Well I don't want to get into the merits or faults of this article or author, but it is clear to me that he is proposing an outlook that amounts to dualism.
Okay, there are a couple of things that spring to mind here.
1. Nondualism (with a small 'd') simply means not-two or not multiple. This sense/understanding points to the fact that even now as you read this there is only a 'singularity' (for want of a word) at play. There is not Source and a me or Spirit and a me or God and a me - there is simply Spirit/God/Reality at play. When we hear a term like 'separation', it simply refers to a sense of separation from the cosmos/Source/Reality etc. But the thing is, no one has ever experienced separation - they experience a sense
of separation. To experience separation would entail actually being separate from Source/Reality/God. Yet nothing is or ever was separate from, independent of, other than, an expression, effect or product of Source.
What we experience is a sense
of separation - and this delusion occurs because Reality presents as individuation, variation and differentiation at every turn. Reinforced by our conditioning, thought and language from a very early age, we mistake this seamless presentation of differentiation for a collection of fixed, enduring, independent objects. But there are no such self-existing things. If we pay special (present) attention we might grasp that there is simply this… and now this…. expressing and modulating as the apparently
separate forms of experience.
I do get your point about some forms of neo-advaita. If that's where your criticism lies, I have no disagreement with that.
2. It's funny that you mention Greg Goode, I too had correspondence with him about ten years ago. You're right, he's a good guy, but his insistence on metaphysical idealism was ultimately off-putting for me.
But something he said to me really stuck. He said (something along these lines) that phenomenal problems require phenomenal solutions. By this he means that looking to spiritual teachings to cure phenomenal problems can never be ultimately successful. I agree. Spiritual insights can change our relationship to our problems but in most cases a phenomenal solution is the best course to take - for instance if you have a deep psychological issue then there is no harm going to see a therapist - it would be an error to cling to the hope that some notion of enlightenment might just make all your problems dissolve.
Like yourself I have health issues (I'm sure that everyone here has phenomenal issues of some kind - and if you don't right now, you will.) It's the way the life of the organism has progressed - mainly genetic with some lifestyle factors of the past contributing. That's just how things are - I do what I can to deal with it but understand that it's the play of nature taking its course. I don't see that there has to be a 'why' in this.
Apart from the projects that we involve ourselves in, I don't see that humans have a purpose any more than dogs or cats do (I don't actually think that we are any more special than them - just more complex, creative and devious
.) If there is a purpose or meaning to existence I suspect that it's at a level far deeper than we can currently understand.
Despite our obvious differences over certain issues I sense your genuineness and it's always nice to chat with you.