To me, the reason to write about [Buckminster] Fuller is because I think that he has ideas that are incredibly pertinent.

I was interested first of all in trying to capture this myth that was always changing and to create some sort of a master story, some version of the myth that resonated with me, since I could have taken more or less any detail that I wanted or the opposite and try to put that down on the page in a way that I could express from that outset for myself and for our readers what it was that was so magical about [Buckminster] Fuller's way of putting together the world.

I think that [Buckminster] Fuller certainly would have found a way in which to be funded by Google in a way that he was funded by the Marine Corps and everybody else. He would have remained obstinately his own creature.

I do not think that technology is our salvation.

We clearly recognize the need for something that is what [Buckminster Fuller] represents and therefore it becomes really useful and really interesting to look at the ways in which world changing today totally misses everything that was valuable.

...there's no reason why scholarship can't be as seriously playful as bubble-blowing.

I call myself an experimental philosopher which is as ambiguous a term as comprehensive anticipatory design scientist.