Ian,

These are RMP's words.  Listen for yourself.


Marsha  



On Jul 12, 2010, at 8:44 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:

> Oohh, oohh, Nazi's 4 lines in - do I win a prize ?
> 
> So thank Horse, freedom of speech is upheld on MD.
> Ian
> 
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:37 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Arlo,
>> 
>> To paraphrase RMP:  'any culture which permits freedom of speech is morally 
>> superior to any culture which does not.  Because in this Metaphysics of 
>> Quality, intellect is a higher level of evolution, and when a social 
>> organization, whether it's nazis, or communists, or anybody, tries to 
>> prevent this evolution from taking place that is an immoral act, that's an 
>> evil act.  And you see it happening.  Once you understand this, you see it 
>> happening in all sorts of places that you wouldn't expect it normally.'
>> 
>> This is from the 'Church of Reason' section of THE MOQ at OXFORD dvd.  
>> Notice it doesn't state an freedom of speech exemption for the MD List.
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 12, 2010, at 7:54 AM, Arlo Bensinger wrote:
>> 
>>> [Bo]
>>> I hate to the make it personal and would have liked to say "...those who 
>>> have supported the MOQ" because I know that Mary and Platt do defend the 
>>> MOQ. Likewise shame on the hypocrites who - to my great satisfaction - are 
>>> those who don't know the first thing about the MOQ -  Ian and Dan f.ex. - 
>>> from DMB I didn't expect anything else.
>>> 
>>> [Arlo]
>>> I'm taking the liberty to rectify the poor rhetoric and ignorance in this 
>>> short example of "why Bo has nothing relevant to say".
>>> 
>>> I hate to the make it personal and would have liked to say "...those who 
>>> have supported [my interpretation of Pirsig's] MOQ" because I know that 
>>> Mary and Platt do defend [my interpretation of Pirsig's] MOQ. Likewise 
>>> shame on the hypocrites who - to my great satisfaction - are those who 
>>> don't know the first thing about [why my interpretation of the MOQ is 
>>> better than Pirsig's] MOQ -  Ian and Dan f.ex. - from DMB I didn't expect 
>>> anything else.
>>> 
>>> There. Accurate. Rhetorically sound.
>>> 
>>> What Bo has proven here, though, is just what I pointed out the other day, 
>>> the only expenditure here is to claim interpretive legitimacy by claiming 
>>> that there is ONE MOQ, and of this even the author himself is not to be 
>>> trusted to deliver the "strong" interpretation.
>>> 
>>> [Pirsig]
>>> There already is a metaphysics of Quality. A  subject-object metaphysics is 
>>> in fact a metaphysics in which the first division of Quality - the first 
>>> slice of undivided experience  is into subjects and objects.
>>> 
>>> [Arlo]
>>> Correct. What we conventionally call "THE MOQ", the convention that has 
>>> confounded Bo since I've been a member of the list, is what we, those 
>>> interested in Pirsig's ideas, use to refer to specifically Pirsig's ideas.
>>> 
>>> This is why Bo is more concerned with claiming legitimacy for his revision 
>>> of Pirsig's work (claiming it is THE metaphysics of Quality) rather than 
>>> just stating the simple and elegant truth.
>>> 
>>> Bo's ideas are a revision of Pirsig's ideas.
>>> 
>>> Bo's formulation for a metaphysics of Quality is a critical revision of 
>>> Pirsig's metaphysics of Quality.
>>> 
>>> Indeed, I'm going to back up for a moment to Pirsig's comment above and say 
>>> "of Quality" is redundant. It concretizes something (not a problem for most 
>>> of us, but apparently a great burden for the SOLists).
>>> 
>>> You could just say "Pirsig's metaphysics" and be done with it.
>>> 
>>> Bo's formulation for a metaphysics is a critical revision of Pirsig's 
>>> metaphysics.
>>> 
>>> Accurate. Rhetorically sound. Valid. Simple.
>>> 
>>> Back to Bo's horrible rhetoric.
>>> 
>>> [Bo]
>>> So, from now on I'll drop the SOL and call it by it's proper designation: 
>>> "The Strong Interpretation of the MOQ".
>>> 
>>> [Arlo]
>>> Actually, if you want its "proper designation", you'd have to go with "A 
>>> Strong Interpretation of Pirsig's MOQ"... in other words "Bo's MOQ".
>>> 
>>> Frankly, I'm continually amazed that so much effort is spent in such shoddy 
>>> ways to grasp any straw of authoritative legitimacy possible. But since you 
>>> have never really understood Pirsig, I guess no one should be surprised.
>>> 
>>> [Bo]
>>> Whether Pirsig agrees or not is of little interest...
>>> 
>>> [Arlo]
>>> In your entire post, this is the only nine words that make any sense. 
>>> Kudos, as Ian said.
>>> 
>>> [Bo]
>>> ... no one can copyright reality and the MOQ is not an expansion of the 
>>> intellectual level, but an expansion of reality itself.
>>> 
>>> [Arlo]
>>> I'll take the liberty to correct this monstrosity as well.
>>> 
>>> "... no one can copyright reality and [my interpretation of Pirsig's] MOQ 
>>> is not an expansion of the intellectual level, but an expansion of reality 
>>> itself. "
>>> 
>>> Its really no wonder, Bo, with such a dismal display of "thinking", only 
>>> three or four people here take you seriously or pay attention to this SOL 
>>> nonsense at all.
>>> 
>>> If you had been paying attention, you'd have seen I provided you a sound 
>>> rhetorical and argumentatively valid platform last week.
>>> 
>>> [Arlo previously]
>>> Pirsig's ideas = "A metaphysics of Quality" (the foundation for which we 
>>> are all here, to be sure), and Bo's ideas = "A metaphysics of Quality" that 
>>> is a critical revision of Pirsig's ideas.
>>> 
>>> Bo might say "A metaphysics of Quality that holds the intellectual level to 
>>> SOM is better than A metaphysics of Quality that considers SOM to be one on 
>>> many intellectual patterns", instead of "THE metaphysics of Quality holds 
>>> the intellectual level to SOM".
>>> 
>>> [Arlo]
>>> Your latest post is simply more evidence that you are eternally trapped in 
>>> some battle (with yourself?) for interpretative legitimacy. I had hoped, as 
>>> I'm sure others were doing, that your time away was spent figuring that 
>>> out. Obviously not.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
> 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

Reply via email to