There are three best friends: Me, Myself, and Yo. Mark
On Jul 24, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello everyone > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:07 AM, david buchanan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> >> dmb said to Dan: >> ...But what concerns me far more than whether or not that correction hurt >> their pride or bruised their feelings (Isn't that just stuff that grown-ups >> have to deal with?), what concerns me is the way both of them totally >> ignored the actual content of Pirsig's correction and they have both >> tenaciously held onto that defiance to this day. >> >> Dan replied: >> Yes, I know. Actually there are a number of contributors here who've done >> the very same thing. I chalk it up to the fallibility of human nature. Many, >> if not most, people are so set in their ways and belief systems that they >> will never, ever change or evolve into a better and more knowledgeable >> person. We can condemn them or just take it as a matter of course and go on >> with our own pursuits. >> >> dmb says: >> Yes, it's true that most people see no reason to alter their views. >> Generally speaking, it would be presumptuous and arrogant to go around >> telling people they're wrong about this or that. Personally, I get irritated >> by people who come to my door with the intention of informing about God's >> love or who I should vote for. BUT, this is a philosophical discussion >> group, a self-selected group of people that have supposedly agreed to an >> open exchange of views simply by virtue of being here. To resent criticism >> in a place like this is like getting angry that there is sand at the beach, >> faith in the churches or gambling in the casino. It's not just okay to >> criticize each other's views and assertions. It's essential. When criticisms >> are answered with resentment and anger instead of an answer of substance, >> the issue has been evaded and the discussion process has been >> short-circuited. And why? Pride. Because saving face means more than making >> sense, apparently. That's what really gets my >> goat, these ego driven evasions. That's when I get hostile - precisely >> because it's so totally destructive. It utterly frustrates and wrecks the >> possibility of having a philosophical debate. > > Dan: > > Yes, we agree then. That's really my whole point... it is okay to > criticize... even necessary, but when the criticism becomes > destructive rather than constructive, then the whole purpose of > discussion is lost. It becomes a "I know you are but what am I" type > of exchange rather than an intelligent discourse raising valid (or > even not so valid) points to elucidate and enlighten each other as to > our varying philosophical outlooks on not only Robert Pirsig's work > but life itself. > >> dmb: >> Let me give you just one concrete example of this ruinous nonsense. >> Recently, instead of answering a piece of criticism with any kind of real >> answer, Marsha deflected the criticism with childish mockery; she altered >> the names in one of my paragraphs so that it was directed back at me. Then >> Steve, apparently not recognizing it as mockery, accused me of evasion for >> failing to answer Marsha's criticism, as if that altered paragraph made any >> sense as a criticism of my views and as if she had a real knock-down point. >> Can you imagine? You see your own paragraph in front of you, altered so that >> it's criticism OF you instead of BY you, and (even though you haven't even >> seen it before} people are smugly calling you names for failing to answer >> this powerful point. Meanwhile, of course, it was my criticism of Marsha's >> views all along and that's what was never answered. Come on. That's >> outrageous bullshit, isn't it? > > Dan: > Yes it is. I admit I have problems with Marsha's "style" as well. She > is one contributor who doesn't really seem ready to engage in a proper > discussion but not the only one, that's for sure. I don't know where > complaining has ever done any good though. It is kind of like Bo and > his antics... all the complaints seemed to do was to stir the pot. > > dmb: > There are many such examples. It would be wrong NOT to complain about > that at kind of behavior, again, because it is so destructive to the > purpose of this place. I wish we had a bullshit cop and a penalty box, > I really do. > > Dan: > > Or maybe a big fist app that would spring out of the monitor and pop > the perpetrator in the nose? That might work... > > dmb: > And let's not forget that nobody has a right to be here. The world is > a big place and there's room in it for all kinds. But isn't this > supposed to be a place where one should fully EXPECT to have their > claims and assertions challenged? So what if those challenges are > brutally frank? It's well within the philosophical tradition, you > know? > > Dan: > And there is nothing wrong with being brutally frank if it is in the > realm of constructive criticism that moves the discussion along. When > I read something that I don't quite understand, I look it up.That's a > great thing about the Internet. You can find out just about anything > you want to know. And yes, it does irritate me when others don't seem > to do likewise. Instead of an intelligent discussion, I get bullshit > like: Oh but I have a PhD or I have a Masters degree. Why should I > care about that when the contributor cannot even string two sentences > together properly? > >> dmb: >> There was an English pragmatist at Oxford by the name of Schiller. You might >> say he was William James's bulldog and man was he ever vicious. James asked >> him repeatedly to tone it down. Schiller was a riot. He published a fake >> journal to make fun of the Absolutist like F. H. Bradley and Josiah Royce. >> He'd write fake articles by "F.H. Badly". James, on the other hand, >> maintained friendships with Bradley and Royce despite their disagreements >> but in private letters he openly talks to his friends about how he intends >> the take the scalp of their Absolute, how is going to destroy their >> Absolute. Hume said the work of his rivals should be committed to the flames >> and if you've ever read Nietzsche you know he is flinging zingers on every >> page. Zingers fly back and forth between academic philosophers too, in the >> published journals. Yea, the tone is civilized and it's all grammatically >> correct and properly footnoted but it's a real fight all the same. As long >> as it's a fair fight, peo ple very much enjoy the debate and find it quite exciting. As you can imagine, childish mockery simply doesn't get published - and rightly so. > > Dan: > > Abraham Lincoln used to do the same thing early in his career as a > lawyer and politician. He wrote extensive (using a pen name) articles > ridiculing his opponents in very cruel and lurid fashion. One of those > opponents found out it was Lincoln writing the articles and angrily > challenged him to a duel (that's what they did in those days... go out > into a field and shoot at each other). > > Lincoln couldn't back down without losing face. He had to fight. So, > since it was his choice, he chose to duel with sabers rather than > pistols. And he even took saber lessons before the duel. But on the > day of the duel, the seconds for each party stepped in before the men > could actually fight and put an end the whole affair. > > Lincoln wrote how he learned his lesson and never again used such > destructive criticism against anyone. Even during the Civil War, when > his generals openly disobeyed him and prolonged the war, he didn't > criticize. Instead, he wrote scathing letters to them and put them in > a drawer of his desk, never to be sent. Only after his death did > historians find out about that. > > That's what the draft folder is for, right? > > Dan > 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
