Ham said to John:
...I received a personal note yesterday from someone named Tim who "couldn't
thank me enough" for introducing him to Donald Hoffman. He also mentioned LS,
but seemed to know me from the past. "I've always had a great deal of respect
for you," he wrote. I dimly recall conversing with a Tim on this forum some
years ago. Can you fill me in on who he is? (Possibly a MoQ Discuss dropout?)
John replied:
He Didn't exactly drop out so much as was expelled. I also believe he was
moderated from LS (LilaSquad) He's a very bright boy but seems to have problems
with the social games required for communication, i.e., he thinks everybody
should put in a lot of work in understanding him, while going to a lot of
effort to make his writings obtuse. ...His big hero is: *George Holmes
Howison*(1834-1916) ...Tim was a doctoral student at Berkeley. Anything else
you wanna know?
dmb says:
I would recommend caution. He sends me long messages that are strangely hostile
and incoherent. He's equally fond of religion and obscenity, apparently. Here's
one of his opening paragraphs, for example addressed to Dan, Pirsig and
myself...
------------------------------------------------
DMB, Dan Glover, Bob M.P.,
you uber-unrepentant motha'fucka's. Only if you had never had one experience
that differed from another would your "indivisible, undefinable and unknowable
Quality be a valid description of your eternally solitary (non-dynamic)
experience. However, if that were your experience, perfect undifferentiation
of any such Qualia, then the mere difference that would be had in providing
such a description would itself ruin your whole damned metaphysical scheme.
Your disgrace is beneath the dignity of every living conscious being, even
beneath the meager "clothing of the grass of the field". If you remain so
disturbingly unrepentant, my full prayers will be that you shall experience the
perfection of the depths of superphenomenal prison. The superhenomenal, which
you write off as "DQ", is the conjunction of the noumenal and spiritual realms.
Howison's greatest disgrace (I can now say), is that his talk of the "eternal"
somewhat mirrors your write-it-off nature of "Quality". Of c
ourse he is not so fucking daft though; in so far as he talks about it being
timeless, he is perfectly clear that he means i[']deal, and that the conception
of time which he refers to is that if phenomenal time. In full scheme of
things, however, Time is complex; and it is (only) regarding the phenomenally
unregistered components of time in which the superphenomenal is - and need must
be - "temporally"-structured. Though I state this only dogmatically here (and
am not particularly interested even in developing any such overwhelming proof
as would demand that any and all serious thinkers need must submit to my
authority in the matter): the superphenomenal is as an ideally structured fluid
(I have said before). I liken this equi-valently to Jay-z's saying "I traded
in that gold for the platinum Rolex". Start looking into the process of
trading in your gold, I suggest.
----------------------------------------------------
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
