Score? Well, I'm too much the gentleman to try and quantify a lady, but I gotta say Marsha that Andre is kickin' butt these days.
In my oh so humble opinion, of course. John On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:04 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 23, 2010, at 9:05 AM, Andre Broersen wrote: > > > Marsha to Andre: > > > > What kind of pattern is 'shaming'? > > > > Andre: > > I did not use the expression 'shaming'. I used the noun 'shame'. This is > an intellectual concept invented through SOM experience to designate an > action that brings shame/dishonor upon someone.. > > Andre, the evangelist? Who has appointed you? > > > > I used it as applying (both ways) to Bodvar and Platt by their suggestion > that THEIR (intellectual) interpretation of the MOQ is better than Mr. > Pirsig's...a suggestion which has been described by Mr. Pirsig as > 'undermining' the MOQ. I therefore pointed to their challenging Mr. Pirsig's > 'intellectual capacity' (as well as his intellectual integrity). > > > Marsha: > I find both Bo and Platt exhibit great respect for Mr. Pirsig's > intellectual capacity and achievement. I believe they have a great > understanding of the MoQ. - You are insisting on one truth when RMP has > clearly stated that the MoQ supports multiple truths, and that philosophical > statements about Quality(DQ/sq) and be both true and false. > > > > > > I also put it in terms of the Cleveland Harbour Effect...meaning: you > only see what you are looking for. We both know what glasses these two > gentlemen have on and what they have to lose when they have to forgo their > intellectual conviction heeding arguments to the contrary ......... A > massive loss of (social)reputation...a form of dishonor...a massive > reorganising of their static patterns. But they have too much to > lose...socially speaking... . (and perhaps intellectually: they may get the > idea that they will fall of the edge of the earth...intellectually > speaking). > > Marsha: > I certainly do not know what glasses anyone wears. That seems like an > egotistical, absurd statement. There are cultural glasses, indeed, but we > act also very dependent on individual experience: DQ and individual static > patterns of life history. > > > "The reason there is a difference between individual evaluations of quality > is that although Dynamic Quality is a constant, these static patterns are > different for everyone because each person has a different static pattern > of > life history. Both the Dynamic Quality and the static patterns influence > his > final judgment. That is why there is some uniformity among individual value > judgments but not complete uniformity." > (RMP, SODV) > > I think your intellectual glasses may have slipped off your nose. Have > your pants slipped too, because I'm sensing a clueless, social ass? > > > > In SOM terms, one would have a clash between reputations and > authority...and ego's, end of story! And both camps unsatisfied.( have you > noticed lately that Bodvar DOES consider himself a 'saint'?!) > > Maybe you spent too many summers at bible camp? I consider Bo defending > the better MoQ explanation. > > > > > But the MOQ says that (Bodvar's and Platt's) lower pattern of > intellectual value is trying to dominate a higher intellectual pattern of > value and therefore it is considered an immoral action. > > Your shaming point-of-view and tactics speak for themselves. And calling > another person 'immoral' is another sign of cluelessness. > > > > > Okay, one party satisfied hoping the other party learns. But NO, they > have a (social) reputation to uphold...and sainthood (although I read today > that the Vatican is going to apply more stringent rules to who becomes > what)! This is a further application of brilliant Christian intellectual > patterning, so much supported by Bodvar who is looking forward to the > realization of this... just like the politician Wilders in the Netherlands > who won 24 seats ( one third of parliament)! > > You are presuming that their concern is their social status; it's a > projection. I believe Bo to be completely dedicated to the Quality(DQ/sq). > You references here are all social. I think you must be pulling my leg > with such naive babble. > > > > Australia is fine, but it ain't home, the Netherlands is home but it > ain't mine no more. (freely adapted from Neil Diamond). Following DQ can > leave you up in the air...but ye gotta come down sooner or later. > > If you are truly following DQ you are living in the moment, but I confess I > haven't been recently tested. My life this past decade (plus) has been > mostly peaceful. What troubles I've had have been mostly illusion. I am > sorry if things for you are on the chaotic side. > > > > Sorry to be so long winded about this. > > You are not too long winded, and I do need the challenge, Maybe. > > > > Marsha > > > > > > > > ___ > > > 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 > 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
