> Marsha Now what would be some of the ways RMP might possibly respond? He might state that Dan is correct because the statement he presented better represents the foundation of the MoQ. Or he might state that Marsha is better because the quote she presented more correctly represents the MoQ. Or he might state that both quotes are good, but the foundation of the MoQ is the idea that the world is nothing but value. Or he might state that in presenting such quotes we only prove we're both clueless. Or he might state it's as William James says... Or he might suggest we consult Anthony. Or he might state Joe has had it right all along. Or he might state it's for everyone to work it out as BEST they can. Etc., &etc., &etc...........
No one is suggesting it is anything goes, but neither is there any verification it is just as YOU think it to be. Ron: Some ideas and opinions are better than others. Some are truer and more accurate to RMP's work than others. Some are better able to explain their own understanding but when it comes to verification continuity in meaning is what is looked for. Any quote can be taken out of contextual continuity and rendered un verifiable rhetorically but when we look at what Pirsig aims at, those quotes should be consistant with that aim which should help our understanding as to just what understanding is truest to his own. If we use the tools handed to us we can dispense with authoritative interpretations. All you have to do is the work. Then all we have to do is look at the practical consequences of holding one idea or another as "truer" or "better" than another. .om 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
