Talk:The Matter with Things
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Matter with Things article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Book title
editThere are conflicting versions of the title, with some capitalising "With" and some (including the author and copyright holder, Iain McGilchrist) using a lowercase "with" (and also some inconsistency).
Rules about things like prepositions and word length vary, as this site's "calculator" shows.
I've provisionally opted for the lowercase "with". Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 12:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Criticism Section
edit@Esowteric It occurs to me that the reception section is getting very big, which seems to take the shine off some of the valid criticisms of this book. Perhaps its worth adding a separate criticism section?
Halfoftheotherteam (talk) 14:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that sounds like a good idea, though some of the reviews say both positive and negative things about McGilchrist's work.
- As for my own input in that process, I'm currently 30,000 words into the first draft of a writing project, and right now I have little spare time or free head space. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 15:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- thanks. i think the very balanced reviews should remain in reception, wihle the ones with broader criticism should appear in different section. i don't know review texts as well as you so please adjust if you think my decision is off. Halfoftheotherteam (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. That looks good. Much appreciated. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 15:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Invalid criticism
editThe critical review cited here from Ellis is too extreme to be fair on this significant work. And given the unnotability of the 'Middle Way' society I'd strongly suggest leaving this out of the article. Too extreme an ending by a long way. Mjacoby (talk) 01:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)