Ron, I do not understand your questions Please clarify.
On Dec 6, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Ron Kulp wrote: > Marsha, > The topic is and always was > What Bob Pirsig means, since > You posted it originally I'd say > The onus is on you, what were > You trying to say with the quote? > How does " hypothetical" relate > To how RMP accounts for value > Rigidity being overcome? > Then I can make some valid > Criticism. Right now I'm not > Understanding how the two > Relate in your interpretation. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Dec 6, 2013, at 8:53 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Ron, >> >> I asked you how you were defining 'fact'. It is for you to answer. It is >> you who are squirming away. Analogy: >> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Analogy?s=t >> >> I think by 'value rigidity' RMP means, in the Buddhist sense, attachment. >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Dec 6, 2013, at 8:15 AM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Marsha, >>> It is drawn from the experience of >>> Reading the pirsig quote , exactly >>> What do you suppose RMP means >>> When he uses the term "fact"? >>> You are getting ridiculous trying to squirm away from the point of the >>> Quote, what do you think pirsig meant by the monkey analogy? >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On Dec 6, 2013, at 7:12 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Ron, >>>> >>>> And? Was the analogy of the monkey with its hand caught in the coconut >>>> drawn from any kind of fact that you experienced? How are you defining a >>>> fact and is the interpretation of facts subject to cognitive biases >>>> (stale, confusing, static, intellectual attachments to the past). I >>>> think it best to consider static patterns of value (stuff in the >>>> encyclopedia) as hypothetical. Of course the requires paying attention. >>>> >>>> Marsha >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Dec 6, 2013, at 6:00 AM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Marsha , >>>>> Of course the analogy is to >>>>> Get a point across, that facts >>>>> Exist in experience , facts are >>>>> Not hypotheses. >>>>> >>>>> The hypothetical story was used >>>>> To illustrate a point RMP was >>>>> Making about value rigidityThere is a fact this monkey should know: if he >>>>> opens his hand he's free. But how is he going to discover this fact? By >>>>> removing the value rigidity that rates rice above freedom. How is he >>>>> going to do that? Well, he should somehow try to slow down deliberately >>>>> and go over ground that he has been over before and see if things he >>>>> thought were important really were important >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 8:44 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron, >>>>>> >>>>>> Okay, low value is low value, but how is using the monkey trap analogy >>>>>> not a hypothetical? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Marsha >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 2:52 PM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Using the monkey trAp analogy, >>>>>>> It would seem (to me) that there >>>>>>> Is nothing hypothetical about being >>>>>>> In a low quality environment/situation. >>>>>>> The bias lies in the value rigidity. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 1:22 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hypothetical is a good approach, because as pattern recognition >>>>>>>> entities, we are susceptible to a HUGE list of cognitive biases: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases >>>> >>>> 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
