> Could this be translated from academic jargon into English? What is a
> "problematic (but very defensible) ontological dualism"?
I couldn't be sure what it means without reading the whole paper, but "ontological dualism" in general is a metaphysical view which says that all beings belong to two basic types which cannot be reduced to one -- for example, mind and body or spirit and matter. What particular dualism this author is pointing to I couldn't possibly tell without more context. If I could see the context, I might venture an explanation.
The point about these academic writings with fancy terminology is that they are not written for the benefit of readers who have not learned the particular jargon of the field in question, so it is not surprising if the general public cannot understand them. There is a horde of popularizers around who eventually get at least some of this jargon translated into ordinary language, though there is always some loss in the translation, of course.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________ In my religion there would be no exclusive doctrine; all would be love, poetry and doubt. -- Cyril Connoll (The Unquiet Grave)