Dave, My comment was from a sudden realization that dmb had probably been subjected to such treatment himself. Poorly stated, though it might have been, it represented a sudden sadness. Unskillful? Quite possibly, but it was not meant to be cruel. I am writing offlist because I've already submitted my 4-per-day posts.
Marsha On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:21 PM, David Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9/6/13 11:19 PM, "MarshaV" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> dmb, >I shudder to think where you learned such tactics. >Marsha > > Ain¹t serendipity strange. About five weeks ago I fell and severely sprained > my ankle. So a majority of my time has been spent reading and of course > monitoring this and the Lila Squad lists. > I rarely post to either during the summer because it takes up time I prefer > spending on other activities. And, because overtime both lists have drifted > into individual polemics coupled with vicious personal attacks like this one > (that I find morally repugnant) and knowing that if I get involved I can and > will give as well as I get, I just choose to mostly avoid posting. > > > But Mr Buchanan beyond¹s the pale post yesterday I just couldn¹t ignore. > Thus my sarcastic response. My two current and parallel reads are seconds > passes thru Partrick Doorly¹s new ³The Truth about Art-Reclaiming Quality² > and Jonathan Haidt¹s, ³The Righteous Mind, Why Good People and Divided by > Politics and Religion.² > > > This morning I picked up where I left off in the later and and in the third > chapter, ³Elephants Rule² I read in section 4 ³Psychopaths reason but don¹t > feel²: > > > ³Roughly one in a hundred men (and many fewer women) are psychopaths. Most > are not violent, but the ones who are commit nearly half of the most serious > crimes....... There¹s the unusual stuff that psychopaths do-impulsive > antisocial behavior, beginning in childhood-and there are moral emotions > that psychopaths lack. ..... The ability to reason combined with a lack of > moral emotions is dangerous........ Psychopathy does not appear to be caused > by poor mothering or early trauma, or any other nurture-based explanation. > It¹s a genetically heritable condition that creates brains that are unmoved > by the needs, suffering, or dignity of others.² > > Some time ago, when I first read this book, in an exchange with DMB I > recommended he read it because I thought it posed serious scientific > challenge to Pirsig¹s MoQ theory. I suspect he did not take my suggestion or > if he did he felt that scientific finding above hit too close to home. > > Dave > > PS: Just as I was about to post this DMB¹s response to my previous post came > thru. It was yet another diatribe against Martha which ended with this: > > ³I think it's an uncanny description of Marsha's attitude, don't you?² > > Honestly? I think trying to evaluate a serious biological condition on the > basis of email list posts by even by someone trained and certified to > practice psychology or psychiatry would be irresponsible. By a untrained > layperson, morally repugnant. But my gut reaction based on the above I would > say you more closely or more likely fit that profile and she does. You have > a long and consistent history of bullying, badgering, and mounting > politically campaigns to drive people off this list who you judge to be not > ³intellectual² with little or no regard for their ³needs, suffering, or > dignity² >> On Sep 6, 2013, at 5:15 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This post is dedicated to my dear friend Marsha. > > > Can a psychopath be >> a good philosopher? > > > "There is a strong analogy here with >> postmodernism. Just as psychopaths lack moral virtues and values and do not >> want them, postmodernists lack epistemic virtues and values and do not want >> them. There is a trend in philosophy of science, in trying to distinguish >> science from pseudoscience and nonscience, which is not to look for any one >> or >> few essentialistic features but to find the distinction in a cluster-class of >> epistemic virtues and values that promote the pursuit of knowledge. Among >> these are being clear, valuing evidence, exposing theories to testing, not >> being dogmatic, keeping explanations and explanatory entities as simple as >> possible, and not letting politics determine good scholarship. This is why no >> religion or theology is a science and why astrology and homeopathy are not >> real sciences either. They lack epistemic virtues and values. And >> postmodernists lack them too. They lack them, and moreover they don¹t want >> them. In fact, in analogy with the narcissism of psychopaths, postmodernists >> view themselves as superior to those who possess epistemic virtues and >> values. >> They see themselves as above such things, as superior. ³You don¹t really >> think >> that people believe because of arguments, do you?² is a common question put >> by >> postmodernists, usually with an arrogant and condescending tone." > > See the >> full article at >> http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=fi&page=stamos_31_5 > > > >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing >> etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: >> h >> ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/a >> rchives.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 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
