re, Mark
Quote, Mark.

"Dmb appears to be one of these people."  I was interested why dmb was
so fanatical about James, so I took some time to reread some of his
stuff.  Sure, James is spiritual, but we knew that from this Varieties
essays.  I appears to me that dmb quotes James completely out of
context.  It is as if he scours the literature to find some quote
which will support his position.  I can easily find selective quotes
from James which will completely deny dmb's position.  He seems to do
the same with Pirsig by carefully selecting quotes so that he appears
to be right.  This is not worthy of this forum, and dmb is rapidly
loosing his credibility."

----------------------------
Not to wine about it, Mark,but some phrase's kept on bugging me this
afternoon.
Regardless of the fact that i'v left school when i was 14.5 yrs old, i have
a very high IQ-- not to clown around with, or to impress others, it was and
is more of a burden than a benefit,...still, i took the challenge and
educated myself with a study of 9 years!!; in the free circuit, i had to pay
everything for myself, all my books, all my free time,all my saturdays, all
my afternoons after my shifts,..
the days when i'v worked true the nights for 9 years, only one moment i'v
allowed myself to take a sabbath year during my 'tour of duty' so to speak
because the military duty was an obligation back then, in '79.

I made my choice to take it as a challenge,the service,the military
apparatus had a very good educationprogram at high level, and i took the
opportunity to
volunteer.
I went for the full monty, all of it , placing myself in the French speaking
part of
the country the first months, and after that i asked a migration to be
stationed in Germany.Taking out all of the given opportunities at the same
time.
Learning French, German,optics, nightvisionoptics,technical photography,
carthology,philosophy,math,laws,latin,....all at the same time.
Take only this forum as an example,i'm learning English, philosophy--, but
in the background i'm learning Turkish at the same time, same speed of
powering up.

I'v studied Huxley for about 30 years Mark,along with Timoty Leary,all the
old
Greecs,and about all there is to know about masers, lasers,the Theory of
Relativity,Kip Thorne's work,Hawkings work......etc.

Okay, allow me to halt it here, and make a selfreflection now.
Given all of the above written is true, if this IQ is my toolset availiable
for myself
do you think i can honestly declare to myself that i'm capable of reading,
understanding, observing the implications of the presented work of
William James, crossreferred back to the work of Plato, Aristotle,Huxley,
Pirsig!
and others, ...thinkers like Einstein or Hawking present in our timeframe?

Nope.
Nope.

I can honestly declare, as well to myself as towards the listers here, like
David,
and Arlo , Andre,Dan!...etc, that if and only "if" i take the challenge to
follow Pirsig's lead to work with the material James presented, only one(1)!
of the implications will be that i will study James 's work completely,all
of it and all possible implications of the written lead.
For a big part i'v already did,enough to make me realise the importance of
the work,some of the possible conclusions,the philosophycal weight....
I declare , Mark,honestly that i will take me years!..only to get William in
my fingers , so to speak, some of his works are what?..1200 pages?and every
page on itself is a very difficult pill to swallow?! ..regardless of my IQ
Mark,
it will take me years to power up that far.....and that is still an
understatement!btw, have you any idea at all how far Andre managed to
power-up since he started to work with the
Maelstrom....?personal growth, understanding, move towards the sparkling
pluralistic
universe, in stead of tunneling back to the Greec's..

Oops, have to go for now,anyway, can you see my point?
Adrie



2011/3/19 118 <[email protected]>

> Hi All,
> As with any movement with those devoted to its cause, there are those
> who take a dogmatic stance.  I have had discussions with Christians
> who quote the bible to me as if it were truth, and Buddhists who have
> done the same.  There are those who try to use whatever coercive
> rhetoric they can so that their opinions appear to be the most
> credible.
>
> Dmb appears to be one of these people.  I was interested why dmb was
> so fanatical about James, so I took some time to reread some of his
> stuff.  Sure, James is spiritual, but we knew that from this Varieties
> essays.  I appears to me that dmb quotes James completely out of
> context.  It is as if he scours the literature to find some quote
> which will support his position.  I can easily find selective quotes
> from James which will completely deny dmb's position.  He seems to do
> the same with Pirsig by carefully selecting quotes so that he appears
> to be right.  This is not worthy of this forum, and dmb is rapidly
> loosing his credibility.  He pretends that he is on James' or Pirsig's
> side when he provides selective quotes, and then berates us for being
> against Pirsig (see below) if we don't agree with him.  Not only is
> this misleading, but it lacks honesty.  To claim a Truth is out of
> order in MoQ, we should all know that.  To say that something is not
> true (see below) is missing the whole point and relies on some Western
> concept of truth.  This certainly sets MoQ back.
>
> I am fine with contributors expressing their opinions, but when they
> say that they speak for Pirsig, I find it annoying.  I would hope that
> some will desist from taking selective quotes out of context and then
> admonish us for not believing what they are proposing.  It is not
> conducive to progress in this discipline.  Of course, people can do
> anything they want, and this is just my humble opinion.
>
> Regards,
> Mark
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 6:45 AM, david buchanan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Mary said to Arlo:
> > I'm exposing the idea that Pirsig's MoQ offers a metaphysics with much
> greater explanatory power than James'.  James' ideas are provincial. If you
> were not human, you would find his theories quaint and limited. The MoQ, on
> the other hand, proposes a static evolutionary system that would be true no
> matter what the starting point of a universe.
> >
> > dmb says:
> > That's not true, actually. James says that we can think of the entire
> universe as noetic all the way down, but not in a grand unified way. It's a
> Pluralistic universe in which "everything gets known by something". Also,
> James and Pirsig are both radically humanist but neither is a subjectivist
> or a solipsist.
> >
> > Mary continued:
> > Let's say time and mass were not the initial SPOVs in some alternate
> universe.  I am suggesting that the SQ evolutionary logic Pirsig has
> employed would hold equally well under any conditions while James' would not
> have relevance.
> >
> > dmb says:
> > Actually, that's not true either. James talks about how some genius in
> the distant past invented the idea of objects and he says that it could have
> turned out differently.
> > I strongly suspect that you don't know much about James and you've
> certainly offered no reason or basis for making these claims. And I happen
> to know that they're simply wrong.
> > Besides, since Pirsig it was himself who decided to write and published
> those chapters in Lila comparing James with the MOQ, dismissing James is to
> disrespect and disregard the views of the thinker you are ostensibly
> defending.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
>



-- 
parser
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