Hi dmb, On Aug 28, 2012, at 6:06 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote:
> dmb: > You can honestly say that reading this collection of quotes DOESN't explain > anything? Marsha: It is a list of quotes without any explanation whatsoever. I assume if you wanted the list of quotes to represent an explanation you would have explained how it did, but you didn't. Marsha On Aug 28, 2012, at 12:57 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi dmb, > > > On Aug 28, 2012, at 12:22 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> dmb constructed some of Marsha words: >> It is true that patterns may include a collection of words, and I take >> patterns as hypothetical (supposed but not neccesarily real or true). I >> think considering patterns to be hypothetical acknowledges the >> incompleteness of patterns and makes room for new possibilities. ...I'll >> stick to considering static patterns of value as hypothetical. ...I did not >> state that 'truth' was wrong, bad or didn't exist. I stated that I value >> more highly using the word 'pattern' rather then 'truth'; and I prefer to >> think of patterns as 'hypothetical'. ...I prefer to think of objects of >> knowledge (patterns) as hypothetical. Once one accepts the MoQ's >> fundamental principal that the world is nothing but Value, then 'expanded >> rationality' occurs when an individual transforms the natural tendency to >> reify self and world into the natural tendency to hold all static patterns >> of value to be hypothetical (supposed but not neccesarily real or true.) By >> using 'hypothetical' ...After much thou g > ht >> , I wrote a very careful explanation of why I prefer to think of patterns as >> hypothetical: > > > Marsha: > I don't appreciate the way you chop up my statements, rearrange them and > remove them from their context. I suppose to misrepresent my comments and > try to confuse everyone is the best you can do. > > > >> dmb says: >> Marsha is using the MOQ's critique of SOM against the MOQ itself. She is >> inappropriately using Pirsig's attack on Objective truth to attack Pirsig's >> own pragmatic truth. She has confused the sickness with the medicine. That's >> how she ends up denigrating truth, philosophy, the MOQ itself and >> intellectual values in general. It's a heart-breaking pile of incoherent >> drivel, confusion and conflation of the operative terms, and big heaps of >> contradictory nonsense. >> > > > Marsha: > So now we get your affected opinion piece served with a bunch of unrelated, > unreferenced, unexplained quotes. I suppose the reader is suppose to > construct some kind of coherent argument for himself? The quotes seem to be > from ZAMM, but who can know or even guess. The MoQ isn't even mentioned. > Are those quotes somehow suppose to represent some kind of evidence? Guess, > Baby, guess! No clearly articulated premises, no clearly explained evidence, > no direct conclusion, and absolutely no argument. > > You keep repeating the same intellectual malfunctioning. It's boring. I am > personally quite tired of you groundless attacks. If others find you > fascinating, that's fine with me. > > > Marsha > > > >> THE PROBLEM - Our modes of rationality are no longer adequate. >> >> "Our current modes of rationality are not moving society forward into a >> better world. They are taking it further and further from that better world. >> ...the whole structure of reason, handed down to us from ancient times, is >> no longer adequate. It begins to be seen for what it really is...emotionally >> hollow, esthetically meaningless and spiritually empty." >> "I think the basic fault that underlies the problem of stuckness is >> traditional rationality's insistence upon "objectivity," a doctrine that >> there is a divided reality of subject and object. For true science to take >> place these must be rigidly separate from each other." >> "When traditional rationality divides the world into subjects and objects it >> shuts out Quality, and when you're really stuck it's Quality, not any >> subjects or objects, that tells you where you ought to go." >> "the thing to be analyzed, is not Quality, but those peculiar habits of >> thought called 'squareness' that sometimes prevent us from seeing it. ..The >> subject for analysis, the patient on the table, was no longer Quality, but >> analysis itself. Quality was healthy and in good shape. Analysis, however, >> seemed to have something wrong with it that prevented it from seeing the >> obvious." >> "He did nothing for Quality or the Tao. What benefited was reason." The >> problem is that "Reason and Quality had become separated and in conflict >> with each other" back in the days of Plato. >> >> THE SOLUTION - A root expansion of rationality through the inclusion of >> Quality at it's center; rationality, like motorcycle maintenance, becomes a >> form of art. >> "He [Phaedrus] felt that the solution started with a new philosophy, or he >> saw it as even broader than that...a new spiritual rationality...in which >> the ugliness and the loneliness and the spiritual blankness of dualistic >> technological reason would become illogical. Reason was no longer to be >> "value free." Reason was to be subordinate, logically, to Quality." >> "What's emerging from the pattern of my own life is the belief that the >> crisis is being caused by the inadequacy of existing forms of thought to >> cope with the situation. It can't be solved by rational means because the >> rationality itself is the source of the problem. The only ones who're >> solving it are solving it at a personal level by abandoning 'square' >> rationality altogether and going by feelings alone. Like John and Sylvia >> here. And millions of others like them. And that seems like a wrong >> direction too. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that the solution to the >> problem isn't that you abandon rationality but that you expand the nature of >> rationality so that it's capable of coming up with a solution." >> "Now I want to show that that classic pattern of rationality can be >> tremendously improved, expanded and made far more effective through the >> formal recognition of Quality in its operation." >> "I think that it will be found that a formal acknowledgment of the role of >> Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical vision at >> all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to actual >> scientific practice." >> "A motorcycle functions entirely in accordance with the laws of reason, and >> a study of the art of motorcycle maintenance is really a miniature study of >> the art of rationality itself." >> >> >> 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
