She would make up her mind

Scott's post on "retraction"--that is to say, the impossibility thereof in the humanities context--emphasizes methodology.   Over the course of their careers, most academics wind up containing multitudes, although such intellectual changes may take any number of shapes: outright disavowal (think Frederick Crews and psychoanalysis); career-oriented (it was the dissertation advisor in the English department with a candlestick); conversion (a voice said "Tolle lege," and I picked up a copy of Of Grammatology); accretion (prolonged exposure to Foucault?); developmental (refining an approach); and the like.  We can certainly debate which models of intellectual change are legitimate, illegitimate, likely to destroy global civilization, or whatnot, but in most cases, change must surely be a good sign.  If we wake up one day and decide that we have learned all about research and writing, then we're doing something wrong, not right.