Ian had said:
To avoid the (unnecessary) mixing up, to avoid (unnecessarily) working the SOMism to death, let's disentangle any (low quality) narrow, GOF-SOMist-intellectual discourse from a wider (high quality, enlightened, extended) MoQ-ish-intellectual discourse - by expressing what more does the latter comprise, that makes it higher quality than the former. (And again, just to be clear, to recap, it's the discourse - the expression and argument - I'm talking about, not the underlying metaphysics, where I think we're all clear on MoQ-101, the primary S/O vs primary Q/DQ distinction.) [Ron says] The foundation of any expression and arguement lies in its underlying metaphysics (our system of belief). I think suggesting we can divorce them is a move away from taking any responsibilty for your arguement. We are not at all clear on MoQ-101, in fact it is what this dialog is all about. For example the very notion of "disentanglement" of (Low quality-SOM) as you equate, from (high quality MoQ-ish) expresses a misunderstanding of MoQ-101. I say it is a misunderstanding because taking it as representational and "true" to Pirsigs work, introduces several philosophical problems. I think Dmb 's post is fairly comprehensive in it's explanation regarding this topic. What makes MoQ-ish intellect better is it seeks to clarify and gain greater meaning to that which we take as "granted". therefore clarity, coherence, precision, are values not absolutes. Lets take a look at your skills in reading comprehension for example: > dmb says: > Dude, you've announced your agreement with one bland statement and totally > ignored the rest. Why ask the question if you're just going to ignore the > answer. Ian responds with: You say agreement is "bland". To me agreement is something positive worth noting,..(snip) [Ron points out] Notice Ian, Dave never said "agreement is bland". He said "you announced your agreement with one bland statement" He specifically stated your statement was bland. In fact it was an insincere gesture plus you just created a deliberate misrepresentation just so you can make a clumsy attempt to turn the disscussions topic towards a subjectmatter you think you can gain the upperhand on. (why else do it?). because you certainly do not seem interested in clearing anything up to come to any sort of "agreement". Ironically, any agreement requires ideas to be expressed clearly without misunderstanding. Clearly expressed ideas are more successful at creating positive meaningful agreement than ideas expressed poorly which often produce misunderstanding and dischord. Ian: Anyway, given that we agree, MOQ-ish intellectual discourse is "more than" GOF-SOMish intellectual discourse, I will return to some of the suggested answers, Arlo's and yours (and anyone else, before I do ?). [Ron] obviously not a very sincere statement, I still debate anyone agree's, leaving addressing any answers wrought with difficulties. . 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
