¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 4 The conclusion to this book is as yet undrafted. Too much remains uncertain as I open this process, and I’m hoping to draw on the community in figuring out what questions remain, whether to be addressed or merely to be raised as possibilities for future writing. If you have thoughts about what belongs here, and what might lie ahead, I’d be most grateful if you’d leave them in the comments.
Please do not take the following suggestion as being glib. Consider a thought experiment: what would a Generous Thinking board game look like, feel like?
I ask because play with stereotypes (how they are shaped and how they react with each other) is something that suggests itself in the shadow missions (The University paragraph 6) and paradigms (Paradigm Shift, paragraph 8).
I raise this because I am fond of exploring group dynamics and the plurality of roles. For some reason, after mulling the potential of the shadow-paradigm for fictional treatment, I find myself thinking about the Divergent Factions in the fictional universe created by Veronica Roth (see http://divergent.wikia.com/wiki/Factions) how they resemble the poses of the intellectual vis-a-vis society [Abnegation • Amity • Candor • Dauntless • Erudite • Factionless]. It’s a reach but not so much when I read this in a profile of Robert Morrison, an expert on De Quincey
Care of the self:
For soothing respite and a reminder of the “humane passion for pure and disinterested reading” indulge in Virginia Woolf’s “Hours in a Library.