Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
It's interesting that it's easier for you to analyze the writing of someone making an assertion. In theory, any post of sufficient length where the person is being him- or herself should be just as easy to analyze. However, maybe you feel more motivation to analyze the writings of people who are making assertions, because somehow you have an underlying motivation to say to people in effect "what makes you so sure of that?"
actually, i'm probably more motivated when i see what seems to be a blatant contradiction and I'm trying to figure it out (whether it really is a contradiction or not, and how a person can hold both thoughts/beliefs at the same time, etc). But really how often have i analyzed someone's writings? that one time with phaedrus when you ..what's the term....not dared but something like that..me to. One time with tc after he'd analyzed something but failed to give any reasons for his decision on which function was being used, and the most recently in a pm with fdg (which was posted in some thread) in which he was trying to give me examples of what i was trying to say and i was having to critique them to be sure they were legit examples.

Really though, unless something really stands out to me, I won't bother. Too much of a headache. (literally)