OK Platt, if you want to take this one point to its "ad absurdum" conclusion.
(1) You didn't say that. That's a lie. (2) If you had - it mght be true, but you changed what you had said for rhetorical purposes to mis-represent what Arlo had said in response to what you had actually said. That's a deception. (3) Arlo disagreed with what you had actually said. He disagreed with your "neo-con version" of Pirsig, but didn't say anything like you were wrong to say "intellectual level is better, more moral than the social". That's another lie. Honesty is not your strong point, is it Platt ? Ian On 2/21/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Platt > > > > "said the intellectual was better, more moral > > than the social level. Arlo said I was wrong." > > > > That is patently a lie. > > What is? That intellect was better, more moral than the social level? Or that > Arlo said I was wrong? > > Clarity is not your strong point. > > > As I say I'm done, and I think Arlo is too. > > One can only hope. > > > > On 2/21/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Quoting ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > Platt, > > > > > > > > Pack it in you imbecile. Where did Arlo ever say > > > > "Lower and higher forms of life are equal." ? > > > > > > Ian: Give it up you jerk. I said the intellectual was better, more moral > > > than the social level. Arlo said I was wrong. So I quoted Pirsig to the > > contrary. > > > Where's your brain? > > > > > > > YOU ARE IGNORANT by definition, and in a very long-lived static kind of > > > > way > > too. > > > > What is the point of anyone responding to you ? > > > > That was fun (not). > > > > Ian > > > > PS having already questioned Arlo and others for even bothering to > > > > debate with you, normal service will be resumed, after half a day's > > > > aberration. > > > > > > You keep promising. Your promises are as good as your intelligence. > > > > > > > On 2/21/08, Platt Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > [Platt] > > > > > > The intellectual (individual) level is better than the social > > > > > > (collective) level. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Arlo] > > > > > > I'm not talking about Platt's neocon MOQ, nor do I have any desire > > > > > > to, I'm talking about Pirsig's. > > > > > > > > > > Let's talk Pirsig's MOQ: > > > > > > > > > > "But what he saw at this point was a social pattern of -values, a > > > > > film, > > > > > devouring an intellectual pattern of values, his book. It would be a > > > > > lower > > > > > form of life feeding upon a higher form of life. As such it would be > > > > > immoral. And that's exactly how it felt: immoral." (Lila, 20). > > > > > > > > > > For Arlo, lower and higher forms of life are equal. Comical. > > > > > > > > > > > [Platt] > > > > > > If all was balanced, there would be no evolution. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Arlo] > > > > > > Wrong. It is balance (not stasis) that allows evolution. Without it, > > > > > > new directions would not latch on one hand, and on the other there > > > > > > would be no new directions. > > > > > > > > > > Balance implies stasis -- physical equilibrium. > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > 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/ > 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/
