> [Platt] > What 90% does Platt dismiss? > > [Arlo] > ZMM. Any part of LILA apart from the dozen decontextual quotes you post > over > and over.
Generalities 1. Specifics 0. No value dialogue. > [Platt] > Do you deny that Pirsig describes DQ as a force? > > [Arlo] > He uses this metaphor, sure. But it holds no water if you take him > literally on > that. He describes DQ in LILA as "the ongoing Dynamic edge of experience". > This > synthesizes with the philosophy he develops in ZMM. It synthesizes with > his > "hot stove" analogy and with the amoeba-acid analogy. When you consider > the > entirety of his writings, seeing DQ as an "external force" is hugely > problematic and can't stand at all. The question was, "Do you deny that Pirsig describes DQ as a force? You change the question to "external force." No value dialogue. > [Platt] > When did DQ stop you in your tracks? > > [Arlo] > Each and every moment of every day, the zero-time of ALL experience, > contains > the seeds of uncertainty (DQ is the ongoing edge of experience... ALL > experience, not "some"). Non answer. No value dialogue. > [Platt] > No refusal except in your imagination. > > [Arlo] > I'm sure no one has forgotten, but I can repost the questions to prove > you > wrong. Will do that later. What questions? No value dialogue. > [Platt] > Platt has repeated many times: chance is ignorance; DQ a positive force > for > good. > > [Arlo] > Apples and oranges. "Force for good" is not an alternative for "chance". > Are > you suggesting DQ is "certainty" (as opposed to "chance")? Or that > outcomes are > "controlled" (as opposed to "chance")? Or that outcomes are predetermined > (as > opposed to "chance")? > > "Positive force for good". AKA "Qualigod". Non sequiturs. No value dialogue. > [Platt] > "These patterns can't by themselves perceive or adjust to Dynamic Quality. > Only > a living being can do that." The context does not include plants and > animals. > > [Arlo] > Was there ever a point in time when NOTHING could respond to DQ? If not, > what > responded to DQ before "man"? Say during the Jurassic? Give any example > from > the archeological record of something pre-man that was responding to DQ, > that > that thing can also no longer do. Ignores Chapter 11 of Lila. No value dialogue. > [Platt] > How can Platt reveal what he doesn't have? > > [Arlo] > Coward. Your words speak loudly. Ad hominem attack. No value dialogue. > [Platt] > Platt merely reciprocates your evil ad hominems. > > [Arlo] > Nice try. But wrong. As everyone sees. No supporting evidence. No value dialogue. > [Platt] > Welcome to world of lies, half-truths and unsupported assertions -- a > world > lacking any dialogic value whatsoever. > > [Arlo] > Yes, that describes you to a "T". Infamous "pee-wee" maneuver comes back to bite ass. You've proved my point: no value dialogue whatsoever. Thus, a complete waste of time to respond to any of your posts in the future. . 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/
