Dear Marsha I find the contributions from Andre, Ron and Dmb dynamic and interesting. Your static stubborness is fascinating. Just follow your heart (Castaneda), your experience and intellectual sense for feelings. Whatever makes you happy would be enough I think.
J A 28 aug 2013 kl. 10:56 skrev MarshaV <[email protected]>: > > Andre, > > You and Ron and dmb can offer up any intellectual topic that you'd like for > discussion. Interesting that none of you can seem to do that? You'd rather > talk about Marsha. That seems to demonstrate the level of your intellectual > competency: > > > Great people talk about ideas, > average people talk about things, > small people talk about other people. > > > > Marsha > > > > > On Aug 28, 2013, at 4:45 AM, Andre Broersen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Marsha said, in response to dmb's observation about her '...confused >> anti-intellectualism leaves you rather empty handed, doesn't it?': >> >> No, not when my aim has been to explore RMP's writing, rather than accept >> your (David Buchanan) opinions, beliefs, assertions and criticisms as >> Scripture. Your paraphrasing has never impressed me. I can accept that you >> have different value judgements than mine as a result of our different >> histories and current patterns of values, but I find no sound reason to >> adopt them. RMP said: >> >> "Remember that the central reality of the MOQ >> is not an object or a subject or anything else. >> It is understood by direct experience only >> and not by reasoning of any kind." >> >> Andre: >> It's curious to follow this type of response which Lucy delivers time and >> time again. The 'central reality of the MOQ' is, as dmb and Pirsig suggest >> (and a few other posters here) Dynamic Quality. This cannot be defined but >> only pointed to. As Pirsig says: 'Quality is a direct experience independent >> of and prior to intellectual abstractions'(LILA, p 66). But we are NOT here >> discussing nor exploring DQ. Any discussion and writing when communicated >> (even to yourself) is already static quality. >> >> We are here discussing and exploring RMP's writings, i.e. his metaphysical >> programme, his MoQ, which is a static intellectual pattern of value. >> 'Slowly at first, and then with increasing awareness that he was going in a >> right direction, Phaedrus' central attention turned away from any further >> explanation of Dynamic Quality and turned toward the static patterns >> themselves.'(LILA, p 126) >> >> And the result is the MoQ. >> >> What Lucy is exploring is her own interpretation of experience which, as a >> result of her different history and current patterns of value (i.e. her >> personal development) seems far from adequate. This type of 'consciousness' >> will not solve anything. It certainly will not make the world a little >> better. >> It is confused, partial and self-centered; the direct antithesis of Pirsig's >> MoQ which leads to a 'going beyond', 'overcoming', 'transcending', >> 'expansion of' the narrow, partial, egotistically oriented behaviours and >> reasoning we are all too familiar with (just turn on the news tonight). > 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
