I certainly agree. This is a well-done and even-handed article. I have underlined that portion of the quotation which is so amply demonstrated by the posters here at FR.
The author has included, in the original, an interesting schematic diagram just below the title "The Interpretive Process" (which didn't come through in the FR posting above) in which he shows his understanding of the cyclicality of the interpretive process in which the data received from the reading is 'recycled' into the readers 'presuppositions' and 'preunderstandings'.
This is, of course, true and, indeed, the aim of Bible study -- to bring the meaning of the Scriptures back into our lives. However, this is the part of the process where the 'presuppositions' can become like weeds which consume immediately upon return any response from the teaching of the Bible, thereby growing, in turn, ever stronger and more voracious at the expense of any further study. Eventually, they are so pervasive and so hardy that they entirely 'choke out' any feedback from the study. So, the students conclude that their presupposition is now complete and they have no further need to focus on the 'raw material' since they now have the more sophisticated product.
As I suggested in another post last night, the ultimate risk is that demonstrated by so many here: that this 'short-circuiting' of the study process causes the 'study' process to become a desire to study one's own presuppositions and use the Bible as simply a source of (supposedly) disconnected 'proof-texts' which can be used independent of each other and their context to 'support' the presuppositions. As this process procedes over time, the subject abandons any pretense of 'Bible study' and engages every more intensely in 'presupposition study'.
What are the 'warning signs' of this conversion from 'Bible Study' to 'presupposition study'? I think several that we often see here present themselves.
Changing the Focus
We see the focus becomes, not a passage of Scripture, but some convenient topical summary of the presupposition. For example, we see here at FR repeatedly that the 'discussion' is begun with the posting of some convenient summary of the presupposition -- the suggested outcome, if you will, of the Bible study. Then the poster says something like "let the fun begin."
Unfortunately, this process is almost doomed from the start. The entire focus is on the presupposition -- whatever its content -- and not on the underlying evidence.
The Expectation of Presuppositional Testing
After this process is reepeated a few times from various points of view, the resident posters are 'trained' in all the wrong ways to respond, much like dogs who are repeatedly treated to a single large piece of meat at feeding time become 'trained' to fight over it. There is the expectation that the post will treated to the hypercritical presuppositional -- not Biblical -- testing. Indeed the nature of the presuppositional postings almost precludes Biblical testing for the reasons set out below.
Misuse of Evidence and Evidentiary Techniques
Indeed this misplaced focus and concommitant expectation of further misplace focus begins to corrupt the entire use of Biblical evidence. Instead of the dispassionate review of the Biblical record, we see the accumulation and citation of long lists of 'proof-texts'. Almost always these are limited to mere verses or even parts of verses (selected because they contain some 'key' word or phrase) lest the context of a larger passage undermine the 'utility' of the verse for it support of the presupposition. Since these 'proof-texts' are gathered hither and yon for this limited purpose, they make no sense other than as part of a list.
Gradually, over perhaps years, people who once may have studied the Bible turn it into a 'book of lists' organized by a concordance or a search engine. It no longer has anything to 'teach', merely a function to 'support' pre-existing 'pre-understandings' and presuppositions.
This loss is egregious. Now the entire process is out of control, spinning ever more toward embittered reinforcement of these pre-existing presuppositions. Lists are no longer even devised; they are adopted from prior defenders. These lists of much-abused Scripture verses are lobbed back and forth in what now passes for a Bible-based discussion. Needless to say, it casts little credit on the Scriptures or upon the Lord of the Scriptures.
What Can Be Done?
I believe the 'cure' for this biblically destructive disease is equal parts of intellectual humility and revised technique. The humility comes with the recognition that, had the Lord felt that systematic presentation of presuppositions a more accurate way of ordering Truth, He could readily have done so. He did not. Therefore, there must be something superior -- not almost as good or subject to improvement, but superior -- in the presentation of Truth in the Scriptures over the organization of presuppositions.
The changes in technique ought to include: (1) a collective refusal to perpetuate the focus on presuppositional, topical summaries of Scripture, (2) a collective insistence that citation of single verses, partial sentences or even, amazingly, half verses ought to be not only ignored but condemned as abuse, and (3) a new insistence that only a focus on the Scriptures themselves and not on anyone else's 'results' has value for us. This latter point is probably not true but useful nonetheless. For example, we know that others' experiences or insights are often valuable, but we have now seen firsthand how destructive a continued focus on such is to our appreciation of the greatest intellectual gift which has been given to mankind -- the very Word of God.
As to your solutions. You use the word collective three times, a concept despised and which does not seem possible on this forum. My suggestion would be to follow the authors advise. Instead of posting articles by men we post selected Bible passages and then employ the authors template; background information,context, culture,form of literature, etc, and proceed with discussion based on those parameters. Of course, it may not be as exciting as the puerile threads now, but as xcins showed, there will always be debate.