For years, in my spiritual studies and readings, I have wondered why I do not seem to "connect" to Ken Wilber — after all, everywhere I turn, he is quoted, he is brilliant, his writings illustrate ... on and on. Finally, with your review of "The Journals of Ken Wilber" I realize what I have missed with him, and still miss. Great book review, that of One Taste — thank you more than words can say.
— Chloe (Tuscon, Arizona)

October 17, 2004

Your review of Jerome Bruner’s Culture of Education was just what I needed. Fascinating reading. Thank you and best wishes.
— Craig Morris (Crowthorne, UK)

August 25, 2004

Hey, my name is Ashleigh. I am a political science student at the University of Western Australia. I found your essay on "How The Media Frames Political Issues" extremely interesting. I'm basically just writing to say good stuff, good form and to extend a big high 5 in your direction. That's about it really. Catcha later and regards.
— Ashleigh Holcz (Australia)

May 19, 2004

Thoroughly enjoy your website. Please keep up your good work. We need more cross discipline intellectual input as you provide.
— Etienne Truter (New Zealand)

April 16, 2004

Scott, I just found your interview with Elisabet Sahtouris. Thank you for introducing me and countless others to her work! I am an MA student in environmental education at the University of Victoria. Cheers.
— Trevor Walker (British Columbia, Canada)

April 5, 2004

Scott, I read your review of Voltaire's Bastards by John Ralston Saul. I was impressed with your succinct summary of his work but not your conclusion. I don't understand why you are so hard on Saul. You certainly didn't give any valid reasons why we shouldn't be "fooled" by the general acclaim.

On the one hand you castigate the length of argument and the book in general calling it "anything but a pleasure to read" and "maddeningly long", but on the other hand you show disdain for what you percieve as his "intellectual vanity" simply because he is not offering solutions a la your perception of the Socratic method. Would you have him double the length of the book? Or have him cut out half the argument which make his case and then offer solutions to a case not yet made? And make it entertaining as well? Do not the ideas presented challenge your thinking, and is this not the true source of pleasure? Do you not see he cares deeply about the ideas fomenting the "meaningful discussion" which is part of your work, as did Socrates? Is this not a noble intention? Yours is a contradictory stance on Saul's work.

My feeling here is backed up by reading your interview on your web page. It seems to me that the book suggests solutions to the imaginative, without coming right out and stating them. Is this the kind of book written for "a consumer whom we have to please in some way, or an idiot whom we can ignore", to quote from your interview?

Your conclusion that you don't see Saul's noble intention a la Socrates is a curious statement given the length and breadth of the arguments he gave — which you don't challenge in any substantive way with your 'maddeningly' short conclusion. The only solution you seem to offer is "don't be fooled" by the acclaim thus don't bother reading a long work with too much argument. I don't think Socrates would be in agreement here.

Furthmore after reading some of your essays, and reviews of others work, I find Saul to be right in line with writers you seem to agree with. An example from your essay "Fraternity, Social Capital and the American Community":

"As he wrote in Making Democracy Work, 'virtuous circles result in social equilibria with high levels of cooperation, trust, reciprocity, civic engagement, and collective well-being.' But the reverse is also true: 'the absence of these traits in uncivic community is also self-reinforcing. Defection, distrust, shirking, exploitation, isolation, disorder, and stagnation intensify one another in a suffocating miasma of vicious circles.'"

Saul is clearly making arguments about the dictatorship of reason, corporatism, the antithesis of which is naturally suggested in the above ideas. Saul's elucidation may be long and to some tedious but required of the subject and the solutions are offered between the lines. Those who require no need of entertainment but seek enlightenment and thus pleasure gained from the exploration of the interior, fomented by facts around us can appreciate the book. Like Saul says in your interview with him, he could give lists of ideas for solutions. In my view what this book is about is fomenting thinking about those ideas.

Perhaps you ought to write a 600 page work, clearly delineating where you think Saul went wrong, and then offer us solutions, of course, which may require some 1200 pages of work. Make certain its a pleasure to read, all 1800 pages. If you can do all that, you are the better and can proclaim the truthfullness of your conclusions. I just think you missed the mark on this one. Regards.
— Win Nelson (Canada)

Response: Win, it's a pleasure to receive this kind of feedback. Thank you. I wrote my review of "Voltaire's Bastards" some time ago and remember being disappointed by it, partly I think because the critics had exhausted their superlatives in praise of it and because some were hailing Saul as a new visionary. At the time, it seemed worthwhile to offer a different perspective. But in retrospect, I agree with you: I was too hard on him and on the book. And my criticisms, as you rightly point out, do ring a bit hollow. Perhaps I was over-reacting to the crankiness of the book. Or it's length. I don't know. Other readers of my review have said the same thing, and I'm inclined to agree at this point. In general, I've come around to the view that criticism for its own sake is never constructive and sometimes downright mean-spirited. Who wants to make a living criticizing the works of others, especially those who pour their hearts and souls into their work, as Saul clearly does? Better to say nothing at all. And why not just stick to the good stuff. Thanks again, I'm grateful for your comments.

March 26, 2004

Hi Scott, I stumbled upon your site after doing a search for Voltaire's Bastards in Yahoo. I'm impressed with the content of your site. Right now I'm a senior in highschool. I'm a Christian, but I don't believe it simply because it is what I've been taught. I believe it, because after searching for life's ultimate questions and looking at different worldviews, it is the only thing I find to be true. I want to follow a career path similiar to you. I'm interested in social issues and philosophy. I also enjoy writing. Once again, I enjoy your site, and will be viewing it regularly.
— Michael Brothers