Marsha, That's true of all of us and all we say and we all know it. It takes a conscious rhetorical choice to choose to say it in words in a communication.
Ian On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 12:57 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ian, > > On Sep 1, 2011, at 7:33 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: > >> You can see Marsha I'm sure, that slipping in ... >> "but then it is ONLY [dmb's] opinion" >> ... is your part of perpetuating the warring you refer to? > > > I don't see it that way because it is _only my opinion_. I do not > hold the Ultimate truth. > > Marsha > > >> >> With respect to the Ant quotations, there is an element of exposing - >> on the one hand / on the other hand - counter arguments in a thesis / >> dissertation, so we might not read strong agreement by Ant into his >> statement of the view of Pirsig's deficiencies ? (Ant can speak for >> himself on that. Matt has already pointed out tactical rhetorical >> reasons why Pirsig might not have wanted to emphasise that aspect in >> his writing at the time.) >> >> dmb's view there was interesting - I happen to believe there was >> something of a straw-man in this passage >> "Various posters have come through here, usually religious types, who >> insist that their philosophical positions shouldn't be judged on their >> intellectual merits, as if it's cruel to hold them to such standards, >> as if their position deserves respect simply because that position is >> held by a person and people deserve respect. This silly, self-centered >> attitude says, in effect, that being critical of another's position is >> more or less the same as being a dick." >> But it is interesting that dmb states HIS attitude clearly. >> >> (Straw-man - because it really just side-steps a debate of what is >> "intellectual merit" - no-one would claim to be unreasonable, not even >> the overtly religious types. It's an open debate as to who's style of >> debate is the more mature and constructive - Matt's point - and mine.) >> Ian >> >> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:42 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> From Anthony's Ph.D. thesis: >>> >>> "On the other hand, Pirsig's system remains a 'broad brush' as two (or >>> more) judgements concerned with a particular moral dilemma can rely on >>> criteria derived from the same evolutionary level. Moreover, there _is_ >>> considerable detail that Pirsig has overlooked from both Eastern and >>> Western philosophical traditions, through this can be provided, to some >>> extent, by researching the philosophers (such as Northrop, Nagarjuna and >>> William James) who influenced his work. No doubt, in-depth comparisons >>> between Pirsig and these philosophers would be beneficial in further >>> clarifying the MoQ. Other issues overlooked by Pirsig are the Taoist >>> quietist concern with the environment; discrimination on the grounds of >>> race, gender culture and disability; the damage caused by global capitalism >>> and the Buddhis emphasis on compassion. >>> >>> "Pirsig's failure to explicitly mention Buddhist compassion (karuna) in >>> ZMM or LILA is possibly his most serious oversight. Compassion is defined >>> by Rahula (1959, p.46) as representing universal... 'love, charity, >>> kindness, tolerance, and such noble qualities on the emotional side' >>> qualified by the following advice: >>> >>> If one develops only the emotional neglecting the intellectual, one >>> may become a >>> good-hearted fool; while to develop only the intellectual side >>> neglecting the >>> emotional may turn one into a hard-hearted intellect without feeling >>> for others. >>> Therefore, to be perfect one has to develop both equally. That is >>> the aim of the >>> Buddhist way of life: in it wisdom and compassion are inseparably >>> linked together. >>> (Rahula, 1959, p.46) >>> >>> "As numerous world problems are caused or aggravated due to lack of >>> genuine compassion, it appears highly plausible that an increased >>> consideration of the later would enhance the MoQ. >>> >>> According to the _Buddha-dharma_... all the pain we bring to >>> ourselves and others >>> --- the hatred, the warring, the grovelling, the manipulation --- is >>> our own doing. It >>> comes from our own hearts and minds, out of our own confusion. >>> Furthermore, if we >>> don't see exactly what the problem is, we're going to perpetuate it. >>> We're going to >>> teach our children our confusion, and we'll go on, generation after >>> generation, doing >>> more of the same to ourselves and to each other. (Hagen, 1997, p.16) >>> >>> >>> (McWatt, Anthony, 'A Critical Analysis of Robert Pirsig's Metaphysics >>> of Quality', pp. 214-215) >>> >>> Marsha: >>> I agree with Anthony when he states "Pirsig's failure to explicitly mention >>> Buddhist compassion (karuna) in ZMM or LILA is possibly his most serious >>> oversight."; and so think it is a very valid topic. Dmb's opinion is quite >>> interesting, but then it is only his opinion. imho >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> > > 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
