On Sep 23, 2011, at 9:38 AM, X Acto wrote:
> Ron:
> Thats all Dave has ever been saying Steve. I think he took it as granted that
> most of us here shed the SOM baggage on most every issue, and that is not
> an unreasonable assumption to take on this forum.
> All his criticism has been based on this assumption. It's an un-needed
> assertion
> to constantly posit in a "Quality" based discussion.
"As mentioned above, Pirsig considers any philosophy that asserts that reality
is composed from mind or matter or a combination of both is an SOM philosophy."
(McWatt, Anthony, 'AN INTRODUCTION TO ROBERT PIRSIG’S METAPHYSICS OF
QUALITY')
> On Aug 30, 2011, at 11:43 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>>
>> dmb says:
>> Another good point. Pirsig's rejection of the Cartesian self certainly
>> doesn't mean the MOQ rejects any conception of the self. The MOQ's self
>> includes the body as well as the mind.
Marsha:
Shed SOM baggage? Really? If this isn't a statement from deep within SOM's
mind/body problem I don't know what is. I have repeatedly requested that dmb
correct his statement that the self within the MoQ consists for body and mind,
but he has evaded responding. Why should anyone assume dmb is not mired in a
som point-of-view when according to his statement his is?
___
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
