Hi All
Just a quick note to say that no-one is being removed from MD for having
an opinion that is not part of the mainstream of thought on this list.
I also think folks need to lighten up a bit and be slightly less tense
when partaking of a conversation.
Remember that we're here to discuss RMP's work and as part of that
endeavour we should try and emulate the manner in which he created it
which, I believe, was in the spirit of good will and tolerance.
Anyone who was at the 2005 conference will remember what Pirsig said
about the idea of fairness - I think that this underlined how he would
like to see discussions relating to the MOQ proceeding.
Could anyone present in 2005 really imagine Bob ripping one of the
speakers a new one if they'd have said something a bit controversial -
cos I can't!
Try to keep your blood pressure down and your heart rate low and steady
- skin up a fat one if you like and take a few deep drags before replying.
Horse
On 19/05/2014 19:32, T-REXX Techs wrote:
Hmmm. Let's see now. With whom can I hope to have fraternal dialogue?
On the one hand we have John Carl in a thoughtful discourse with Dan:
Let me put it a slightly different way, Dan. remember when the art teacher was so
impressed by Phaedrus's "sculpture"? And yet Phdrs didn't see why?
Dan:
Absolutely. Phaedrus didn't understand DeWeese. They were on different wave
lengths. One was a rationalist and the other an artist.
Jc: And yet they were friends. That is, there wasn't any antipathy or
competition driving their relationship, but an interest in each other's
different way of thinking. I find it telling that the artist seemed to
"get" the intellectual more than the intellectual got the artist. At least
in this story.
John: The classic seems dynamic to the romantic, and vice versa. But ultimately, the
"realest" thing we can be sure of, is an aesthetic good - something that
"feels" right. It has to be logical, of course. Anything illogical is bad thinking, but
logic is like the law - a schoolmaster, and does not itself own the goal of it's own technique.
Dan:
Well, in that same section of ZMM, DeWeese asks Phaedrus to look at a light
switch in his studio that's not working. He says how DeWeese has the look of an
art patron asking the artist a question about a painting he doesn't understand.
Jc: DeWeese didn't understand electricity but that wasn't the bone of
contention in this episode - it was whether or not intuition can guide
one in seeking solutions. Phaedrus intuitively knew that the problem
was in the switch because he had some technical information about the
way electricity works, that DeWeese did not. This was frustrating to
an artist who prides himself on listening to his intuition alone. He
contrasts DeWeese with the Sutherlands in that he is not
anti-technology at all... he is simply so far removed from it he
doesn't understand it. But he is always willing to learn more. DeWeese
becomes frustrated when he doesn't understand how Phaedrus knew it was
the switch, especially when told it was obvious. In
hat sense, DeWeese is neither a classic personality or a romantic.
He is beyond that. He is an artist.
We then have John Carl, justifiably indignant when abusively provoked:
When you say "about", do you mean parrotting? Because that's something
weird I've encountered with both you and dmb, that you think the MoQ
is to be memorized and staticized whereas I believe that metaphysics
of Quality implies potential for continuuing betterness. That is, the
question of what is good and not, can be asked ad inifitum about
anything and everything, including the MoQ itself. It's a process, not
a thing. You guys seem to want to carve it in stone and cause it to be
worshipped. That's the problem with humanity, they try and make a
religion out of everything. Well not the MoQ, fuck you very much. This
is sacred ground and not to be contained in your shelves and
definitions, white man. Then John wrote an apology letter to Robert
Pirsig: Dear Bob, I apologize for the abject state of your only
academical representation in the world today. Unfortunately you were
right all along and no person of Quality would want to have anything
to do with that instrument of asshole-ery - the academy. I feel
somewhat to blame because I really felt early on that if I'd just
cared enough, I could have taken SOM on in the academy myself but in
the end I decided I'd rather keep my sanity and have a family and a
happy life. It was self-serving, in a way, but all I can say was that
it seemed the quality decision at the time. But when I see what we've
come to, I may have made a mistake. Sorry, Yours prayerfully, John
Finally, we have a representative response from David Buchanan:
John's self-serving bullshit is the kind of thing that gives rhetoric and
sophistry a bad name. Since he cannot or will not meet the most basic
standards of intellectual quality, his tactic is to attack those standards
and attack those who respect such standards. If he were sick, he'd portray
health as something to avoid like the plague. If he were penniless, he'd
condemn wealth and so it is with intellectual values and standards. John's
delusional and self-aggrandizing bullshit does not meet the most basic
standards of quality and so his foolish pride demands that he construe them
as something we should not want. According to John, precision and accuracy
is just "parrotting," remembering and understanding is just is just for
those who "think the MoQ is to be memorized and staticized" and those who
condemn contradictory nonsense "want to carve it in stone and cause it to be
worshipped" and "make a religion" out of it. Even definitions are a
violation "sacred ground", he says to the "white man". "Fuck you", John
says to the guy with the PhD and the guy with the Masters degree, and he
doesn't "want to have anything to do with that instrument of asshole-ery -
the academy". If he'd "cared enough," John claims, he "could have taken SOM
on in the academy" but that would be at odds with sanity, "a family and a
happy life". Yea, those grapes would would have been downright bitter.
They're poison. They are the forbidden fruit, the font of evil, the source
of madness, they'll destroy your family and your happiness. Intellectual
values are for parrots and higher education is for assholes.
But John is not anti-intellectual. No way. I can't imagine where anyone got
that idea. That's just crazy.
But seriously, I think John has no business in a forum like this. He not
only doesn't care about the point and purpose of this forum, he's openly
hostile to it and does nothing but get in the way of those who do care about
making sense and who do understand what Pirsig is saying. John is not a
critic or gadfly or rebel. He's just a narcissistic asshole, an ignorant and
childish blowhard. Apparently he thinks it's better to be hated than
ignored. As long as he gets attention, nothing else matters.
Disgusting. Depressing.
Dialogue, especially when it is written and lacks the directness and
subtlety of face-to face encounter, requires openness as well as
open-mindedness; vulnerability, as well as allowing for vulnerability
in others; empathy, charity, acceptance, and forgiveness; willingness
to modify one's perceptions of another; willingness to relate to
another as a person, not as a philosophical position. I have been able
to do that with John Carl and to establish a very cordial relationship
in which exchange of ideas, as well as mutual correction and
refinement of views, can occur freely and without rancor. Similarly,
Anthony and I have established a deeply friendly and mutually
respectful relationship which has been of great value to me personally
and in my philosophical endeavors. But David, although I have
respected your scholarship, your intelligence, your insights, and most
of all your friendship and high regard for Dr. Pirisg, I have failed
to find tolerance, empathy, compassion, or any other basis for
dialogue with you. Right thinking begins with right being, and you are
probably a good person. I'd like to believe that of you, but you
haven't let me see your quality in this forum. I am willing to be
wrong, and I hope to be, but I am not optimistic. I join John Carl in
submitting this post prayerfully.
--
"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines
or dates by which bills must be paid."
— Frank Zappa
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
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
