ABSTRACT
I hope the reader will bear with some introductory self-referencing by way of putting my comments in appropriate perspective. I am a rhetorician with a strong interest in hermeneutics. This explains my concern in the pages that follow with the nature of the discourse in which Professor Rawlins chooses to embody his ideas. Not only is my experience with the theoretical and methodological controversies among empiricists rather limited, but my rhetorical interest constantly diverts my attention to the drama of ideas struggling to be expressed in the discourse. My interest in hermeneutics further prompts me to wonder whether a given discourse is indeed the best one for trying to understand a particular phenomenon.
