I skipped over this earlier because I didn't care to deal with what seemed such hostility. But perhaps that isn't the best way.
I'll try to do better On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Ant McWatt <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, it looks like we're in for an intellectual treat tonight, ladies and > gentlemen, as I notice John Carl has imparted his wisdom in at least four > posts today. I wonder what words below need to be kept for posterity from > one of our great intellects of our time. Let's go and take a look: > > ---------------------------------------- > > Jc: There is an inner idea... > > Ant comments: An "inner idea"? That's an interesting... idea, John. > Anyway, I was wondering, what is the difference between an inner idea and > an external idea? > > Jc: Expression of some kind, either spoken or acted out. Inner ideas have the label "thoughts" too. > > JC (aka "Jesus Christ of the world's intellectual elite" continues): > > ...that wants to be expressed... > > Ant comments: > > So an idea can want something too. News on me John but thanks for me > enlightening me there.. Jc: You are welcome. I know in the common parlance, only subjects have desires but the MoQ is centered upon the idea that caring affects all the levels. Atoms have preferences to be and ideas want to be expressed. Ant: > so, can only "inner ideas" want things or do "external ideas" (especially > being external!) want things to? Also, being "external" do they have more > independence than inner ideas? Jc: That's a good question. I hadn't thought about it in those terms but yes, externalized ideas have independence while internal ones are dependent upon will to keep them alive. Ant: > A genius must have at least one good idea so you must know all about them. > > Jc: I'm not a genius, Ant. I'm not stupid, but I'm not a genius. In measurable terms, I'm one point less than genius and 4 points more than the minimum for Mensa membership so for a genius I'm pretty stupid. But for an idiot, I'm pretty smart. Actually, all this classifying of relative intellect is something they do more in your world, than mine. Out here its what you do that counts, not how smart you are so if you want to insult me, insult my laziness rather than my intellect. It zings home more effectively. Jc: > > ...and it's stronger in some than others... > > Ant comments: > > OK, I can see where you're coming from a little now, John. So do ideas > head to their local gym every evening and have a work out? Jc; heh. good one. But no. Ideas work out in criticism and dialogue. Ideas pump dialectic, not iron. That's how ideas grow strong. Did you think they were supposed to be locked up in a vault or something? Ant > Or is this only open to external ideas because, of course, being external > they are the only ideas who have independence (from a mind let's say) so > "inner ideas" not being able to work out as a gym tend to be weaker than > external ones? > > Jc: Yes, that sounds right. Ideas only grow in strength when they are externalized (spoken or shown) and shared socially. > Jc: > > ...and in a few, it is a powerful force for change. > > Ant comments: > > So, am I right to presume your talking about external ideas here as they > can work out more than inner ideas? > > Jc: Yes. > Jc: > > But sometimes it's just a selfish ego, striving for mere social > recognition in a lazy lifestyle. > > Ant comments: > > Of course, being the modest genius you are, this last sentence would never > apply to yourself? > > Jc: Well... I did cop to laziness and I never claimed to be a genius. > JC: > > Who can tell the difference? Not art critics! That's > for sure. But not me either, so who am I to criticize. > > Ant comments: > > Oh dear, with you being a genius, I had great hopes that you could explain > to me how we could distinguish these things and now you're telling me that > though you've brought this idea of "an inner idea" and this idea of "the > social recognition strived for by a selfish ego" you are now saying you > haven't got a f**king clue how to distinguish between the two. > > Jc: That's because its not an individual decision - it's a social decision. I can't be a society all by myself. And it looks like I'm going to have a hard time joining with you also. Ant: > How disappointing. The saddest news I've heard this year. > > Jc: You must live a sheltered life then. Ant: I did think at first that possibly Pirsig's MOQ with its social patterns > and intellectual patterns could have assisted here but I note you have > carefully avoided. Jc: Part of the reason I have made such a hullabaloo over the relation between intellect and social patterns is that I don't think intellect can do any social good if it's seen as mainly antagonistic and conflicted. Until the MoQ reconciles society and intellect, its not going anywhere. Ant: > But you have obviously heard on the grapevine (maybe from the spirit of > Marvin Gaye?) that Pirsig was a mental case and consequently have carefully > avoided talking about his ideas on this forum. What a wise man you are. > > Jc: ... > > Ron earlier: > > > I have tried to view parenting and marriage as an art and I think having > > practiced eastern martial arts influenced that point if view. > > Jc: Lol. Yeah, every once in a while there's nothing like a karate chop > upside the head, to help kids learn how to behave. > > Ant comments: > > You know, in my own modest observation of human behaviour on this planet > over the last few decades, I have realised that a good "karate chop > upside the head" can also help adults learn to behave as well. Not that I > can think of anyone on this forum Who needs a good slap. Certainly don't > worry about me being engaged in such behaviour though John; at only three > foot four, I'm a only little schizophrenic. > > Jc: yeah, well, its obvious to all that you got *some* kind of problem. If the MoQ discuss were a healthy and vibrant community, many people would jump in right here and come to my defense for the many, many years I've struggled and fought for Pirsig's philosophy, even while critiquing it. But as it is, I don't expect anything sincere and honest to come forth from other longstanding members. All dissent has either gotten tired or gotten booted and so it's down to us. Alas. > Jc: > > I took San Soo Kung Fu, for a couple of years... > > Ant comments: > > God knows why such a nice sociable guy such as yourself thought it > necessary to take up a martial art. Anyway, they say the universe is > essentially full of mystery, don't they? > > Jc: It certainly is. > Jc: > > ...but it didn't influence my child rearing that much beyond taking a full > horse stance when giving piggy-back rides. > > Ant comments: > > Well, I've heard of these sad guys who like their ponies a little too much > even for the average swinger. But pigs too!!! F**king hell, I'm nearly > impressed. You are certainly a cutting edge fellow! > > Jc: Yeah? And you're pretty friggin' hilarious yourself. > Jc: > > My biggest influence was my younger self... > > Ant comments: > > Well, who else could a genius rely on? Well, it couldn't be someone else > as they'd no doubt have a weaker intellect than a genius such as your good > self. Good for you John. > > Jc: Old stuff, really. It wasn't me who invented "the child is father to the man" I'm not that great of a thinker but I'm a pretty good reader. Dr McWatt comments: > > If only that was always the case... even makes me feel a little sad for > John > > Makes me sad for us all. 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
