Quoting ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 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.
Say what? That convoluted bit of rhetoric makes no sense. > (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. So my supposed "neo-con version" of Pirsig isn't wrong? Glad to hear it. > 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/
