| Abstract: | Michalski's (2008 ) critique of Marshall (2008 ) is rebutted. It is demonstrated that Michalski's response largely fails to address the substance of Marshall's argument, and instead deploys a number of characteristically Blackian rhetorical strategies to obscure the field. These include an inconsistent and opportunistic rejection of philosophical argument, the lamentation of an imaginary victimization, a reliance on reassertion over reasoning, the use of misleading examples, an attempt to turn to the critique against the critic, and the exaggeration of empirical evidence. As a result, his critique is not only unconvincing, but further substantiates Marshall's case. |
