dmb said:
...What we're trying very hard to do is show you that this problem has already
been solved by Pirsig and an increasing number of other philosophers. How many
times have I posted quotes from other philosophers who also reject SOM? Too
many to count; dozens or maybe even hundreds! ...Cogent explanations and
textual evidence never seems to have any effect on the people in this gang....
Horse said:
...[John and Ian] are "the two that are having the hardest time getting their
heads around the problem space/solution scenario that several people here have
commented on, supplied evidence for and generally given a crystal clear
explanation about! ...There is no problem here and as DMB has re-iterated over
and over, stop confusing the problem with the cure! ...Until you get past this
you ARE going to be stuck in the same place as when Bo left. No amount of
evidence is going to shift you because you will just keep ignoring and/or
denying it. There are none so blind.....etc."
John replied:
No, it's not SOM that's the 4th level. I mean, I don't even think the 4th
should be called intellect! ...Can anyone just respond simply to my
arguments/issues without resorting to ad hominem attacks? PS: By "respond" I
mean without resorting to "because RMP said so". Since's it's Pirsig's
terminology I'm taking to task here, something more is needed to defend it than
the mere fact of what Pirsig said.
dmb says:
Unbelievable!
John, you're not making any sense. How can we talk about the meaning of
Pirsig's terms without Pirsig's explanations of those terms. And what makes you
think you get to ignore well-supported and carefully explained criticisms. What
makes you think that you get to impose conditions on your critics? And don't
you realize how absurd it is to rule out the most relevant textual evidence
there can be for the MOQ? Your attempt to characterize references to Pirsig's
books as "resorting" to RMP says so is completely absurd because that's exactly
what we're supposed to be talking about. Pirsig's statements are the thing you
are distorting and confusing and misunderstanding.
Lots of people are trying to tell you the same thing, John. How does that fail
to impress you? Not just Arlo and myself but also Ron, Ant, Horse are all in
basic agreement about the nature of your mistakes. Why wouldn't want to take
that seriously? Even if you just don't understand what we're all pointing at,
don't you care to find out, at least?
Okay, maybe you don't care about getting ideas right. It's not for everybody.
But how are you not embarrassed or even ashamed? Don't you care what this makes
you look like? Can I appeal to your vanity, if not your sense of decency? This
Bo's level of crazy, where you don't even care what the author of the MOQ
thinks of the MOQ.
I think it's very clear that you simply unwilling or unable to have an
intelligent conversation and so you have no business being anywhere near
philosophy.
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
