He should at least explain that there are other better arguments that need to be addressed, and maybe point his interlocutors to the distinction.
I would really like him to do that. However I suspect that he feels that these arguments actually aren’t that strong when you look into it, so that might not make sense from his perspective.
He should at least explain that there are other better arguments that need to be addressed, and maybe point his interlocutors to the distinction.
I would really like him to do that. However I suspect that he feels that these arguments actually aren’t that strong when you look into it, so that might not make sense from his perspective.