Ditto on this MD

So it seems people learn his model, go around applying it to things they read about but when challenged have nothing to rely on, to back up and argue besides Wilber’s very generalized ‘orienting’ model. His work covers so much and summarizes in a way that people just swallow it down (download IOS ring a bell?) and instant analysis not using the general lens or IMP of AQAL but using Ken word for word or pretty damn close to it often….

I have to say that I am disappointed with the derogatory manner in which you continue to refer to ken in your writings. And please do not interpret this as some kind of a defense for kw for I do not feel the need to “protect” him or to be out there in cyber-space writing apologies for him everywhere. Rather, this is about protecting the integrity of your own work – why would you choose to jeopardize your efforts by lowering yourself to name-calling and vocal bullying? And let’s be honest, you are clearly openly attacking people here, and not their ideas…. Continuing to speak in such a manner will only serve to discredit the strong work that you are producing and the service that you are performing for the larger community. I say, honour your own efforts by maintaining a sense of dignity about your ideas. In the end, this will come across as a certain subtle confidence which can only serve to aid in the delivery of your ideas and provide a kind of buttress for your emerging philosophy as well as a bolster for your own academic integrity.

Thanks for setting the record straight, Matthew. And for the record, I care too.