Neat post there Arlo. I couldn't agree more. Best wishes,
Ant ---------------------------------------- Arlo stated November 26th 2012: [DMB] > The first one is that Western intellectuals cannot escape subject-object > metaphysics and the second is that the MOQ is something other than Pirsig's > philosophy as presented in his books. > > [Arlo] > Right. I've been saying for quite sometime that Pirsig's rhetorical use of > "the MOQ says" as a placeholder for "I say" continues to be a source of great > confusion for some here. I think it'd be a nice experiment if Horse set up a > filter that would replace the string "the MOQ" in all posts with "Pirsig". > This "I am here to discuss the MOQ and I don't care what Pirsig said" is > bizarre rhetoric that really only evidences very muddled thinking. There is, > of course, nothing wrong with proposing counter ideas, or disagreeing or > expanding, and if we have an eye towards a larger, emergent field of related > theories, there should always be an emphasis of clarity and precision on what > was said, what is being agreed with, what is being disagreed with, and why > one's ideas provide a better overall metaphysics than the ones it is > diverging from. > > Marsha is in a difficult spot, because she still adheres to Bo's MOQ where > the entire intellectual level IS subject-object metaphysics. She can only > allude to this, of course, but this reconstruction of Pirsig informs all her > ideas here, it leaves her really with little to do BUT attack 'intellect' as > 'the problem'. This is reason why Mark and Marsha pretty much talk to > themselves (apart from attempts by you and others to address their > misconceptions). Mark is the classic "my ignorance is just as good as your > knowledge" case study (with love to Asimov), which is why together they > amount to pretty much a constant bombast attacking those on this list that > have/had direct contact with Pirsig, and (gasp!) dare to cite and offer > quotes from Pirsig in a forum dedicated to discussing and understanding > Pirsig's ideas. > > Andre lamented the direction of things here, and the constant volume from > those who clearly do not understand Pirsig and really only serve here to > shout down anyone who actually spends time on Pirsig's ideas. Why do you > think people like David Granger never participate, even intermittently? Why > do you think that of all the people presenting and behind MSU's upcoming > Pirsig conference, only DMB spends any time here? Why do you think Ant, who > is friends with Pirsig and who completed a PhD through interaction with > Pirsig, doesn't spend a lot of time here anymore? I can say with pretty much > certainty its not just because of the nonsense and continual misconceptions, > but the bombast that meets any attempt to provide clarity to those who most > obviously need it. And, of course, the absence of these voices is exactly > what they prefer, since anyone with authority or insight into Pirsig's ideas > is just a 'static intellectual preacher'. But its created a vacuous space > where anyone who a > ctually did come here to talk and learn about Pirsig would be met only with > the loud voices of those who understand Pirsig the least. > > [DMB] > Since all philosophers are stuck in SOM, all thinking is hopelessly illusory, > all concepts are inherently reified, then nothing counts as excellence in > thought and Pirsig's words can never count as evidence for Pirsig's intended > meaning. You see the problem with that? > > [Arlo] > I certainly do. And I imagine that aside from Marsha and Mark most do as > well. As you pointed out, if all philosophy is SOM, why even be here in the > first place? Why join an intellectual philosophical discussion about Pirsig's > ideas if you find intellectual discourse repugnant, philosophy hopelessly > missing the point of life, and Pirsig to be uninformative on his own ideas? > > I get that, for some, feeding of animosity is kind of a psychological rush. > Trolling, is of course, a highly popular activity for the bored and > uninsightful. But seriously, when that becomes the bulk of the stuff here, > what's the point? Right now, I'd say the trolls are winning, since more than > 95% of what I see come through are the trolls and the conflict they are > hoping to create. To be fair, I don't think Marsha is trolling as much as > struggling to interject the old SOLAQI thing, and looking for excuses to > attack those who have, rightly, rejected it as a representation of Pirsig's > ideas. But Mark, he's nothing but a troll, amigo. > > In any event, don't be discouraged. > > > > > 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
