Hi Dave, On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:49 AM, david buchanan <[email protected]>wrote:
> > This is a misconception and it is just one of many examples. In the MOQ, > the difference between abstractions and concrete reality is the difference > between static intellectual patterns and direct everyday experience. It's > the difference between sq and DQ. You are simply misconstruing the MOQ as > SOM. > Khoo: Yes, IT really boils down to this. That many can read an author like Pirsig and come away with widely differing understandings is to be expected. I would have thought a more open dynamic mind would be completely receptive to what Pirsig was trying to convey. A closed static mind, sees the MOQ only in its own mould. In Bo's case, I would venture fourth stage meta-stasis had already set in years ago. Pirsig should have added a caveat, that the MOQ is not for everyone to grasp at first instance. For some it could takes, years, decades or even a lifetime. Dave added: > I really, really hate what you're doing to this place, clogging it up with > this hair-brained nonsense all the time. I listened to it for over a decade > now and I'm just sick to death of it. Please, get a hobby. Go away. Let us > do philosophy, will you? That would be "a promising development". > Khoo would like to say: I, for one, really appreciate all your exertions, as do all else who labour like you do to clarify our understanding of the MOQ and Quality as presented by Pirsig. It is not wasted, even if it might be on Bo. It has helped instead to refresh our perspectives, place into context, again and again by repeated defence against the assault on Pirsig's MOQ. Lurkers and newbies alike, if I may say so, who disdain but endure the endless, sometimes pointless argumentation over basic definitions, see much value in defending Pirsig's formulation of the MOQ, given that it is THAT which drew them here in the first place, not a pretender's version. If and when, we, as a discussion group, leave all this "adolesecent" sparring behind, I hope we can explore the new vistas an expanded rationality can explore. We still have not bridged Western and Eastern philosophies yet, which is one such great promise of the MOQ finding common ground I look forward to; by understanding how Eastern civilisations have achieved their respective intellectual levels as compared to the SOM-dominated Western worldview. We will cross the bridge when we come to it. But we are not there yet. Not when we still have to come to terms with tendencies no matter how overt or latent, for Western hegemony over the rest of the world. It does looks like a slog, but then again, who can ask for a better cast of characters than on the this list to make philosophy an ongoing dynamic battle, an everyday real-life clash of ideas sometimes couched in terms of "biblical proportions" and implications. It gets the adrenaline pumping; emotional drivers that help meld the static and the dynamic to yield creative insight by the clash of the rhetorical swords. You stay keen and sharp by your own vigilance for the real and good. This state of mind does not come in the absence of opponents and detractors who distract by imposing themselves on you. Thats all they do and want to do. Best regards Khoo Hock Aun 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
