ABSTRACT
Michael Leahy’s response is impish and ungenerous: more importantly it is full of misrepresentations-not surprising since he concentrates so little on what I actually wrote and insists on reading me through the thought of fellow thinkers-some of whom I agree with, and some of whom I do not. The task of unravelling it is, as editorially constrained, beyond me: a mere thousand words cannot begin to show fully how misguided Leahy is.
