Walsh's "An integral view of wisdom"

IPS forum is looking at the 2013 ITC conference papers and the above titled by Roger Walsh is one of them (here). Neelesh writes the initial post and asks at the end: "On page 4 the paper claims that trans-conceptual wisdom (Jnana) is radically and incommensurately distinct from wisdom derived from conceptual understanding? I can understand ‘radically’, but not ‘incommensurately’." My response:

This is more easily understood in light of Walsh being a kennilinguist and adopting wholesale the Lingam's notion of a radical and dualistic metaphysical distinction between (Causal) ultimate and relative ontological domains and forms of knowledge. E.g., see here. Also see the Batchelor thread for a more in-depth study of this phenomenon via Buddhism.