You are correct that I have not defended it as of yet utilizing the context with which you are comfortable. I may be able to and I may try, or I am not able to and I may not try.
I see this as a translation problem more than a logic problem and the problem is mine for being unable to use your methodology, not yours for being true to it.
Ok. I believe I see the crux of the matter.
You wish me to stay within the parameters of the game. When I go outside of the parameters of the game, it makes my moves invalid.
Would this be a correct analogy or am I oversimplifying?
It is quite possible that we are each attempting to force the other to play our own games by our own rules.
You may be attempting to have me (and/or Millard) play the game of logic within the parameters of the system you are using.
I don’t know about Millard, but for myself, I may be attempting to have you play the game of logic from within the parameters of the system that I am using, which is that of a sociohistorical context within which I see the parameters of the system you are using.
But it may also be valid that you can equally place my game of logic within the parameters of the system that you are using.
I believe the main difference is inclusion vs exclusion. I am not excluding your system but including it in mine.
I do not think that there is room in your system for mine to fit within but I could be mistaken here and welcome correction. I do not wish to imply superiority by any means, just differences.