Ron, I'm not complaining. I enjoy talking metaphysics and think the MoQ presents a Better way to interpret experience. But if I were thrown off the list, I'd just go back to my books. I have nothing to lose. I'm not Marsha-Marsha-Marsha, the wannabe, looking for the label of scholar, academic or intellectual. So whether what I present is labeled a 'blond joke', 'ignorant', or if I am called an asshole or Lucy, or you insinuate that I am self-centered, it's seen as projection and tells me something about what your made of. Marsha isn't anybody.
"'I mean, I used to play I was this kind of person and that kind of person but I got so tired of playing all those games. It's such work and it doesn't do any good. There's just all these pictures of who I am and they don't hold together. They're all different people I'm supposed to be but none of them are me. I'm not anybody. I'm not here. Like you now. I can see you've got a lot of bad impressions about me in your mind. And you think that what's in your mind is here talking to you but nobody's here. You know what I mean? Nobody's home. That's Lila. Nobody's home." Marsha On Nov 7, 2011, at 9:47 PM, X Acto wrote: > "The MOQ is a continuation of the mainstream of twentieth century American > philosophy, It is a form of pragmatism, of instrumentalism, which says the > test of the true is the good. It adds that this good is not a social code or > some intellectualized Hegelian Absolute. It is direct everyday experience." > (Lila 366) > > "The Metaphysics of Quality is not intended to be within any philosophic > tradition, although obviously it was not written in a vacuum. ... The > Metaphysics of Quality's central idea that the world is nothing but value is > not part of any philosophic tradition that I know of. I have proposed it > because it seems to me that when you look into it carefully it makes more > sense than all the other things the world is supposed to be composed of. One > particular strength lies in its applicability to quantum physics, where > substance has been dismissed but nothing except arcane mathematical formulae > has really replaced it." (RMP, 'A Brief Summary of the MOQ') > > Ron: > I think it's altogether silly to ignore words like "intended" and "That I > know of" and force such an > absolute denial that these statements confirm MoQ is CLASSIFIED as a FORM of > Pragmatism, > Pragmatism being a uniquely american tradition of philosophy. > > That it is CLASSIFIED as a form of Pragmatism has absolutely no bearing > whatsoever as far as Pirsigs > INTENTON of it being so or not. > > > But then again this isnt about making any sort of sense...it's about teaching > those boys a lesson, it's about > being a chick in the boys club...fighting the man...all about Marsha..you > know..yadda yadda > > aaaalllwayyys about marsha... > > marsha, marsha, 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
