Hello everyone On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Ham Priday <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey, Dan -- > > On Tuesday, 9/20/11 at 12:42 AM, "Dan Glover" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello everyone >> > [snip] >> >> The reason no one complains is that it does no good. I tried >> discussing the MOQ with you on numerous occasions to no avail. >> Like Marsha (Lucy), you seem to want to engage me in a game >> but then you pull the football away. I think you should be happy >> you have others like Marsha and Mark who enjoy discussing >> nonsense and leave the rest of us alone. >> >> Dan (the not so innocent bystander) > > I don't know what game you think I'm playing or what football I pulled away > from you. I can assure you that I'm not into games and, if I failed to > continue a dialogue, it was probably because your response was to play > "Pirsig says".
Dan: I don't care if you continue a dialogue... that wasn't my point. In fact, you've just reinforced my point by complaining about playing "Pirsig says." First of all, this is a forum dedicated to "Pirsig says" so your complaint is rather goofy. Second, I always offer my own interpretation of what "Pirsig says" so that others finding disagreement may respond (or not) and we may compare our words. Third, when someone specifically calls me out asking for an answer to certain questions pertaining to the MOQ, it seems only courteous to acknowledge my answer if nothing more than stating a disagreement. Most times when I answer a post like that, it takes a good few hours of my time. I will ignore such requests in the future, to be sure. > > Dan, I appreciate that you are totally absorbed in the MoQ, philosophically > allied with the author, and resolved to hold the level of understanding to > its current status. Dan: And I appreciate you're totally absorbed in your philosophy and unable to see the forest for the trees. But that's neither here nor there, now is it? > I'm also aware that the MD is dedicated to Pirsig's > ideas. Dan: Oh! I see. And so what are your complaints about? You are contradicting yourself, good sir. >That said, MOQ-Discuss is described in the Charter as a > "free-ranging forum for the discussion of Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality", > and it is clear that its members have wide-ranging and diverse views as to > the meaning of the author's pronouncements. > > In the interest of fuller understanding, is it not relevant to compare MOQ's > fundamental tenets with the concepts of other philosophies, both classical > and contemporary? Dan: It is relevant IF a person did so. You do not. That is precisely my point! >If so, why should > you and Arlo want to discourage such discussion when it involves a different > interpretation of Value realization? Dan: I am not discouraging any such discussions. If you are indeed interested in comparing the MOQ with your own philosophy, then do it. Don't wallow in your own words and then call us all out for not playing your silly games. > As intellectuals, we all abhor rote > learning and dogmatic edicts issued by authorities in the name of Truth. > With no logical proofs or empirical validation at its disposal, Philosophy > is a dialectical discipline at best. That's why so many discussions here > are of the "circular" type that seem to go on interminably without producing > a satisfactory conclusion. Dan: That is the nature of discussion. There are no satisfactory conclusions. The story goes on and on. > > On the other hand, a "free-ranging discussion" that is restricted to > unchallenged repetitions and echoes of the author's statements deprive > Pirsig's insights of fresh, new interpretations that can ensure against > stagnation and make his legacy more meaningful for future generations. Dan: No, I don't think so. There have been many fresh interpretations of the MOQ over the years as well as many thoughtful comments offered on how to grow it. On the other hand, there have also been many attempts to deride it without ever making an effort to understand the MOQ's implications and relevance to philosophy. > > While I don't deny an interest in promoting Essentialism, the arguments I've > presented in this forum are a sincere attempt to point out and/or clarify > undefined or unresolved metaphysical issues in Pirsig's philosophy. Dan: If you understood the MOQ, fine. But even after years and years of reading your posts I have failed to find even one that signifies that you do understand it. > Since > Value factors significantly in both philosophies, it's only natural that the > solutions I offer will take an essentialist form. On the assumption that it > is not violating Pirsig's thesis to suggest alternative interpretations for > consideration, I regard those who call my suggestions irrelevant or > "nonsense" as disingenuous. Dan: To to fair, I wasn't referring to your alternative interpretation so much as I was referring to your refusal to actually compare it to the MOQ. Yet... you seem to think it is okay to pretend a lack of response to your posts is somehow an endorsement from us all. It isn't. > Of course, should Horse disagree, I shall be > forced to follow the path taken by Bodvar, Platt and Tim. Dan: That is not what I meant. You continually mention members of the group both by name and by the somewhat ridiculous term "Pirsigians." Leave us (at least me) out of it. And, for the record, Bodvar left of his own accord, as did Platt. Tim self-destructed, probably after going off his meds. I think it is good we have someone like Horse who acts as an able moderator so the list doesn't become swamped with people like Tim and others who for whatever reason cannot control their emotion state. > > Until then, I remain your "inconvenient renegade", > Ham Dan: You're not "my" anything. And to oppose the MOQ in the way you do is nonsense. If you were genuinely interested in contrasting your philosophy with Robert Pirsig's, you'd take the time to learn a little something about the MOQ. It is obvious you just don't care enough to make that effort. 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
