Marsha said to Ant McWatt:
I can accept that dmb has different value judgements than mine as a result of
our different histories and current patterns of values.
Ant Mcwatt said to his dear Marsha:
What you have said is true but in this context of a philosophical discussion
group if you just produce the occasional mystical quote then you won't be
making the most of your knowledge about Pirsig's work or the Discussion group.
...Though you have provided some good links and references over the years, I
can't remember reading one of your numerous posts and thinking "Hey, that's a
good way of putting of that!". ...the production of quotes is very static. In
fact, it could be considered a form of trolling. ...Unfortunately, you can't
be removed from this discussion group for being boring though - in future - I
do hope to hear more original thoughts from the "real" Marsha than these
mystical quotes. I know you're relatively very well read so you could do a lot
more to help people new to the MOQ (and Pirsig's work in general).
dmb says:
It seems that you're trying to help, Doc, but you're very much missing the
point. I dare say that you might even be making it worse. As you've construed
it, Marsha's deployment of naked quotes is boring, unoriginal, and represents a
lost opportunity to helpfully contribute her knowledge of the MOQ. The problem
is that Marsha's quotes are irrelevant - absurd non-sequitors - and she uses
them to evade the substance of the matter. The only honest and fair way to deal
with this situation is to deal with the substance of the matter. This is
exactly what Marsha refuses to do and you're not doing it either. How many
times do I have to point out that this is a philosophical discussion group? How
about if we discuss philosophical ideas and their relative merits? If we would
only do what we're supposed to be doing, everyone (including you, I hope) would
clearly see that Marsha has nothing to contribute. (I have asked you to examine
her "original" thoughts and please explain how they a
re anything other than unintelligible gibberish. Except for Arlo, it seems
that nobody has addressed the substance of these complaints.
What reason do we have to believe that Marsha understands anything about the
MOQ? And surely there is a difference between reading a lot and reading well.
As far as I can tell, she has never understood anything I've ever said, never
got the point of anything and never given a proper answer to any criticism.
This is irresponsible and dishonest. It's disruptive. It's produces nothing but
hostility, confusion and distraction. But as you've construed it, Marsha has
only hidden her secret intellectuality by using the wrong style! Seriously,
what reason is there to think she understands the MOQ? I don't see any evidence
of that. I believe that when I see it.
Don't you see what she's doing here? Instead of making any effort to address
the actual complaints, Marsha has dismissed the substance by suggesting that
our differences are just a matter of "result of our different histories and
current patterns of values". This is just one a many, many cases wherein she
implies that there is no such thing as being wrong. There is no point in
discussing the actual merits of actual ideas because everybody has their own
values and their own ideas. She's not incorrect, the implication says, just a
different person with her culture and her own standards of intellectual
quality. That is an outrageously self-serving distortion of the idea and she's
only using it to evade the responsibility of answering for her own claims and
assertions. That's the substance of the matter. That's what almost never gets
addressed and it's certainly not being addressed here either. What could be
MORE appropriate to a discussion group than actually taking the discussi
on seriously? C'mon, how is this even debatable? This is so damn obvious that
it shouldn't even have to be said.
Ant McWatt also said Marsha dearest:
Finally, the other issue that I personally have with this Discussion group is
that there are relatively too many white Western male contributors as it is so,
at the same time, I wouldn't be too happy to see you unsubscribe (being a
female) especially after Khoo's untimely exit recently. The fewer cultural
perspectives that we have at Discuss, the weaker we will be as a Discussion
group.
dmb says:
Gender a totally bogus reason to retain an incompetent troll and I hardly think
Connecticut counts as a different culture. C'mon, Doc. Now you're being silly.
The MOQ's moral codes say that social and biological values should not be
allowed to interfere with intellectual progress, right? What do you suppose
that means with respect to this discussion group? I think it means that one's
merit is measured by basic intellectual standards, at least. And we hope that
is done artfully. But simply refusing to do it at all? I think that's obviously
not acceptable.
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
