Hi Dan, Apart from a few minor corrections (!) like ... I'd say the "science" of influence IS another name for rhetoric, And I'd say peace, love and understanding is all about (genuine) respect for the person(s) you are dealing with, criticising, disagreeing with or otherwise ... and a million miles from the machiavellian "buttering up" and knifing suggested by dmb.
I would say I share the sentiment of your post - the "egging on" (from all sides) always seemed targetted at creating problematic opposites, rather than progressing understandings. Pirsig's balance of praise and correction was just that I'd say, balanced and honest, and not dishonest praise to soften (butter-up) a critical message. Both messages - friendship and correction - were honest. Ian PS What's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding ? On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello everyone > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 6:33 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Dan said to dmb: >> Let me ask you: do you think Bodvar and Platt were laughing when they read >> what RMP wrote? Is it a knee-slapper for you when RMP sends a little praise >> your way? >> >> >> dmb says: >> >> I am shocked (SHOCKED!) to learn that gambling goes on in this casino. >> >> More seriously, I just think criticism is an unavoidable part of exchanging >> views. It's supposed to hurt a little bit, unless you're just stroking >> yourself. Taking criticism personally is unrealistic and more than a little >> bit childish. What's the proper response to criticism? Do you defend your >> claims? Or is it more fruitful to make a big fuss about the critic's motives >> and table manners? If we don't worry so much about pride and such, criticism >> can make you stronger or sharper or whatever. Criticisms are supposed to >> answered, not wept over or turned into a sore spot. Anything other than an >> actual answer is worthless, if you ask me. > > Hi Dave > > I'd add constructive criticisms are supposed to be answered. How does > one go about answering: You're an idiot, other than with more of the > same? or to simply ignore it. Perhaps we need to back up and ask: what > is a proper criticism? That is what I was pointing out to Steve when > he first posted RMP's annotation 126 to Bodvar and Platt. But it went > right over Steve's head. And again, it isn't about peace, love, and > understanding, or buttering people up. Maybe, it just boils down to > being polite in our criticisms. And if we can't be polite, maybe it is > better not to write at all? To just ignore that person? And hope > they'll go away? That's what I kept hoping would happen with Bodvar > but someone always had to egg him on. Every frigging time. So who is > the real culprit? > >>dmb: >> It is an honor to be corrected by Pirsig and he was very gracious about it >> too. 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 both of them totally ignored the >> actual content of Pirsig's correct and they have both tenaciously held onto >> that defiance to this day. > > Dan: > > 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: > I still get hostile posts from Bodvar telling me that Pirsig and I do > not "get" the MOQ. Sorry, but I am not going to pretend like that's > okay. There is something very wrong with that kind of tenacity of > belief. That whole attitude defies intellectual values in a very big > way and I think it's more than worthy of condemnation. > > Dan: > I tell you, Bodvar really got me going a few times too. And I am not > pretending it is okay. But that is Bodvar and nothing is going to > change his outlook. That much is certain. Even Robert Pirsig himself > telling Bodvar he is wrong did no good. So what chance do we have? > None. And yes, I still get posts from him too only he seems to view me > as your disciple, as if I don't know enough to formulate my own > opinions and have to follow someone else. > > Yet, as pissed as I get at him, Bodvar is the one who put me into > touch with Robert Pirsig when Mr. Pirsig wrote him concerning LILA'S > CHILD, way back when it was just a compilation of posts on my website > that no one ever heard of. And Bodvar (at my insistence) is the one > who wrote to Mr Pirsig asking if he would be interested in sharing the > annotations that he mentioned to Bodvar in his first letter. And > Bodvar was one of the few people who actually shared a discussion with > me when I first joined the old Lila Squad all those years ago. So my > feelings towards the man are muddled at best. I love him but at the > same time I want to disown him. > > Anyway, thanks for reading, > > 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
