Ian, I can appreciate your endeavors to appeal to everyone getting along, but, what I have learned about Quality is that people simply are NOT going to get along! the important aspect to concentrate on is HOW we dont get along. If we can argue our beliefs clearly and explain our reasons why we hold them we have a better chance of persuading others to place themselves in our own position and perhaps adopt one or two of our beliefs or drop one or two. We can persuade others as to why we feel some things are better than others. Why we are here right? to polish that skill. Having said this, it becomes a problem when contributors refuse to explain their reasons for their beliefs. It becomes counter-productive to refuse to engage in a dialog in favor of the monolog. Simply because (as it seems) they think its too bothersome to invest the time and the effort to clarify what they mean. It's all any of the bull dogs are pointing to. I have become removed from the discuss recently and often I can only lurk but I hope the differences expressed by Dmb, Ant, Marsha and Dan get worked out in a meaningful dialog and they all choose to activly engage in the art of rhetoric in a clear reasonable and effective manner to express their reasons for their beliefs, Khoo could have taken that route too but chose to make a knee-jerk decision to leave, who knows whats going on in his life to influence his decisions but I would hesitate to blame it on anyone. If people choose to leave because they are called to task to be more clear about their thoughts and explain what they mean then perhaps a philosophy foeum is not the place for them. I think Dan asked a rather good question in another thread and I will pose it to you to explain how you feel. Is contradiction and unintelligibilty better than clarity, precision and the intelligible? if so how and why? How is the obscure and vague better than the precise and clear? Thx -Ron ..
From: Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 10:12 AM Subject: Re: [MD] Marsha My Dear With Ant having defused the DMB response with humour perhaps we could get back to the point. I too winced a little at the rather patronising "Marsha My Dear" headline, but hey, it's really tough to make a difficult point on this forum these days, a point that doesn't fit the "accepted MD ideology" - and you have to start somewhere. Well done Ant for making the effort. I've tried and get roundly shouted down by the baying mob of Pirsig bulldogs. The point is balance. Any evolutionary ecosystem, any democracy, needs to defend it's minority interests. Most shocking was Dan's "what difference does it make ... " line. [shakes head] Pirsig and "them pesky redskins" working title for Lila - hello? Even after we've had Paul pointing out the two contexts within the MoQ we still get one shouting down the other. If we can't handle that gawd 'elp us add with every gender / national / racial / cultural / cognitive-style / metaphysical perspective variation. Nice try Ant, and thanks for being a sport Marsha, we know you don't actually need our help, but when Khoo left in the circumstances he did, I really hoped the bulldogs might have had an epiphany. Ian 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
