Hi Dave T ... thanks for the gumption and Chautauqua references from James ... I can believe it, and for me it just re-inforces the "foundations" of MoQ. Must follow those up.
You said to Bo. "I hope I can open your eyes. Keep an open mind, ..." I wish you luck. I have several dead ends of unfinshed business with Bo. (At the risk of stating the obvious, Dave Buchanan - who has dropped of the forum for a break recently - has been pushing Jamesian "radical empiricism" very hard as a foundation for quality - I think he's right. For me the issue is whether MoQ is any good, solid and useful - not who invented it - ideas evolve.) Regards Ian On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM, David Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9/9/09 2:03 AM, "Bodvar Skutvik" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I have read it all and find it most relevant. An gee Dave, if you could >> bring the discussion to the social level for a while because it is what >> sets the MOQ apart. > > With the biological/social divided firmed up a little the next step in my > mind would be trying to clear up the social just prior to intellectual. But > I have to warn you that when I read this in the "relativity" thread: > > (Bo earlier) >> Anyway this blunder resulted in the Quality/MOQ "meta-metaphysics" >> that overrides the MOQ and is a result from Pirsig's disastrous >> association with James whose view was Pre-conceptual/Conceptual. > > I scrambled for the subscribe button. > > I had been making what I think is my third pass though the 900 page tome > "The Writings of William James-A Comprehensive Edition- Edited by John J > McDermott and feeling philosophical decided to check the discuss archive to > review progress. Low and behold I hear you bashing both Pirsig and James for > screwing up the MoQ. Oh why? Oh why? I just couldn't let it lie. > > As you are aware I believe James' work is foundational to the MoQ and that > an understanding of this is instrumental to its long term success. You > disagree, not just with me, but also RMP on this. I hope I can open your > eyes. Keep an open mind, I will try to be gentle. > > But as you know graphics is my first language, English my second. So I write > slowly and think even slower. So it may take a while. > > As a tease: Are you aware the James discusses in, (What make a Life > Significant) a trip to speak at the original Chautauqua as a vehicle to > discuss what was lacking in life? Or that in another lecture he discusses, > gumption? Surely you would have to admit that the term "gumption" in not > one that commonly comes up in philosophical discussions. Mere coincidence? > Maybe. > > > > Dave > > > > > 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/
