dmb said:
The second question (Is Pirsig right?) can't really be raised until the first
one (What does Pirsig mean?) has been answered pretty well. The attempts to be
clear about what Pirsig is and is not saying are bizarrely construed as
oppressive dogmatism or an evil static trap. Why in the world would we NOT
want to know what Pirsig means? What is the point and purpose of this
discussion group?
John replied:
Pretty well? You mean all the commas counted? The whole thing sliced, diced and
thoroughly intellectually analyzed? I think the MoQ is a pretty nifty tool for
avoiding static traps. Methinks you're mainly concerned with turning it into a
static trap. You got the impulses of a priest, dave, and this your religion.
dmb says:
Yes, of course, understanding what Pirsig means is going to entail a thorough
intellectual analysis. The purpose of this forum is to talk about a set of
philosophical ideas known as the MOQ. What could be more appropriate than a
careful analysis of those ideas? It's like complaining about mechanical
precision at the auto repair shop. These complaints are fantastically idiotic.
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
