The author is well read in philosophy, and the article (what I read in the first 1/4 or so) is a work of philosophy. I have a minor degree in philosophy. To me

The author is well read in philosophy, and the article (what I read in the first 1/4 or so) is a work of philosophy. I have a minor degree in philosophy. To me it is interesting and at a good pace. For example the author doesn't descend into shallow made up lingo, they aren't too formal or abstract, the ideas are organized into sections, there's a development of the ideas, there's poetic illustrations interleaved with stories, etc. I liked some of the themes of taking responsibility and venturing into the unknown. EDIT: I read the rest. The spiritualizing and financial stuff is a bit clumsy. Mainly from lack of context. Based on this writing alone, the author could be anywhere on the spectrum from absolutely insane to level-headed trying to focus on spirituality qua creative pursuits. I also spot another lack of context in the audience being considered responsible elite, meanwhile belief in bountiful surplus and the audience needing more materials. I guess he may have a different article regarding "non elites" and the bountiful surplus, or maybe he believes the bountiful surplus is only for the elites. All in all interesting and kinda lukewarm, if only because possible craziness hides behind ambiguity.