Dmb about disruptions "Sadly, the thing that gets lost in these petty games is the substance of the matter. Instead of worrying about who's being naughty or nice, we should be worrying about what's true and untrue of the MOQ. These social games disrupt the point and purpose of this forum, which is supposed to be intellectual and philosophical."
------------------------------------------------------------------ Adrie Sad but true,this crap is what we get instead of working on the models. I suppose all classrooms have a choirus of prankers on the back rows. Anyway,what You and Paul have to do and should be doing,is to unfold the content and intentions of the presentd work. You are both extremely capable,and there should never be a contest,a better insight is the highest goal. 2013/6/15 MarshaV <[email protected]> > > dmb, > > I can only repeat what I said to djh: > > Marsha to djh: > You didn't offer the context, so I don't know if the statements extracted > from your search pertain to dmb or intellectual patterns, so let me put it > like this: I don't care (to be concerned or solicitous; have thought or > regard.) what dmb thinks. As I stated, dmb is not my moral or intellectual > compass. I am _interested_ (curious) in everyone's opinion, but that does > not mean that I must accept those opinion's. As for intellectual patterns, > I am tremendously _interested_ in intellectual patterns, but feel no need > to be attached to them. > > > Marsha > > > > On Jun 15, 2013, at 12:36 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > David Harding said: > > > > Marsha will actively claim that she doesn't care about what folks (in > particular dmb) think... A quick search of the archives here for the > phrase "I don't care what you think." - except for three messages - all the > rest (fourteen) are from you (or repeats of something you've written) to > someone else. This lack of care for intellectual patterns of folks on here > results in a lack of change or improvement of your opinion. As said > previously - it's ironic, considering your definition of static patterns > includes the term of 'ever-changing'. > > > > > > > > dmb says to all MOQers: > > > > I think it's much, much worse than anyone realizes. One could search the > archives of this forum to write an entire book about the stuff Marsha has > said to me for past eight years. The subject of that book would be that > green-eyed monster called envy. It began right after the conference in > Liverpool in July of 2005. As the old-timers around here might recall, > Pirsig dubbed me his "bodyguard" for defending his work in this forum, he > told Paul Turner and myself that we understood the MOQ better than he did > and he said my conference paper had gone "very deep". This is exactly when > Marsha went sour. > > > > In August of 2005, her reaction was to say exactly the opposite of > Pirsig. Oh, it's a good paper she said, "But your telling of the Orphic > story was very shallow. The story is much older and much deeper than your > [sic] telling. The story is about something lost. The important question > is: What's been lost???" > > > > > > Fast forward about 5 years, to November of 2010, a year after Pirsig had > praised Ant and I as the world's foremost experts on the MOQ as we prepared > to present his work at Oxford's MOQ Study Day, and you can see this > green-eyed monster is still saying the opposite. > > > > > > [Marsha]Did RMP say that dmb is the only "philosopher" that understands > the MoQ? > > [Arlo]And so begins the carnival mirror. I'll play, for the moment. To > answer, no. I believe he named Ant as well. > > [Marsha]And in general, is dmb any more a "philosopher" than you, or > Mark, or Dan, or John, or Ron? > > [Arlo]Ah, methinks me sees the a reflection of the green devil in that > mirror? > > I believe, to get back to what was actually said and not this silly > mirror, that Pirsig believes DMB is one of two people who understand the > MOQ the most, and I think this is a repeat of what was said in the DVD. > Along with DMB, I think that list should most definitely be expanded to > include David Granger, and I personally would be tempted to make a nod here > too to Matthew Crawford (Shop Class as Soul Craft) even if his primary > emphasis was ZMM. On my personal short list, I'd also include Horse and > Dan. Over the years I've found there respective understanding of Pirisg to > be unparalleled. > > You know, of course, that this does not make you or me or Mark or Ron > and John, or Pierce, or Nietzsche, or Hegel or Kant, or Plato, or James, or > Johnny Lydon or Bugs Bunny "any less a philosopher". You know, of course, > that Pirsig was not naming who is and who is not "a philosopher". What he > was doing was pointing out who he thinks understands his ideas with the > most accuracy. > > [Marsha]If RMP said dmb has a firm grip of his ideas, does that mean > absolutely every aspects? > > [Arlo]I'm going to break out of this silly carnival mirror again. The > context here was that you repeatedly called DMB's understanding of the MOQ > "shallow", it was not about whether he is right on every single detail. To > that, I think I would say that Pirsig obviously does not think DMB's > understanding of his work is "shallow", and I would think Pirsig would know. > > [Marsha]Does that mean that no one but dmb has a firm grip on his ideas? > > [Arlo]Back into the carnival mirror again. Okay then, no, he named Ant > as well. > > [Marsha]What is a psychological issue within the MoQ? > > [Arlo]Per this context, when hostility and acrimony are a barrier to > intellectual patterns. In this case, after repeatedly doing nothing but > accusing DMB of having a "shallow" understanding of the MOQ, when he > finally breaks and presents a supportive word from Pirsig that shows the > exact opposite to be true, you STILL are doing nothing but acting out of > hostility, now trying to twist the context into whether DMB is right about > every detail, about whether other people are "philosophers", etc, all of > which have nothing whatsoever to do with what has been said, just ways you > are looking for to keep attacking DMB. > > > > > > > > dmb continues in the present: > > > > I don't expect everybody to be familiar with this long history. I want > everyone around here to realize how long this has been going on. Khoo and > others have complained about the way I treat Marsha, as if there is no good > reason for me to complain, to criticize, to lose my patience or to be rude. > Given the context, the last eight years, I think Marsha deserves ten times > more rudeness than she gets. > > > > Sadly, the thing that gets lost in these petty games is the substance of > the matter. Instead of worrying about who's being naughty or nice, we > should be worrying about what's true and untrue of the MOQ. These social > games disrupt the point and purpose of this forum, which is supposed to be > intellectual and philosophical. Isn't clear by now that Marsha doesn't care > about the latter, has no respect for the latter and even feels contempt for > philosophy? Nobody ever thinks they're the bad guy, but jeez. If you doubt > my story, go look for yourself. There is a long record in the archives. I'm > telling you Marsha has been a stone in my shoe ever since she heard Pirsig > say nice things about me. She just cannot bear the thought, apparently. And > this has nothing to do with philosophy or the MOQ. Zip, zero, nada. It's > just about Marsha's petty jealousy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > -- parser 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
