Is that to prove my point Marsha ? My response to an ad hominem from Bo. Ian
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:48 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 4:37 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: > > Cut out the FUCKING PERSONAL INSULTS Bo, > and argue with what people actually say, > or just SHUT THE FUCK UP. > > I'm off to the hills .... sort the DICKHEAD out Horse. > Ian > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 28, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: > >> Hi Marsha (and Bo), I see DMB already replied, but you addressed a >> question to me (I think) ... >> >> The social level (like all levels, as I said) will keep evolving - of >> course it's the patterns within it that do the evolving - they are the >> species. It (its contents) will evolve into something different to the >> current / pre-existing social level. As has happened already it can >> and will evolve patterns that are part of the intellectual level - the >> first such patterns that did so, evolved the intellectual level >> itself. (as DMB said too) >> >> Next, I get confused .... are you still talking to me ? >> None have demonstrated ... etc. >> Do you think that if ... you understand .... etc. >> There have been ... etc. >> >> I think you are making pejorative statements about people's behaviours >> in general. As I've said before if you have such a complaint about me >> I'd prefer it if you were specific with examples. >> >> My view - in MoQ-Discuss emails it is difficult to work with anything >> but S's and O's - it's the nature of language - but plenty use >> artistic rhetoric and poetics and links to parallel interests that >> break the dialectic patterns. I wouldn't generalise the negative >> criticism (if that's what it was). >> >> I think there is plenty of non-S-O / Quality thinking being >> demonstrated, but clearly you have to read between the S-O lines of >> the language to see the quality .... as we all did at least once with >> Pirsig. >> >> Since Bo was the subject at hand .... Bo is in fact the least able to >> argue his way out of his SOMist prison in my experience .... resorting >> to insults when he doesn't understand an argument and never returning >> to points made to him that might help us all out of that >> straight-jacket. >> >> Regards >> Ian >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:47 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 22, 2010, at 4:37 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Bo > Intellect is a static level - do we at least agree there? >>>> >>>> Ian - Yes, but like all levels it comprises patterns that are evolving >>>> thanks to the action of DQ. >>> >>> >>> Ian, >>> >>> Will the Social Level expand and evolve into something different than >>> the social level? >>> >>> None demonstrate anything like an expanded intellectual pattern. Do >>> you think that to say you understand the MoQ, makes it so? There has been >>> no demonstration of anything but ordinary subject/object thinking, with some >>> social/biological epitaphs thrown in for biological/social reasons. >>> >>> >>> 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
