Knowledge Contributors Book

It's hard to say i've read it. tried to absorb? yes. failed dramatically? Y E S.

the "realism and anti-realism" chapter was somehow compulsory reading for our course. it started nice, Dummett flashed a little bit of his dry humour, for a moment thought "oh, he sounds almost as nice as Quine or Searle", but the further I went, the worse it got. fast jumps from one idea to another, "oh, btw, X found a good solution *insert vague description of it here* NOW BACK TO THE TOPIC... OR MAYBE THE OPPOSITE STANCE FOR TWO SENTENCES?"
to be fair, from my limited philosophical knowledge I appreciate the multiangularity of Dummet's work, and I'm definitely more mad at my lecturer who practically threw us in at the deep end after much easier texts. maybe when i'll have broader philosophical knowledge i'll return to Dummett someday. or maybe not.

oh, and one last word: LECTURERS HAVE MERCY UPON US. we students quite stupid. very stupid students. and poor, and tired. in the sea of language we are a tiny plankton and the pressure of Dummett's logorrhoea crushes us