I mean, I agree. I think most L's are either engaged in a rhetorical performance of the kind you describe, or theyire averse to cognitive effort, or ignorant in the literal sense.
There are a small number of highly technical cases where an L vs S debate makes sense, biological categorisation being one of them. But mostly, it's an illusion of disagreement.
Of course, the pathological-S case is a person inviting distinctions which are contextually inappropriate ("this isnt just an embedding vector, it's a 1580-dim! EV!"). So there can be S-type pathologies, but i think those are rarer and mostly people roll their eyes rather than mistake it as an actual "position".
There are a small number of highly technical cases where an L vs S debate makes sense, biological categorisation being one of them. But mostly, it's an illusion of disagreement.
Of course, the pathological-S case is a person inviting distinctions which are contextually inappropriate ("this isnt just an embedding vector, it's a 1580-dim! EV!"). So there can be S-type pathologies, but i think those are rarer and mostly people roll their eyes rather than mistake it as an actual "position".