Marsha to Andre:

I assume you understand the point you are trying to make, but I do not get it.

Andre:
Hello MOQ'ers!
Those who are left on this discuss to talk about Pirsig's MOQ are now called 
dogmatists! Any attempt and/or counter argument citing Pirsig and other 
supporting evidence (e.g. James) used by these dogmatic MOQ contributors to 
point to the misconceptions/misunderstandings/dead ends/irrelevancies to 
Pirsig's MOQ  by other posters are in their turn asked to justify their premise 
through misunderstanding or simple ignorance or bloody minded stubbornness ( 
Mark suggesting to dmb that he (Mark) has 'yet to see some fundamental premises 
of MoQ coming through your posts'... obviously never even read the archives and 
dmb's impressive energy put in every post he has posted!!). This is really 
frustrating and insulting!

So when Marsha asks me to clarify my point ( Marsha confuses DQ with sq) she claims 
"I do not get it'.
And John is still after confirmation of his 'Absolute' Roycean flavour.

I am sorry but to have the tables turned on 'dogmatists' for proof and 
supportive evidence whilst quoting this evidence from its original source and 
supporting ideas mentioned in that original source and then ( by the so called 
non-dogmatists) to still claim ignorance is intellectual dishonesty at its 
worst.

My only recourse left is to urge Mark, Marsha, John etc to read ZMM and LILA. 
It is that simple. Then we can have a conversation.

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