[Mark]
Arlo, you avoided Marsha's original suggestion.
[Arlo]
No I didn't. You asked a question about Humanism, a few other people
chimed in, DMB entered to make the points relating humanism to
Pirsig's ideas. I don't know what the problem is there at all?
And I see no evidence that DMB is "blaming" people who disagree with
him (whatever that means). What I see is a condemnation of twisting
Pirsig's ideas, and holding to a foundation from which our
disagreements can germinate. I disagree with Pirsig on a few points,
and I have no problem separating out where my disagreement is from
what he wrote. And I imagine if I wrote a post to the forum saying
Pirsig actually meant what I want him to have meant, that DMB would
correct me as well.
[Mark]
If dmb is the gatekeeper, fine, but he should describe what is inside
the gate for us newcomers.
[Arlo]
Gatekeeper? Why do I think you are trying to twist this into a
condemnation of disagreement. Disagreement is healthy. Disagreement
spawns the evolution of ideas. Even minor disagreements that lead to
better contextualization are necessary and should be encouraged. No
one is saying otherwise. But the issue is not one of disagreement,
its trying to manipulate a text to force agreement where no agreement
exists, and it is against that form of dishonesty that we should all
take a stand.
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
