Oh... It was helpful that you used the terms dmb's "beliefs" and "criticism" and not argument and rationality. Exactly!
On Aug 25, 2013, at 8:59 AM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ron had said to Ian: > 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. .... > > > > > dmb says: > > This isn't a very important point but it does speak to the need for us all to > write and read carefully. > > I did not mean to say that agreement is bland or that Ian's statement of > agreement was bland. The term "bland" was used to describe my own statement. > I was complaining that Ian responded to only one of my sentences and it was a > bland, introductory sentence in which I had said very little. It was just one > more way to complain about the lack of substance in Ian's response. Look.... > > I said to Ian, "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? Don't you have anything to say about the quotes > and explanations I offered? If it's not what you're looking for, then what > are you asking? How did my answers fail to address your question?" And then a > few lines later, I made the same complaint again. I reposted the entire thing > and said to Ian, "here's the part you did not mention at all, which is all of > my post except for that one boring, introductory sentence. It would be nice > if you read it, thought about and responded to it with some coherent thoughts > of your own." > > That still has not happened. In fact, I can't recall any legitimate responses > from Ian or Marsha. It's weird. It's like they think you can just wave a flag > and say "hurrah" and that makes you a philosopher or a MOQ. Apparently, they > love philosophy except for that part where you have to think and speak and > otherwise grapple with ideas. > > [Ron]: > Thanks for clarifying Dave. Reading it through with your intended meaning > certainly makes more sense, yet I still feel Ians > lack of substance in his response could be described as "bland" also, It > seems to me that they share a love for the deconstruction > of philosophy. > Take for example Marsha's recent posts concerning Bob's psychosis in which > she attempts to elevate and equate > catatonic expressions of schizophrenia including central nervous system > disease where hallucenations and delusional > behaviour are painted as somehow superior to intellectual excellence. > > Marsha bemoans: > Are there still areas of inquiry and discovery, or should one blindly swallow > dmb's argument of "a volume of material", "the disease" and "the cure"; > therefore he is right? Ian asked a question that has not been properly > addressed. > > [Ron] > As far as I know, Dave HAS answered and explained the reasons for his beliefs > several times whereas both Ian and Marsha have yet > to respond with any explanation of their own save only to say that Daves > criticism is bogus, no explanation as to why it is bogus. > > Talk about blindly swallowing !! that is EXACTLY what they ask us to do when > they refuse to explain. In fact, what I gather > about their whole arguement is it all surrounds a non-thinking acceptance of > ideas, a "blind swallowing" if you will. > Never mind that Robert Pirsig himself is quoted as supporting both DMB and > Dr. McWatt in their interpretations of his work, > nevermind the paragraphs apon paragraphs of quotes supported by well reasoned > explainations which renders Pirsigs MoQ > as a coherent whole concept. > > Nahhhh > > Believe the folks who ask you not to think.. > > The Church and the Government agree. Please dont think..thinking is bad. > > > .. > 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
