dmb twice said to Steve:
Like I said, we simply cannot have an intelligent conversation on this topic
unless and until you learn to use the terms properly. Until then your
statements will continue to be nonsensical and so talking to you is quite
pointless..
Steve replied:
I don't disagree with Pirsig or the dictionary as far as the "classic dilemma."
I disagree with how YOU think this dilemma could possibly still come up in the
MOQ while Pirsig specifically says this dilemma does not come up in the MOQ!
dmb says:
See, now that's exactly the kind of thing you do over and over again. There is
no way that an honest person could say what you just said. I have been
explaining WHY the classic dilemma DOESN"T come up in the MOQ. (Due to the
replacement of causality with patterns of preference.) My point in quoting the
dictionary definition of "determinism" was to show you what the word means and
I did so on the heels of your stated position, which basically fits that
classic definition. I did so in the context of many deterministic statements
about how we have no choice and how free will is an illusion. All you've done
is take up the classic determinist position, except that we are determined by
our values instead of causality. That does nothing to overcome the dilemma.
You've simply re-named the determining factors and denied freedom of the will
for slightly different reasons.
I do not understand why you cannot see what is so plain. You don't even
understand your own stated position, let alone Pirsig's or mine or James's. If
this isn't a matter of old-fashioned dishonesty or malicious bullshit, then you
are a remarkably stupid man. In either case, your nonsense is just too
frustrating to bear.
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
