> I'm not assuming; I've read most of these people, or at least have a basic grasp of their ideas. Should you believe something I believe, merely because I cla

> I'm not assuming; I've read most of these people, or at least have a basic grasp of their ideas. Should you believe something I believe, merely because I claim it's right (with no evidence)? I likely believe some false things. People believe all sorts of weird things. The AI snakeoil salesman might believe in his own snakeoil. > I'm not sure how I could more directly engage there. By using the actual paragraph where he mentions actually meeting Foucault, Derrida, and Kristeva. Or in general, try peforming the same trick on a passage where your point maybe doesn't look so hot. Or instead of Haskell, the aforementioned AI snakeoil. > There is a wealth of introductory literature. Here, I cite introductory literature on a non-mainstream programming language, on many levels: (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6038989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6038989). It took work, but I hope it helped a couple people. (It's unhelpful to merely cite the existence of literature (rather than naming it), leaving people ignorant. After all, I demonstrated that I was willing to re-read the Chomsky/Foucault discussion. I'm not lazy.) And I vouch for the literature I cite. That means if people have problems with it, I know places where people can go and ask away to their heart's content. Or I will sit down and help people understand, until they're satisfied (or no longer interested). [Edit: I see you edited to offer youtube links. Thanks, will watch! If they're good and in-depth, then ignore my last point.]