Arlo said to Krimel:
Yikes. You're using the terminology, but you're completely in a different
ballpark than Pirsig. Maybe that's where you want to be, maybe that works for
you, and all power to you. But when you say things like this I think there is
really no common ground between what Pirsig is saying and what you are saying;
same words but completely different discourse.
dmb says:
Exactly. If the various participants insist on using their own private
definitions of the MOQ's key terms, then moq-discuss will continue to be a
tower of babel. And Krimel's nonsense only serves to add more noise and
confusion.
Krimel replied to Arlo:
I find it impossible to believe that Pirsig endorses the new MoQ terminological
shift you endorse. It utterly undoes everything he says.
dmb says:
Arlo not only understands the key terms and uses them properly, he provided you
with a clear explanation and the textual evidence to support his explanation.
The only thing that this "utterly undoes" is your misconception and
misunderstanding of the key terms. It utterly undoes your misreadings of the
MOQ. How many times have you dismissed, disregarded or deleted this evidence so
far? Have you faced up to it even once? No, so far you've only produced lame
excuses and bogus evasions.
Krimel said:
In fact I take his silence on this point as clear evidence that he either does
not read this forum or does not give a shit.
dmb says:
Back in 2005, he told me that he reads it every morning. I haven't asked him
about that lately but I'd guess he still does. He also said that he has to
actively resist the urge to chime in. If he did, he's afraid, his authority
would squelch the conversation. So he remains silent. I think Ant stays pretty
quiet for the same reason.
Krimel said:
Claiming that Pirsig endorses this shift is in effect saying that since he had
done nothing for the Tao in his first book, he wrote a second for the sole
purpose of killing it dead.
dmb says:
Kills it dead? What does that mean and how did you come to that conclusion? I
can't make any sense of that, probably because it's nonsense.
Arlo said:
This seems to be a point of fundamental disagreement you have with Pirsig,
maybe that's your point, and that's fine.
Krimel replied:
I quite agree there is a radical departure from Pirsig at stake here but you
are confused if you think I am the one to have made it.
dmb says:
It seems clear to me that you'd have to ignore, delete and dismiss the textual
evidence in order to maintain that view. I guess that's why you have to keep
evading the evidence from Pirsig's books. If you took an honest look at the
arguments and the evidence your position would immediately collapse like a
cheap card table. - Apologies to all the cheap card tables of the world.
If you were playing fairly and honestly, you'd engage with the substance of the
matter, the arguments, the criticisms, and the evidence above all. I just not
seeing any of that from you. Quite the opposite.
I don't know how many times this has to been placed before your eyes already,
but apparently you are not seeing it.
Here is some solid evidence from our primary sources for the terminological
shift that you find so impossible to believe. Do you have any legitimate reason
for rejecting the clear and obvious parallels in conception on display here?
Nope, your replies have been nothing but distraction, diversion, smoke screens
and snark.
Pirsig said: "The quality that can be defined is not the Absolute Quality."
Pirsig said: "Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to
intellectual abstractions."
Pirsig said: "Dynamic Quality, the source of all things, the pre-intellectual
cutting edge of reality, always appears as 'spur of the moment'."
Pirsig said: "This preintellectual reality is what Phædrus felt he had properly
identified as Quality."
And there are about a hundred more pieces of evidence that'll support this use
of terms. Compare that to the pieces of evidence you've provided for you
position. I believe that number is zero.
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
