[Ron] That's the trouble your head is buried in identity, I get it! you have stomped a mud hole in identity and walked it dry.
[Arlo] Glad to see my civility is being wasted. Is this the level of dialogue you want to have, Ron? [Ron] so lets leave it be for a moment and look at ethics. [Arlo] Yes, by all means, let's look at ethics. [Ron] The beef is that you seem to think the many selves absolves one of any sort of responsibility for actions and words simply because it can not be attributed to a singular self. [Arlo] Can you point out anywhere where anything I've said would show that I "seem to think this"? Anywhere? Anywhere at all... Indeed, in several posts I've said the opposite, including this latest one. So I ask, who's head is it that's stuck in a mud puddle? [Ron] You would make a great defense attorney; You keep citing the use s/o grammar and language as proof of our insistence of a singular self when we understand the technical aspect of what you are saying, it's the ETHICIAL aspect we are harping on which you keep ignoring in redundant glee. [Arlo] How can I be ignoring it if I've responded to it many times, including days ago when the thread topic began? "Redundant glee?" Well, if I'd make a good defense attorney, might I suggest you're showing the skills so adored in talk radio. So do you want to to tell me (1) what I've said that you disagree with, (2) what you offer instead, and (3) point out where anything I've said whatsoever indicates I believe the plurality of selves absolves social responsibility? Really, Ron, because you've not done any of that. You're posts are now just empty accusations and insinuations about stuff I've not only NOT said, but yesterday said the opposite. [Ron] In our society Aliases are attributed to nare-do-wells. Usually one is hiding behind an alias. They are the M.O. of Fugitives, criminals and terrorists no? [Arlo] "Arlo" and "Ron" are aliases. Whether we are "nare-do-wells" I can't say. What you are talking about is not the fact that all our selves are avatars, but that some people deliberately deceive others with the intent to harm. This has nothing to do with the nature of the selves, and nothing to do with your "self" being any more real that theirs. What it has to do with is malicious intent. And I've already said that social law adheres to the illusion of "one body, one self", a necessary law at this point in our social evolution. [Ron] I'm not talking about pseudonym's or pen names I'm talking alter egos and false identities. They are typically the earmark of con artists and thieves. [Arlo] "Arlo" is an alter ego. So is "Ron". There is no "ego-prime" for which can have "alter egos" from. You don't have one that pretends to be many. You have many. They are the norm for everyone, at all times, not "con artists" and "thieves". That's like saying because bank robbers drive a getaway car that all cars all used for criminal purposes. [Ron] Warcraft is just fine in the world of Warcraft, everybody gets it and everyone agrees to it who gets involved with it. But here we do not have a choice and consequently some of us here do not TRUST it. [Arlo] Yeah, you've been burned so you want the comfort of an illusion. You want the "one real person" to be here, since that makes you feel better. Great. Okay. You got me. There is one real "Arlo" who just pretends to have other faces elsewhere. You're talking to the one real "Arlo". Does that make you feel better? Thing is, you DO have a choice. The "Ron" you created here is indeed an avatar. As is "Arlo". But you want to cling vehemently to the illusion that they are "real", or "more real", than other selves we have. Or that we all have one real self who only creates other pretend-selves to deceive and harm others. Your "trust" issue, Ron, won't be satiated by blindly adhering to an illusion. You need stop conflating your own betrayal with self-plurality and realize the intent to deceive or harm has nothing to do with the fact that we are all, always, an avatar and never more (or less). It had to do with malicious intent. And might I say that even those who cling to "one body, one self" can bring harm to others. [Ron] THIS forum concerns THIS society and part of the social continuity we value depends upon those social values which include honesty and integrity. [Arlo] Honesty and integrity? Oh right, I'm against those as well. When have I suggested that dishonesty or disintegrity are "okay"? Can you give me an example of something people in this forum should be "honest" about? Let me give you a real example. You are familiar with the case in academia where an author wrong a deliberately ridiculous article using buzzwords and jargon just to see if something absurd would be accepted for publication if it contained the right words. It was. In this case, the author used deceit to prove what he felt was a weakness in the system. Some lauded it, others considered it malicious. When Ant held the MOQ Conference, one of the list's former contributors took it upon himself to "rehash" this by doing the same thing to Ant. He submitted and delivered a paper he wrote to demonstrate what he felt were the absurdities and cultishness of the MOQ. He then used comments by Pirsig about this paper to "prove" how absurd the MOQ is. If you read the archives, you'll see that while some here supported this, or though we should learn from it, I was one of the vocal crowd who felt this act of maliciousness deserved no credit for anything, and fully supported the continued ban on this person from contributing here (he has gotten back in at times under various pseudonyms). Read the archives and see who spoke in support of this deceit and who spoke against it. You may be surprised. So before you accuse me of relying on "avatars" to absolve responsibility, or that somehow what I am saying shrugs off honesty and integrity, you better get the facts. [Ron] What I perceive when you exert the illusionary identity theme is that you support an "anything goes" atmosphere and why I get abit cranky about it. [Arlo] I get the feeling I could write a billion posts denouncing this and yet you'd still "perceive" this in my words. [Ron] Arlo may be your Avatar in this society, but that's THIS society. Using that Avatar, I can physically track you down, research your social history, follow your every move and learn about your family tree. [Arlo] Yes you can. But that's because I deliberately make visible a thread of continuity that I want to be seen, because this avatar and my work avatar share much overlap. [Ron] There you may ponder as Bubba is reaming you, is he screwing Arlos ass? or is he merely screwing an illusion, which Arlo will be traumatized? the biker Arlo? the Hot pepper Arlo? [Arlo] Of course we are organic beings. Of course pain on the body will be realized by all selves inhabiting this body. But what happens to the body does not happen to the self. You want to make this comical with allusions to anal rape, be my guest, but Bubba can rape my ass all he wants yet he still won't be raping "me". Sure, it'll hurt. Sure, my body will suffer physically. But the "selves" are strong enough to know it is not them who are being abused. Consider, if you will, the difference between rape and consensual tantric sex. One involves only the body, the other the mind. Would you tell a rape victim "she has had sex"? I wouldn't. I'd say her body has been raped, but "sex" is something that has to involve the self. Sure, she will suffer physically (and emotionally), but healing begins when she realizes that the act perpetrated on her body was not perpetrated on "her". [Ron] Point is, pragmatically, I am quite aware honesty is a social convention but it is not "merely" it IS one of the core values that constitute the "self" as understood in our society which ultimately IS the self in our society for society creates and defines "self" therefore it is a "real" value and not some made up rule that is inconsequential to "reality". [Arlo] Social law protects people from deceit and malicious intent. And to do so it passes "laws" that codify illusions into seemingly "real" things. I am not so concerned with your use of "honesty", as I understand it to be very S/O laden. I'd say a better value is "And it harm none, do what you will". But if you give me some examples of things we should be "honest" about, maybe that'll help. Our legal names? Our body's shape? Our geographic location? Or who we feel ourselves to be? Am I being dishonest with my biker friends because they don't know my legal name? Am I being dishonest in Warcraft because my physical body sitting at the keyboard is male? Give me something concrete here, and let's talk specifics. 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/
