This paper offers a brief response to the article of Bouffard (2001), which in itself was a reaction to two earlier papers published by the present author (Shephard, 1998, 1999). Bouffard makes a vigorous attack on his perceptions of my observations concerning the use of jargon, the primacy of the scientific method, and postmodernism. Unfortunately, his perceptions of my arguments are not always substantiated by a careful reading of the text. Many of the world’s social ills are rashly attributed uniquely to rationalism. No viable alternatives to the scientific method are suggested, and self-criticism of the postmodern approach is less than optimal. Nevertheless, the paper is to be welcomed, both as a challenge to continuing perfection of evidence-based science and as providing an insight into the thinking of those who espouse the postmodernist philosophy.