[Platt]
I thought you were against selfishness. But if there is no self, how can that
be?

[Arlo]
I'm not sure what I have to say to get it through to you, Platt. The "self" has
real, pragmatic value. And overattachment to this value, just as
underattachment to it, has low-quality consequences.

[Arlo had said]
Sounds like Pirsig to me. Maybe it would to you too if you took the time to
read and understand ZMM.

[Platt]
Arrogance at its height. 

[Arlo]
Actually, not at all. I expressed a fairly common point from ZMM. You said
"sounds like Idealism to me". Pirsig directly addresses this in ZMM. If you had
read and understood the book, you would not have made such a telling comment.

[Platt]
Absolutely. You  should write "the pattern included the flesh and blood of 
Chris" a hundred times on the blackboard. That was a integral part of Chris's
self -- no illusion whatsoever. 

[Arlo]
I'm sorry, when did I say biological patterns are illusions?

[Platt]
Nor was the larger pattern an illusion. Pirsig identified, recognized it, felt
it in his heart and soul. To him it was real. 

[Arlo]
Yes... real, pragmatic value. Thank you.

[Platt]
No. Memories unique to self may be illusory to others. To the self they are 
real. 

[Arlo]
So whether something is "real" or something is "illusion" can be different to
different people? I thought "real" meant "real". In this case, you'd be better
off saying its all "illusion", but one person's illusions may hold for value
for them than for others. I'd encourage you to think through where you are
going with this before responding.

[Platt]
If the memory is exclusively yours, it is real to you. To others that you
describe it to, it's probably an illusion unless they were there at the time to
verify it.

[Arlo]
Yeah, if I were you I'd step back and think through the logic of this. Are you
sure you want to suggest that something can be an "illusion" for me, but be
"real" for you?

This makes sense, oddly, if you accept what I've been saying, that its real,
pragmatic value NOT some existential being. For me, I could easily say that my
memory holds real, pragmatic value for me, but likely little for you. No
contradiction. MOQish. For you, you'd have to argue how something can be real,
in the sense of having some existential being apart from pragmatic value, for
one person but not-real for another.

[Platt]
But since you don't believe you exist, the whole question is mute. 

[Arlo]
Which is just more bullshit, or you aren't reading my posts, or you think inane
rhetoric is the way to handle this. Not sure which, but... the "self" exists as
real, pragmatic value. It is a "thought", one that hold great pragmatic value
and allows quite drastically different activity than without. The self is a
"concept". A valuable one (to a degree). 

[Platt]
Are you really suggesting that all intellectual patterns are illusions? 

[Arlo]
I'm actually getting pretty tired of this continued distortion. Intellectual
patterns are patterns of intellectual VALUE. They are real in their pragmatic
effect and usefulness. But they are also illusions, reflections of experience.
Dan has very eloquently explained this.

[Platt]
How can part of you continue to by real when you believe you (self) to be an
illusion?

[Arlo]
The "part of me that continues to be real" (horrible language from a MOQer,
btw) is the memories valued by others. The self is an illusion in that we are
deluded into thinking it is more than a thought, a concept, but when we examine
this we see it has no reality apart from its pragmatic value.

[Platt]
Pragmatic value to who? The "self." 

[Arlo]
Yes. I am the figment of my own imagination. I create myself out of value, and
then convince myself I preceded that value, that is the illusion.

[Platt]
What about giving a platform to the president of Iran?

[Arlo]
I have no problem giving the platform to anyone who wants to make a peaceful
statement. The president of Iran, the Minute Men, Ann Coulter, Michael Moore.

But this is in many ways like pissing about Cuba while doing business with
China. Its all well and good to make symbolic gestures, like banning the
Iranian President, but when our biggest trading partner is also one of the
leaders in world human rights violations, I tend to see it all as some
ridiculous party-game, and the Trumpet Wurlitzers of talk-radio have convinced
me that this is just another empty issue, something to rile and provoke the
masses into seeing that "great Liberal evil".  Which is all you really want to
do too.

[Platt]
My how you exaggerate. By law, health care in this country is available to 
everyone.

[Arlo]
Talk-radio myth.

[Platt]
The poor dying off for because of policy of social Darwinism is a nothing but a
fear-mongering illusion, similar to that other liberal shibboleth, human-caused
global warming.

[Arlo]
Gee, if everyone is already seeing a doctor, and getting adequate health care,
then I stand corrected. 

[Platt]
There you go again. You really are hung up on talk radio aren't you? How do 
you explain its popularity? 

[Arlo]
Fear sells. Pandering to xenophobic fear sells. Tell people its a "culture
war", and its those evil secular progressives against the true and noble
religious traditionalists. 

[Platt]
How do you explain that attempts by libs to be competitive are complete
failures? 

[Arlo]
Its a difference in the media people seek their information from. Radio, as was
well documented in information studies since the forties, is a great medium for
conveying emotion, but it lacks the ability to carry and fasciliate deep
thinking. Books, print media, is still the best media we have for conveying
complicated information and a depth of understanding. Given that the "blue"
states are the ones with the highest per capita book sales, I'd say that the
plain answer is that "liberals" tend to get their news from information-rich
text sources, while "conservatives" tend to get their news from
information-light but emotionally-charged audio.

[Platt]
Would you like to ban conservative talk radio?

[Arlo]
Haven't I already said I listen to it almost every day? Why would I want to ban
it? It's quite entertaining.

[Platt]
Anyway, all you do is parrot the ridiculous and embarrassing crap coming out of
moveon-org and other radical left-wing blogs. 

[Arlo]
Another moveon.org squalk! Good work! And oddly I heard O'Reilly mention
"left-wing blogs" today. You are a very good parrot!



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/

Reply via email to