Coward! You're always talking out the side of your mouth.
On Sep 8, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Andre Broersen wrote: > Ron to Ham: > > Excellent Ham, exactly what I was hoping to draw out of the comment. > Unfortunately Marsha seems > to have missed this point. > > Andre: > Right Ron, Marsha missed this point or perhaps she just didn't bother because > she does not recognize any 'point'. The way she's behaving on this discuss > makes me wonder if she knows her arse from a hole in the ground. Sorry to put > it this way but her reasoning basically is DQ=sq. No difference. All > discussions on this md about metaphysical concepts are considered to be > without inherent existence and therefore illusory. Well that's fine but > Marsha uses this illusory character to mean insignificant, unimportant, a > mirage, a relativity in the sense of meaninglessness. > > No idea is better than another. All are relative because illusory and hence > she slithers on the nihilist flatland film of snot. > > She keeps on putting up so called Buddhist inspired quotes to substantiate > her argument (which is a wonderful contradiction when you think of it) but it > only shows her flimsy knowledge with regard to its proper place, use and > value. She even quotes Wallace and Hagan to add authority. Authority, which > she questions the use and value of when used by other contributors. > > I think she hasn't even read the back of Hagan's little book where Pirsig > suggests that "If you're looking for enlightenment rather than just scholarly > knowledge, you'd better read this". > > She isn't into scholarly knowledge because she fundamentally distrusts the > church of reason. Any reference to 'academia' is suspect. Hence Marsha's > anti-intellectual attitude. > > She still doesn't accept that the MOQ is a stable, intellectual pattern of > value. For her it still is 'experience' (following good old Bodvar). > > And of course she'll deny this. Of course she'll say that we do not know what > she thinks (she has said this!)She'll decide whether to take you seriously or > not Ron. This depends on her mood and where her interest lies at that moment, > but since she is an ever-changing pattern of values I would not hold my > breath. > > I have certainly stopped taking her seriously and I'm certain that she > doesn't care because that's only my opinion and accounts for nothing. > Anyone's opinion for that matter...including Pirsig's. > > Meanwhile she's looking for a shared agreement with Ham 'in the experience of > 'pure awareness'. > > Very sad indeed. ___ 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
