And dmb,

Though you may not like it, I put together a definition of static patterns of 
value.  You can hardly accuse me of neglecting static patterns of value.


Marsha




On Mar 25, 2012, at 1:53 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> Robert Pirsig wrote: 
> "In the past Pheadrus' own radical bias caused him to think of Dynamic 
> Quality alone and neglect static patterns of quality. Until now he had always 
> felt that these static patterns were dead. They have no love. They offer no 
> promise of anything. To succumb to them is to succumb to death, since that 
> which does not change cannot live. But now he was beginning to see that this 
> radical bias weakened his own case. Life cannot exist on Dynamic Quality 
> alone. It has no staying power. To cling to Dynamic Quality is to cling to 
> chaos. He saw that much can be learned about Dynamic Quality by studying what 
> it is not rather that futilely trying to define what it is... Slowly at 
> first, and then with increasing awareness that he was going in a right 
> direction, Phaedrus' central attention turned away from any further 
> explanation of Dynamic Quality and turned to the static patterns themselves" 
> (Robert Pirsig in Lila).
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 25, 2012, at 12:48 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>> 
>>> dmb:
>>> "In the past Pheadrus' own radical bias caused him to think of Dynamic 
>>> Quality alone (as you seem to be doing Marsha) and neglect static patterns 
>>> of quality (as you seem to be doing Marsha). 
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha:
>> Why, because you think so?   I do not value your opinion, and your 
>> point-of-view is not interesting to me.  You seem to think progress is 
>> agreeing with you.   There are multiple ways to experience the MoQ.  I am 
>> interested in the MoQ as a bridge between the East and West.  From RMP's 
>> initial interest in Northrop's 'Meeting of East and West: An Inquiry 
>> Concerning World Understanding' and his recommendation of Steve Hagan's book 
>> ‘Buddhism: Plain and Simple’, I think he is quite interested in 
>> accommodating both East and West philosophies.  
> 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> Did anyone say Pirsig is NOT interested in accommodating East and West? No, 
> of course not. That much can be seen by reading nothing more than the title 
> of his first book. And that uncontested point is completely irrelevant 
> anyway. The point is to show that your position is contradicted by the 
> evidence. You've dismissed Pirsig's explicit statement (the evidence of what 
> Pirsig thinks) as if it were just my opinion or the opinion of whoever quotes 
> Pirsig. I take this to mean that you do not understand what counts as 
> evidence or what counts as a reasonable interpretation. As usual, you seem to 
> be incapable of understanding this criticism as such. You take the use of 
> textual evidence as an argument from authority or a form of persecution 
> against you personally. That's totally twisted, upside down and backwards.
> 
> This is just more proof of your incompetence, Marsha. You can't even stay on 
> the topic, let alone say anything relevant about it.                          
>  
> 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

Reply via email to