he tends to NOT say what he is (as an identity) now, even though he's pretty clear about what he is not." There is a role for the critic in society who illuminates the positions of others. I've noticed a pressure in contemporary society to be "for something". That kind of accusation sometimes is used to dominate or discredit the opponent and end the debate. In fact, being "for something" or "having a position" is not always appropriate. It keeps the brain loose while generating new ideas. True scientists know this.