If you have read parts of Summa then you will get this. I move that all disagreements on PB be framed in the following manner:

First, you begin your disagreement with On the Contrary. You cite an authority who disagrees with the objector. Context: St Thomas would respond to a series of Objections 1, 2, 3...y. These objections would usually cite some prominent figure from philosophy or church history. St Thomas would often respond to this authority with this authority. However, the ancients usually considered appeals to authority to be the weakest form of argument (Reformed folk take heed!). More importantly this appeal to authority helpfully and succintly states your position

Secondly, respond in the form of I answer that...; here you build your case for your position.

Thirdly, you will directly reply to the objections in the previous post--or, given the nature of discussion boards, state your objections to the previous post.

But isn't this kind of laborious? Yes, it is. It also forces one to slow down and put a lot of time in a post. By this point, much of the heat, if present, is gone.

__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College