[In good faith] FWIW, I don’t think you did. I got the feeling you were reacting to mainstream views, but I don’t think I hold many of those in these matters, or to the extent I do, we haven’t really discussed or challenged them. That’s why I’m interested in what you think my current ideas are, because I think there’s a gap there and that discussing it will help. I also think that ordering the discussion in such a way that we both write about the other’s ideas simultaneously instead of in series will be better.
While I can’t cite anything particularly, my intuition is that this is an element of a lot of conflict resolution or mediation techniques. That’s why I suggested it, because I think it might help improve the quality of our conversation. Maybe I should have floated that more explicitly or something, but I think the questions are also just fine as part of a debate, so it’s not necessary to try to steer it so early.
Perhaps an additional thing we can do at the same time is also answer the questions for ourselves, so we have 4 sets of documents all up covering all permutations. That will probably help keep us honest, as such.