Hello everyone >From: "Platt Holden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [MD] subject / object logic >Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 20:51:25 -0500 > >Hi Dan, > > > >[Discussion picks up here] > > > > > >[Platt] > > >Yes, and perhaps Pirsig should have been more specific when he wrote >"the > > >universe of distinguishable things." > > > > Dan: > > Perhaps, though I have no problem understanding what he means within the > > context that he's set up. > >OK > > > > > Dan: > > > > We could but it might lead to more confusion than if we simply >called > > >atoms > > > > and aardvarks static quality patterns of value. > > > >Platt: > > >Yes, but if we did that would anyone know what we were talking about? > > > > Dan: > > They would start by reading LILA. It is a long road to understanding but > > others have blazed a trail to follow. > >I'm sure that even those who understand Lila wouldn't get very far in >conversations between themselves if they referred to everything as >patterns of values. "What will you have to drink?" "I'd like a pattern of >value if you have one."
No, I'll just have any old thing. > > > >Platt: > > >To > > >name static patterns of value seems essential for clarity and > > >understanding, justifying Pirsig's use of names for such patterns > > >throughout Lila whether it be a "stove," a "boat" or "Phaedrus" >himself. . > > > > Dan: > > Well yes. I didn't say anything about not naming static quality patterns >of > > value to distinguish them from each other. I assumed that what we're >talking > > about is not in the naming so much as it is in the generalized nature of > > reality. > >I think the naming and the patterns go together in talking about what we >believe to be the general nature of reality. Otherwise, I guess we would >just stare at one another. You miss my point. A rose is a rose. It would still smell as sweet by any other name. It is not about names. > >(skip) > > > >Platt: > > >I agree with Pirsig's view. But nowhere does he suggest by changing the > > >vocabulary that a glass of water becomes an illusion. "The data are the > > >same." > > > > Dan: > > "No one has ever seen substance and no one ever will." (LILA) > >Substance, no. A glass of water, yes. A glass of water is not a substance. Good. Now we're getting somewhere. A glass of water that gives the illusion of substance. > > > Dan comments: > > If no one has ever seen substance then what are we seeing if not >illusion of > > substance? > >We are seeing what we name "a glass of water." An illusion of substance, yes. Not substance, as you have already agreed. > > > > > Dan comments: > > > > > > > > So instead of asking of people are real or figments of imagination, >it > > >seems > > > > better to ask: do we value people? The answer is yes. To think in >terms > > >of > > > > value instead of substance doesn't change people yet it changes our > > > > perception of people. > > > > > >Do we value people? In general, yes. But I don't value people who are > > >dedicated to killing me or my family. So it would be dangerous to give > > >blanket value approval to every one. > > > > Dan: > > Oddly enough, I don't know of anyone who is dedicated to killing me and >my > > family so I guess I felt safe making that blanket generalization. When I > > sold my home of 17 years the buyers made me put locks on the doors as >prior > > to that I never felt the need. What if someone stopped by and I wasn't >home > > and they needed to use the bathroom or the phone or something? How would > > they get in if they found the doors locked? > > > > Do you really feel someone is out to kill you? Do you know who it is? >How do > > you protect yourself? Do you sleep with a gun under your pillow? I'm >sorry. > > It all sounds quite scary and quite foreign to me and I feel bad that >anyone > > would have live with something like that hanging over their heads. > >Going back to my childhood there were Germans and Japanese out to kill me. >Then it was the North Koreans and Chinese. Then it was Russia and the Viet >Cong. Now it is al Qaeda and Islamic fascists. Oh, wait... you neglected to mention those pesky Mexican immigrants (where is that fence anyway?) and those nasty nappy-headed inner city blacks. Oh, and don't forget those cowardly French pukes (the bastards) who wouldn't even back us up when we went and invaded a sovereign country. And don't even get me started on that Cuban mf'er and his stinking beard. And what about that goofball they elected in Venezuela causing all the commotion and calling our strong leader a devil. What balls. Send in the CIA and their Blackwater pals and see who has the last laugh, that's what I say. >Thanks to strong leadership You mean the war criminals and cronies we have in charge of our great nation? Wake up! >and the sacrifices of millions of other Americans I am still alive. If you consider living in fear of your life to be alive... I don't. >I get >down on my knees every night and thank God for those leaders and those who >died to preserve my life and my freedom. So yes, there were plenty of >people out to kill me and my family over the years and some who still do. >Sorry, but I don't value them in the least. We need to cultivate compassion, imo, not hatred. Someone once said to love one another. Remember? I think you enjoy pushing people's buttons and so hold out hope you aren't as mean-spirited as you seem. Thank you for the discussion. I have nothing else of substance to add. Dan Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
