I tried to get into Philip McShane's comment on my go at a dialectic of interpretations of Sankara, available at Paul Allen's Lonergan Website blog.
McShane has, I think, very trenchant things to say. One useful thing I picked up even on my extremely cursory scroll down: my need to make a personal shift from description to explanation, and the need to lift merely descriptive interpretations like that of Radhakrishnan into a properly explanatory context before even thinking of putting it through dialectic... McShane quotes from my text: "Radhakrishnan wants to be both realist and empirical..." and comments: but what does Radhakrishnan mean by 'realist' here? Is he able to utter that word with anything of the complexity of a Lonergan who has mastered the theory of relations?
Absolutely. That is a way ahead.