I know I seem to be dancing around in circles but I'm not. What
   seems obvious to you, isn't to me. But you're helping me
   comprehend your perspective better and I'm trying to translate
   as best I can. You seem to be coming from an objectivist
   perspective, perhaps logical positivism. I'm not sure.
   Analytical philosophy maybe? Or utilizing a two-valued logic
   system with a no-contradiction-zone that must be avoided. That's
   the trouble with deconstruction. It makes it harder to share
   assumptions between people... every little nit-pickity detail
   has to be worked out.. and I'm sorry about that. Again, my
   'phiosophy & theory', according to that dewey thing seems to be
   in the area of the nature of time, causality and philology,
   which makes sense to me, so I accept it to be true enough.