DocsExcerpt critique: concepts/.md

Excerpt critique: concepts/.md

Excerpt critique: concepts/*.md

Critical editorial review of the excerpt choices on all 17 concept pages, done after the accordion/foldable-callout formatting was removed and quotes became directly visible (no "expand for more" fallback). Reviewed against the full text at library/1995-sex-ecology-spirituality-full-text.md, reading a page or two of surrounding context around every quote, not just the cited lines.

This is a critique only — no concept pages were edited as part of this pass.

Recurring issue found across multiple pages, flagged once here rather than per-page: several pages mis-cite the chapter a quote comes from (attributing it to "Book 1," to a plausible-sounding but wrong chapter title, or presenting an endnote as if it were body text). This showed up on 6 of the 17 pages, independently, across all four review passes — worth a dedicated citation-accuracy sweep across the whole concept wiki, separate from the content questions below.

Ascent and Descent

Verdict: strong.

  • All five quotes come from a single tightly-focused stretch of ch. 9, "The Way Up Is the Way Down" (lines ~3821–3869), in correct sequence, and map precisely onto the synthesis's Ascent/Descent/wisdom/compassion claims.

  • The fifth quote is a well-made composite: it splices the "Wisdom knows…" line (3867) with "compassion knows that the One is the Many…" (3869) via ellipsis, covering both halves of the wisdom/compassion pairing in one quote — genuine compression, not padding.

  • All quotes are self-sufficient; no dangling pronouns or undefined jargon.

  • Coverage gap: the synthesis's claim that "most of the tension in Western civilization's spiritual history… comes from treating Ascent and Descent as rivals" isn't backed by any current quote — the quotes illustrate Plato's own resolution, not the civilizational-conflict framing. A strong unused passage covers exactly this, and chronologically precedes the quoted material, so it would slot in first:

    "while Plato emphasized both movements, Western civilization has been a battle royale between these two movements, between those who wanted only to live in 'this world' of Manyness and those who wanted to live only in the 'other world' of transcendent Oneness—both of them equally and catastrophically forgetting the unifying Heart, the unspoken Word, that integrates both Ascent and Descent and finds Spirit both transcending the Many and embracing the Many."

    — ch. 9, "The Way Up Is the Way Down," ~line 3791.

The Big Three

Verdict: adequate — strong selection, undercut by a citation error.

  • Fit is excellent: the four quotes trace the concept across the book's arc (definition, cross-tradition parallels, differentiation-into-dissociation, the vision-logic resolution) — a deliberate narrative sequence, not a grab-bag.

  • Citation error: the third quote ("The differentiation of the Big Three thus degenerated…") is attributed to "ch. 5, 'The Emergence of Human Nature'" but is actually at line 4355, inside ch. 11, "Brave New World" (same chapter as quote 4; ch. 5 begins at line 2049 and is unrelated). Fix the label — this also means all four quotes are actually drawn from just two chapters (4 and 11), worth knowing for how the page's implicit "coverage" reads.

  • Minor coverage gap: the synthesis mentions the Three Jewels of Buddhism (Buddha/I, Dharma/It, Sangha/We) as a cross-tradition parallel, but no quote backs it. Optional addition if fuller coverage is wanted:

    "the Big Three appear in such all-important formulations as the Three Jewels of Buddhism: Buddha, Dharma, Sangha. Buddha is the ultimate I, Dharma the ultimate It, and Sangha the ultimate We."

    — ~line 1977. Not urgent; the existing Plato/Kant quote already carries this point adequately.

Dominator vs. Growth Hierarchy

Verdict: needs work — citation errors, a broken mid-sentence quote, and no quote for the page's own foundational claim.

  • Citation error: three of four quotes (Eisler at line 720, "ontological fascism" at 730, "Why is the finding of value" at 750) are attributed to "Book 1: The Pattern That Connects" (ch. 2, starting line 802) but actually sit in ch. 1, "The Web of Life" (heading at line 235). Only the fourth quote (Naess, line 994) is genuinely in ch. 2.

  • Broken quote: the second excerpt currently ends mid-sentence on a dangling parenthetical about "pathological agency and pathological communion," and the page itself has an apologetic editorial note "(source notes cut off mid-sentence here)" — a clear sign this needs fixing, not documenting. Trim to the clean, complete sentence one clause earlier:

    "Whereas pathological hierarchy is a type of ontological fascism (with the one dominating the many), pathological heterarchy is a type of ontological totalitarianism (with the many dominating the one)."

    Drop the trailing agency/communion/gender aside — it introduces terms ("agency," "communion") the page never defines, and the gender material is off-topic here.

  • Coverage gap (the main finding): the synthesis's opening claim — that a holarchy "is not, in itself, oppressive: the higher level includes and enfolds the lower" — is the page's foundational move, but no excerpt states the neutral/positive definition of holarchy; all four current quotes jump straight to pathology. A precisely on-point, currently-unused passage:

    "Normal hierarchy, then, is simply an order of increasing holons, representing an increase in wholeness and integrative capacity—atoms to molecules to cells, for example… Hierarchy, then, converts heaps into wholes, disjointed fragments into networks of mutual interaction. When it is said that 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts,' the 'greater' means 'hierarchy.' It doesn't mean fascist domination; it means a higher (or deeper) commonality that joins isolated strands into an actual web, that joins molecules into a cell, or cells into an organism."

    — ch. 1, "The Web of Life," lines 674–676. Recommend adding as the page's first excerpt, before the pathology material.

Eros and Agape

Verdict: strong, with one clear improvement available.

  • All four quotes (definition line 3991, Phobos 4001, Thanatos 4011, "vast circle of love" 3989) are accurately located in ch. 9, "The Way Up Is the Way Down" — citation is correct throughout. Self-sufficiency is good.

  • Coverage gap: the synthesis's closing claim that Wilber reads Freud's Eros/Thanatos dualism as "a real but incomplete glimpse of this same axis" isn't backed by any quote. A vivid, on-point passage a few pages earlier in the same chapter fills this directly:

    "Freud clearly and accurately saw Eros; he clearly and accurately saw Thanatos; and perhaps more clearly than anybody in history, he saw that so much human misery is and always will be a battle between the two, and that the only solution to our suffering is a union of Eros and Thanatos—and yet there is precisely nothing Freud could do about it. There he was stranded, and there he left us stranded."

    — ch. 9, ~line 3901.

  • Suggested trade: the fourth current quote (Cambridge Platonists "vast circle of love," line 3989) is the weakest of the four — decorative lineage-tracing rather than argument, and nothing in the synthesis specifically calls for it. Recommend swapping it for the Freud quote above.

Flatland

Verdict: adequate — solid core quotes, one poor fit, and the page's most vivid line isn't backed by any quote.

  • Quotes 1–4 (Preface line 344; "What these systems…" 1851; "All of that can still be heartily embraced…" 1943; "Similarly, personal integrity…" 1995) land squarely on the subtle-reductionism argument and are accurately transcribed.

  • Weak fit / self-sufficiency problem: the 5th quote ("Pathological heterarchy means not union but fusion…", ch. 3, line 728) is drawn from a different argument thread entirely — the hierarchy/heterarchy-pathology discussion, not the subtle-reductionism diagnosis that defines "flatland" everywhere else on the page. It uses the word "flatland" in passing, but a reader hits "Pathological heterarchy means…" with zero definition of "heterarchy" anywhere on the page — a real dangling-jargon problem. This quote fits much better on dominator-vs-growth-hierarchy.md, which already exists and is linked from holarchy.md.

  • Coverage gap: the synthesis's most quotable line — Wilber calling flatland "a 'flat and faded landscape' … with no vertical dimension left in it at all" — is a paraphrase, not backed verbatim by any excerpt. A strong, self-contained replacement from the same chapter, immediately following the "flatland holists…have merely cloned it" passage already referenced nearby:

    "It is from this flat and faded landscape, armed with good intentions and a weakest–noodle science, that they cry out to us as our saviors."

    — ch. 4, "A View from Within," ~line 1957. Recommend as the replacement 5th quote in place of the pathological-heterarchy one.

  • Quotes 2 and 3 look redundant at a glance but make genuinely distinct points (systems/holism confusion vs. the quality→quantity collapse) — keep both.

The Four Quadrants

Verdict: strong — best-assembled page of the set, one small self-sufficiency fix worth making.

  • All four quotes map cleanly onto the synthesis. Quote 1 is a heavily-ellipsed composite spanning ~30 lines of source (UR/UL/LR/LL definitions) — checked fragment by fragment against the source; accurately assembled and correctly flagged with "…".

  • Self-sufficiency issue: quote 4 ("The point of this overall example is simply that my 'single' thought…", line 1931) opens referring to "this overall example" and "my thought," but the page never shows what that example is (Wilber's "a thought occurs to me" walk-through starting at line 1879). Fix by prepending the actual setup sentence:

    "For example, I have a thought; a thought occurs to me. That's the given holon, which we will use as an example. … The point of this overall example is simply that my 'single' thought, the original holon, is not really a single thought as such, but rather a holon with four inseparable aspects…"

    — ch. 4, "A View from Within," setup at line 1879, existing quote text at 1931.

  • Note: quote 3 ("What these systems and 'holistic' theorists…") is also used verbatim on flatland.md. Not wrong — it genuinely supports both — but worth knowing a reader browsing both pages sees it twice.

The Great Chain of Being

Verdict: needs work — documents the Chain's fate, but no quote states what it actually is.

  • All four quotes (lines 590, 594, 620, 622) are accurately transcribed and support the "decline narrative" half of the synthesis (dominance → scientific fracture → arrows of time → alienated spheres).

  • Coverage gap (the main finding): the synthesis opens by defining the Great Chain as "nested domains of matter (physiosphere), life (biosphere), mind (noosphere)" — but no excerpt gives this definition; all four are about the Chain's historical status or its unraveling. The single best one-sentence definition in the book sits unused, immediately before the currently-used "official philosophy" quote:

    "…physiosphere, biosphere, noosphere—were one continuous and interrelated manifestation of Spirit, one Great Chain of Being, that reached in a perfectly unbroken or uninterrupted fashion from matter to life to mind to soul to spirit."

    — ch. 1, "The Web of Life," ~line 586. Recommend as the opening quote. A secondary candidate, Lovejoy's three-point summary (superabundance/plenitude; no gaps in nature; gradation) sits right after at line 588, if more definitional depth is wanted.

  • Mild redundancy: quotes 2 (Copernicus/Kepler causing fracture) and 4 (physiosphere/biosphere separation, "alienated spheres") narrate the same fracture from slightly different angles. If trimming to make room for the definitional quote, cut one of these two — quote 3 (Laszlo's "mechanistic world slated to run down / organic world seeming to wind up") is the sharpest of the three and should stay.

  • Citation nit: all four quotes are labeled "Book 1: The Web of Life" — "Book One" is the whole of Part I (chapters 1–8); "The Web of Life" is specifically ch. 1. Should read "ch. 1."

Holarchy

Verdict: strong — five tenets covering five distinct sub-concepts well, one accuracy concern worth fixing.

  • The five quotes (emergence/transcend-include line 986; depth-span definition 1054; depth-span law 1062; translation/transformation 1086+1108; coevolution 1144) map one-to-one onto five distinct synthesis claims, with little redundancy.

  • Accuracy concern: the translation/transformation quote silently splices two passages that are not adjacent in the source (line 1086 and line 1108, 22 lines apart, with unmarked intervening material) without an ellipsis marking the gap — unlike the four-quadrants page's similarly composited quote, which does mark it. A genuinely adjacent, sharper pairing exists a few lines later and better matches the synthesis's own "rearranging furniture on a floor" framing:

    "And so we can say: translation is a change in surface structures ('horizontal'), whereas transformation is a change in deep structures ('vertical')… We can use our simple analogy of the three-story building to summarize all of these definitions. Each of the three main floors is a deep structure; the furniture, chairs, and tables on each floor are the surface structures. Rearranging the furniture on any given floor is translation; changing floors is transformation."

    — ch. 2, "The Pattern That Connects," lines 1102–1108 (a single honest "…" would cover the one short elided paragraph).

  • Minor tightening: the tenet-8 quote drops its own bolded thesis clause ("Each successive level of evolution produces GREATER depth and LESS span") and starts mid-argument — inconsistent with how tenets 4 and 10 keep their numbered thesis sentence. Restoring it would make the quote self-contained.

  • Citation nit: same "Book 1" vs. chapter issue as Great Chain — should read "ch. 2" (confirmed at line 804/808).

Holons

Verdict: strong. No changes recommended.

  • All four quotes map 1:1 onto the four capacities named in the synthesis (self-preservation, self-adaptation, self-transcendence, self-dissolution) plus the opening ontological claim (tenet 1) — the best-matched page reviewed. Every synthesis claim has direct textual backing; nothing is merely topically-adjacent.
  • All four are self-sufficient and cleanly trimmed: the tenet-1 quote is a complete paragraph; 2a/2b ends at a natural sentence break; 2c uses an ellipsis to skip a Whitehead/Jantsch tangent without losing the argument; 2d is short but complete.
  • Citation (tenet 1, line 848, "Book 1: The Pattern That Connects") is correctly located in ch. 2. No redundancy, no coverage gaps, no padding.

Involution and Evolution

Verdict: adequate — one clear redundancy, one strong unused alternative.

  • Quote 2 (co-creation/anti-determinism) and quote 4 (Plotinus A/A+B/A−B formula) directly back their respective synthesis paragraphs well; quote 5 (mystical recognition) backs the "recollection" claim.

  • Redundancy: quotes 1 and 3 both restate the same basic definition (evolution = matter→body→mind→soul→spirit, transcending and including; involution = the reverse) in near-identical terms — quote 1 and 2 are in fact the same source paragraph (line 410) split across two block-quotes. Since quote 3 already supplies the Eros/Agape labeling the synthesis's first paragraph needs, quote 1 could be cut or shortened.

  • Better alternative found: a vivid passage that actually names the concept the page's own alias points to ("the way up is the way down") is unused and would work well as a replacement for quote 1:

    "This integration may be thought of (very crudely and, as always, somewhat misleadingly) as a Great Circle. The descending or manifesting or creative path moves from the top of the circle to the bottom, and the ascending or returning path from the bottom to the top—both arcs traversing the same dimensions—which is why, as we will see, 'The way up is the way down.'"

    — ch. 9, "The Way Up Is the Way Down," ~line 3857.

  • Citation nuance: quotes 4 and 5 are cited as ch. 9 but are technically in the endnotes to ch. 9 (lines 7853, 7861), not the main chapter text. They do genuinely elaborate the chapter's content, so this is defensible, but strictly it's endnote material — worth a parenthetical "(note)" per the convention wilber-on-plato.md already uses correctly (see below).

Kosmos vs. Cosmos

Verdict: needs work — three citation errors; the quotes themselves are otherwise strong.

  • All four quotes are well-chosen and each directly backs a specific synthesis claim (etymology, containment relation, physics-fundamental-but-insignificant, Enlightenment's collapse of Left/Right). No padding, no coverage gaps.
  • Citation errors:
    • Quotes 1 and 2 ("The Pythagoreans introduced the term…", "So I would like to reintroduce this term…") are cited as ch. 1, "The Web of Life," but are actually at lines 874/876, inside ch. 2, "The Pattern That Connects" (ch. 1 ends at line 807).
    • Quote 4 ("The downside of the Enlightenment…") is cited as ch. 12, "The Collapse of the Kosmos," but is actually at line 1863, inside ch. 4, "A View from Within" (ch. 12 doesn't start until line 4725). Ch. 12's title is a plausible-sounding match for this content, which is presumably how the mislabel happened, but the actual passage is ~3000 lines earlier, in ch. 4's discussion of subtle reductionism and the Enlightenment's "harmony of interlocking orders."
    • Quote 3 (line 1476, ch. 3, "Individual and Social") is correctly cited.
  • No redundancy or coverage gaps beyond the citation fixes above.

Wilber on Postmodernism

Verdict: needs work — one real citation error, one strong missing quote.

  • Quotes 1–3 are well-matched and accurately transcribed: quote 1 backs the "achievement" paragraph almost verbatim, quote 2 backs "derailment" verbatim, quote 3 backs the Big Three differentiation/integration claim verbatim and is correctly cited to ch. 11.

  • Citation error: quote 4 ("The study of holarchy, in short, is the study of nested truths…") is cited as ch. 14, "The Unpacking of God," but is actually at line 6415, in the endnotes to ch. 2 ("The Pattern That Connects" — confirmed by the Notes section headers). This is a genuine chapter mismatch, not just a body-vs-endnote nuance — ch. 14 is nowhere near this passage.

  • Better alternative found: a sharper, self-contained passage exists that more vividly demonstrates the self-refuting structure the synthesis's "derailment" paragraph gestures at (nihilism as pluralism turning on itself), and needs no jargon setup the way "nested truths/nested lies" does:

    "Pluralistic relativism was the only acceptable worldview. It claimed that all truth is culturally situated (except its own truth, which is true for all cultures); it claimed there are no transcendental truths (except its own pronouncements, which transcend specific contexts); it claimed that all hierarchies or value rankings are oppressive and marginalizing (except its own value ranking, which is superior to the alternatives); it claimed that there are no universal truths (except its own pluralism, which is universally true for all peoples)."

    — Preface to the Second Edition, ~line 306. Recommend adding this, and either fixing or dropping quote 4's citation.

  • Minor, likely unfixable coverage gap: the synthesis's "narcissism" claim is named but never elaborated by any quote; no tighter directly-quotable passage connecting postmodern relativism to narcissism-as-isolation turned up elsewhere in the book. This looks like Wilber's own gloss rather than something with a clean matching quote — not flagged as an action item.

The Pre/Trans Fallacy

Verdict: strong, with two citation-accuracy issues worth fixing.

  • All five quotes are precisely on-point. Quote 1 (definition) and quote 2 (Freud/Jung) sit back-to-back in the source (lines 2549–2561, ch. 6) giving a clean definition-then-application pair. The Campbell quote (line 2923) is the single best sentence in a long, dense passage (2885–2943) — well-chosen, not padded. The Engler quote (line 8925, "condemning an acorn for not being an oak") is vivid and self-sufficient.
  • Citation errors:
    1. The quote attributed to "ch. 13, 'The Dominance of the Descenders'" (line 5237, "confused postconventional spirit with preconventional nature") is actually from ch. 12, "The Collapse of the Kosmos" — ch. 13 doesn't begin until line 5319.
    2. The Engler quote is cited as "ch. 14, 'The Unpacking of God'" with no qualifier, but it lives in the book's endnotes, not the main narrative (Notes section for ch. 14 starts at line 8743; quote at 8925). wilber-on-plato.md correctly labels its equivalent endnote quote "(footnote)" — this page should follow the same convention.
  • No redundancy; all four synthesis claims (definition, Freud/Jung, Campbell, Eco-Romanticism) are backed.

Right-Hand and Left-Hand Paths

Verdict: adequate — solid definitional quotes, but misses the sharpest illustration of its own central argument.

  • Quotes 1–2 accurately define the Right-Hand path (it-language/neutral surfaces); quotes 3–4 accurately establish Left-Hand validity.

  • Coverage gap (the main finding): the synthesis's second paragraph makes a specific, vivid claim — a thought correlates with measurable brain physiology, but the thought's actual meaning is something only the thinker can report; "correlation without reduction" — and frames this as Wilber's own worked example. But no quote on the page actually gives that example, even though it's in the same chapter and is more concrete than any of the four currently used:

    "For example, I have a thought; a thought occurs to me. That's the given holon, which we will use as an example. For this holon, in the Upper-Right quadrant, there is a change in brain physiology, a change that can be described in completely objective terms (it-language)… But that is not how I experienced the thought, and I will never actually experience my thought in those terms. Instead, the thought had an interesting and important meaning to me, which I may or may not share with you. And even if you know what every single atom of my brain is doing, you will never know the actual details of my thought unless I tell you."

    — ch. 4, "A View from Within," lines 1879–1881. Recommend replacing quote 2 (the most generic/replaceable of the four "neutral surfaces" quotes) with this.

  • Also worth considering: the synthesis's "subtle reductionism" claim isn't quoted at all either (currently just deferred via See Also to [[flatland]]) — a strong one-liner sits at line 1935: "It has reduced three-dimensional chess to flatland chess, the Kosmos to the cosmos, the interrelated pyramid of life to the interrelated web of life, interrelated I and we to interrelated its." Optional fifth excerpt if the page wants to earn that claim directly.

Systems Theory and the Sciences of Complexity

Verdict: strong for the scope it claims.

  • All three quotes (lines 634, 642, 644, all from the "Modern Evolutionary Synthesis" section of ch. 1) map precisely onto the synthesis's three claims: the whirlpool/"order out of chaos" mechanism, the taxonomy of named sciences, and the "everything connected" claim.
  • The third quote's "They claim, in other words…" framing is correctly preserved, so it reads as Wilber describing systems theorists' self-description rather than endorsing it as his own settled view — important, since he later throws this exact phrase back sarcastically at "flatland holists" elsewhere in the book (line 1953), and the excerpt doesn't misrepresent that.
  • The page's own "Update" note already and honestly documents that the critique of systems theory is deferred to [[flatland]] — a deliberate scope limit, not an oversight.
  • No better alternative found nearby; the source section is short and these are its clear high points.

Vision-Logic

Verdict: strong.

  • Quotes 1 and 4 (Preface, lines 310, 316) back the postmodernism/universal-integralism narrative; quotes 2 and 3 (ch. 5, lines 2367, 2369) back the core definition and the "adds them up into a totality" claim.
  • All four stand alone well. Quotes 1 and 3 overlap slightly (both establish the vision-logic/network-logic/Gebser naming) but each also does independent work (quote 1 sets up the postformal-cognitive-stage ladder; quote 3 performatively demonstrates vision-logic by describing what the book itself is doing) — not wasteful redundancy.
  • No sharper alternative found in the surrounding material; nearby Gebser content ("the part is… a betrayal of the whole," line 2399) is interesting but more tangential to this page's specific claims than what's already used.
  • Every synthesis claim is either backed by a quote or explicitly deferred to a linked page (postmodernism critique deferred to [[postmodernism]]).

Wilber's Non-Dual Reading of Plato

Verdict: strong — the best-sourced page reviewed.

  • All four quotes are exact matches for the synthesis's claims, drawn from the actual high points of ch. 9 (lines 3773–3869) plus its footnote apparatus (line 7775, Parmenides/Nagarjuna).
  • Every quote reads cleanly on its own, including the excerpted Seventh Epistle passage.
  • Citation care — the standard other pages should match: this is the only page reviewed that correctly labels its footnote-sourced quote "(footnote)" rather than presenting it as body text. involution-and-evolution.md and pre-trans-fallacy.md should adopt the same labeling for their own endnote-sourced quotes (see above).
  • Quotes 1 and 2 both revolve around the "no treatise… exists or ever will exist" line, but serve distinct purposes (quote 1 is primary-source evidence; quote 2 is Wilber's own framing of why it matters) — not wasteful.
  • No better alternative found; surrounding material (Neoplatonist "outflowing" passages, Timaeus quotes at line 4263, wisdom/compassion section at 3861–3871) is rich but more tangential to the specific non-dual-reading thesis than what's already selected.

Cross-page summary

Citation-accuracy issue across the wiki: 6 of 17 pages mis-cite a chapter, either by labeling a quote "Book 1" instead of the actual chapter number, attributing it to a plausible-sounding but wrong chapter, or presenting an endnote as body text without saying so (big-three, dominator-vs-growth-hierarchy, great-chain-of-being, holarchy, kosmos-vs-cosmos, postmodernism, pre-trans-fallacy, involution-and-evolution — several pages have more than one instance). This is mechanical to fix and worth doing as a single pass across all pages, using wilber-on-plato.md's footnote-labeling as the model for how to handle endnote-sourced quotes.

Pages most needing a follow-up excerpt pass, in priority order:

  1. dominator-vs-growth-hierarchy.md — worst of the set: three mislabeled citations, one quote that ends mid-sentence with an apologetic editorial note flagging its own brokenness, and no quote backing the page's foundational claim that holarchy isn't inherently oppressive. Concrete fixes given above for all three.
  2. great-chain-of-being.md — the page never actually defines the Great Chain in any quote, only narrates its decline; the missing definitional quote is a one-line fix with a strong candidate identified above.
  3. kosmos-vs-cosmos.md — three citation errors (two ch.1→ch.2, one ch.12→ch.4); the quotes themselves need no content changes, just correct labels.
  4. postmodernism.md — one real chapter mislabel (ch.14 claimed, actually ch.2 endnotes) plus a clearly sharper unused passage (the "Pluralistic relativism was the only acceptable worldview…" self-refutation quote) that would strengthen the page's central argument.
  5. right-hand-and-left-hand-paths.md — the synthesis explicitly describes Wilber's own worked example (the thought/brain-physiology correlation) as evidence, but no quote on the page actually gives that example; a direct replacement is identified above.

Pages that are already strong and need no substantive work: ascent-and-descent, eros-and-agape (aside from one optional swap), four-quadrants, holons, systems-theory, vision-logic, wilber-on-plato.

Built with LogoFlowershow