If this individual had simply understood the extent of my argument

Thursday, March 08, 2007 I'm nearly done with the Integral dialogue project over at the Integral Review, at least the dialogue on my paper. Here's what I notice so far:Nice folks, really earnest. Some creativity. I'm intrigued (in the positive sense) with some of the stuff people came up with. So far, so good. Heavy reliance on secondary sources. Lots of claims about, say, Derrida, but not a whole lot of citations of Derrida. Many claims on nonduality, often cited in Loy or other scholars rather than in primary sources. Some overreaching, some overconfidence. One reader, for example, went to great lengths to disprove a point I didn't even make. I appreciate this kind of diligence, but it would have been a lot easier for everyone if this individual had simply understood the extent of my argument. Some reductive thinking in the forum, too; I suppose I'm guilty of this also.

On balance: productive, sure, but the format is too fast. There's no way anyone's going to catch some of the fun I had weaving cultural and literary allusions in, or even some of the wordplay I indulged in. Whatever. I think it'll be worth reading later on, as it's a mine of ideas for scholars interested in integral theory.This sort of thing turns me into an emotional wreck. At this moment, I'd like to just hole up in my office and read Edmund Spenser for a few hours, accompanied by a warm cup of black coffee and some comfort food. posted by DGA at 11:01 AM 0 comments