I suspect that we keep having these fruitless arguments because of the existence of a peculiar mindset which is now lodged deep in the heart of our culture. In this way of 'thinking' nothing much of any interest or relevance existed before the lifetime of the 'thinker' - hence it's necessary to keep on (and on and on and on) re-inventing the proverbial wheel. This also leads to the view that any transient notion that pops into the head of our 'thinking' protagonist MUST be of great relevance and must be acted upon. But, because these airy notions have no strong intellectual or theoretical basis, someone else must be persuaded to validate them. Unfortunately, the putative validators are 'experts' - who often HAVE studied what went before and ARE armed with definitions and theories - and are not easily persuaded. Hence these intransigent 'experts' have insults heaped upon their heads by the frustrated 'thinkers'. And, let's face it, in contemporary popular culture education, study and analysis are despised; 'experts' are 'nerds' who should know their place and take responsibilty for the airy notions of the wilfully ignorant.