genealogical note on my project’s beginning

---

There’s so much I want to cover, I thought I might easily determine where to begin. But themes already raised in a few postings about (and to) evolving@ result in over 30 topics! just for my sense of beginning.

So, I got the evolving@ topics sequenced, but then fell victim to an overwhelming need to go through all seven years of my postings on Habermas (to both the Spoon Collective—now dead—and to the Yahoo! group) in order to synthesize my views, not so much for a sense of integrated perspective on Habermas, but for an integrated sense of “Gary” as that dialogue role or discursant relativized to Habermasian issues—my own perspective relative to that extended dialogue with others on Habermas. In other words: to clarify that discursive dialogue role apart from and with Habermas (defending him) as a singular identity—the apart-and-with as integrated conceptual design—relative to those themes, views, responses to others, and influence by others.

I can do that!: a conceptual synthesis of a seven-year dialogue.
In the swim of it now, it’s a very instructive experience: facing the reality of myself as textual other over seven years, for I hadn’t much looked at any postings beyond the week or so of each, relative to response to others (and many I never saw again after posting). There are hundreds of pages (not counting any of the short responses!) to organize thematically before really beginning “the evolving project,” in order to formulate the post(??)-Habermasian discursive stance—that I earlier so felt had already resulted that I begun the evolving@ group (which hasn’t turned out to seem apt, thus “the evolving project” with that evolving@ address in hibernation, to be used as an update-notice medium for the project).

...which is to say I’m not yet really beginning now, though I’m massively into the construction of It All. That&rsquos really to be a major project, which I’m going to do exactly the way I want.

It’s not going to be limited by the rubric of “evolving,” though that word captures my project better than any other single word. This is to be about writing to Jürgen Habermas from my own perspective; on individualism, the ends of history—whatever’s on my mind: leading current events; who needs theory; the nature of discursive inquiry; taking lifeworldliness to heart; evolving as such; social evolution; conceptuality as such; narratibility; comity; bipartisanship; dialectic; Habermas’s conceptual architecture (his philosophical hermeneutic); modernization—and tens of other “things,” for starters.

---