If those are his credentials, I would have preferred he debate Wittgenstein instead of PG. In the article, he could have simply acknowledged PG's essay for re-

If those are his credentials, I would have preferred he debate Wittgenstein instead of PG. In the article, he could have simply acknowledged PG's essay for re-igniting his critique of Wittgenstein. And, as a bonus, a blog title of "Why Wittgenstein is sort of wrong about philosophy" might have attracted more hits.