Mary said: On one side are arrayed the forces of DMB, Horse, Andre, Steve and others who are the equivalent of MoQ Fundamentalists. ...On the other side are arrayed the forces of Bo, Marsha, myself, and Platt, who take a more, dare I say, liberal interpretation.
dmb says: A more liberal interpretaton? That's funny. What I see on Bo's side is the maintenance of belief in the face of good reasoning and solid evidence against that belief. If that's not the fundamentalist style of mind, nothing is. Mary said:I have asked these questions so many times without getting any answers that I hesitate to ask them again, but this is the crux of the matter. If you are going to say that the Intellectual Level is more than "just SOM", I need ONE example. dmb say: I provided a whole bunch of examples. I quoted a bunch of philosophers saying they reject SOM. How does that NOT count as conclusive evidence? See, I think tempers flare up in this discussion because the people presenting the evidence are frustrated that you don't even see that the evidence is evidence. How about this? As I said recently, I strongly suspect that part of the problem is a misconception of what SOM is. (Steve added some good points on this subject.) So how about if you tell me what you think it is. I know what I think it is and of course I think my counter examples have already answered your question. So I'm trying to figure out why you think they aren't counter examples. I haven't lost my temper over it to the extent that I feel the need to use harsh language on you, but I do find it quite frustrating. It's hard to understand why you're not seeing it because it's so obvious to me. Like the Pirsig quotes. Your view baffles me. Pirsig was very generous and polite about it, but I really don't see how a reasonable person could construe his comments as anything other that a rejection of Bo's theory. Oh, and one more thing. Nobody is saying that Pirsig's word is gospel, but c'mon. He is the author of the MOQ. A reasonable person would not dismiss his opinion of the MOQ or the interpretations of it. If the debate is about the structure and meaning of the MOQ, Pirsig's words are are best evidence anyone can have. If the debate is about the truth and value of the MOQ relative to other perspectives, Pirsig's words hardly count as evidence at all. Big difference, you know? _________________________________________________________________ The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3 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/md/archives.html
