[Mark] There is a sense of protection, and outrage which must have been building up waiting to let loose. Get a grip.
[Arlo] Funny. Yeah, I figured the only response you'd muster would be along these lines. [Mark] If anybody is diverging from Pirsig, it is you Arlo. My statements are consistent with MoQ, and you know it. [Arlo] It is "consistent with the MOQ" to claim Pirsig is no longer an expert on his ideas? That YOU are better suited to say what HE meant that HE is? I made no comments at all about Pirsig's ideas in my post, I am talking about the "interpretative legitimacy" that is being used to justify that all "interpretations" of what Pirsig said are equally valid, that "no one has the rights" to a "correct interpretation". [Mark] Do we interpret something with intent, or is our intent an interpretation? It certainly points to dynamic quality. [Arlo] Interlocutors in a dialogue act both intentionally and interpretatively as meaning is negotiated between them. We do not blindly stumble upon abstract and meaningless utterances and them subjectively ascribe them meaning. [Mark] Would you prefer a static world of dogma and submission? [Arlo] Nothing I said leads to this kind of absurd accusation. [Mark] Symbols themselves are interpretations and not the real thing, at least according to Pirsig. Perhaps you disagree. [Arlo] I do not disagree that symbols are derived from interpreted experience, but they do not derive in isolation from a social dialogue where intentional and interpretative meaning moves towards clarity and mutual accord. [Mark] Interpretation has been around for thousands upon thousands of years back to the times of the Lemurians. [Arlo] And has persisted in the guise of "subjectivism" into the post-modern age, but has been challenged by many thinkers as being artificially dichotomous and poorly constructed. [Mark] Well, Arlo, it would appear that there may be subjectivism with intent, as well as dynamic intent at subjectivism. Is subjectivism at all tied with experience? [Arlo] This makes no sense. S/O are post-experience, a faulty intellectual way of understanding experience. [Mark] Are you against the postulates of experience as presented by Pirsig.? [Arlo] No, I just restated them in contrast to the nonsensical comment you made. [Mark] Why don't you accept personal experience as a valid form of reality? [Arlo] This is absurd. There are no "valid forms of reality". Experience is reality. Forms ascribed to that experience are secondary. [Mark] Oh, I get it, this is all about Bo. Gee, don't you like Bo? [Arlo] I had no personal issues, nor even any substantive issues with Bo at all. He seemed like a nice enough fellow. [Mark] How did you come by this interpretation? Just lay back on the couch and tell me all about it. You just stated that you support the end to subjectivism through experience, and that you want to create a reality which is confined to Static values. [Arlo] Well you can keep throwing out these nonsensical claims if you think it will help your argument. Yeah, I want to "create a reality which is confined to static values", I am so busted. You got me. Sigh. [Mark] The interpretations that most agree on are usually the ones that survive. Or perhaps you do not believe in evolution as Pirsig presents it. What is your antidote to evolution? [Arlo] Ideas evolve over time as people agree and disagree with ideas they experience when involved in the historical dialogue. They do not evolve because we keep revisioning what so-and-so "meant to say" when "interpreting" their words. You, too, are confusing evolution with interpretation. [Mark] Are you a creationist or something. This is the wrong forum for preaching such dogma. [Arlo] Yeah, and a commie. And a hater of all things good, dynamic, free and cuddly. I kill puppies for fun. I squash snails with malice (nod to Bloom County) and am secretly plotting to thwart Pirsig's ideas by denying that Pirsig really meant to say whatever it is that you want him to have said. Honestly, I expected this sort of nonsense, but its still kinda sad to see. Since the rest of your reply is pretty much this same, I'm just going to stop responding here. Call me whatever you want, if you think that such detractions and evasions will help your "ideas". 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
