Ron my friend,

On 8/15/12, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Mark had said:
> If Mark is mad, then so are you.  You are repeating what I wrote.  Welcome
> aboard!  Good luck with some of the others though.  Insanity is overrated,
> just read the books by Pirsig to grasp that.  You on the other hand just
> seem angry.  Good luck with that.  Maybe you need a new cathode tube.
>
> Ron replies:
> Mark, I find it difficult to discern that we are talking about the same
> thing. Your post attacks Pirsigs
> criticism of scientific objectivism as a criticism of all science then tries
> to paint that criticism as a straw
> man and Pirsig as a foolish layman who really does not understand sceince.
> This makes you come off like a pompus egotistical ass that has really not
> took the time to
> carefully read the material. This indeed raises the hackles of those of us
> who have done the reading.

Mark:
That you do not comprehend what I write does not mean we differ in
viewpoint.  I will be the judge as to whether we agree or not, since
your posts are rather simplistic and two dimensional.  I have yet to
see something creative coming from your pen.

The "philosophical" post which you provided the forum (above) is
complete nonsense, and you know it.  If you want to be one of the
righteous who are governed by pride, then this is not the forum for
you.  Try a political forum; there you can call people names and be
rewarded for it.

In response to what you claim is "criticism" Pirsig I can state the
following.  Nobody is more indebted to Pirsig than I.  You are a
tag-along and while your posts are often interesting, they are pure
Western drivel.  I would hazard to say that I have read both ZAMM and
Lila more times than you have.  What is taken from such books are not
the words, but rather what those words stimulate.  It appears to me
that they have not stimulated much in you since you keep referring to
the books as gospel.  What is in these books is only a small part of
what is intended by Pirsig.  There are way too many literalists in
this forum.

Let me reiterate what I said concerning science, in another way.
There is a big difference between observing formal science and
creating it in real time.  Scientific creations are as much art as a
da Vinci (who also dabbled in science) painting.  We can sit around
and look at the Mona Lisa, but that is entirely different from
painting it, entirely.  This is what I mean by layman.  I, of course,
am a layman in many things.  For example I am not a musician.  For me,
music comes in as an object of affection and enables my creativity.  I
leave the song writing to others.

Science involves the creation of structure, just like a constellation
is a structure.  It is provisional and depends on the people involved
in it.  Currently there is a trend to impose Darwinism on everything.
This too shall pass since that is how science works.  Who knows what
we will come up with in 50 -100 years!  Pirsig uses science since it
is the currency of the day.  Within each age, each teacher uses the
lingo of the day.

Pirsig rightly states that Scientism is way too powerful.  Such a
religion is based on "promissory materialism" (read what Popper or
Eccles have to say on this to learn more).  It is completely two
dimensional.  Realizing this opened the door for neo-Cartesian duality
which separated the mind from the brain (read Eccles, who was a
neuroscientist).  This is of course also standard Zen teaching, there
is a mind outside the brain.  One can certainly criticize the displays
made by science and say that they are insufficient, however the
scientific method can also be used to explore the mystical (read
Occult Science by Rudolf Steiner, free from Kindle).  The scientific
method is pattern recognition, pure and simple.  As humans we have an
enormous capacity for such pattern recognition (or creation if you
will).

If the fact that I live and breathe science makes me into an ass so
far as you are concerned, then how about you provide me with your
profession and I will say the same about you.  Besides, from your
posts your pomposity stands clear.  Just who do you think you are?
Are you God's gift to Pirsig?  You are small minded and stuck.  I pay
you a compliment and say that I agree with you, and all you respond
with is rubbish.  Well, good luck with that.

If you actually want to discuss philosophy, then I am all ears.  Maybe
you have something to say about the interrelationship between DQ and
SQ.  We can only hope.  Try to relax and not be so reactive.  Maybe
you are a fireman in real life, but there is no fire here.  There is
nothing you need to stamp out.  There is not even any smoke except
maybe between your ears.

Cheers,
Mark
>
>
> .
> 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