0sa fNAN5+qB [email protected]> 
<[email protected]> 
<[email protected]> 
<CAKPdW3=q+qfj4empzsajdxrg97hkbbxguvkhdreahx2xeo9...@mail.gmail.com> 
<[email protected]> 
<cakpdw3nbs58ms5c_kyvg7egtwp97p-qukq5jhnhquiylxyl...@mail.gmail.com> 
<[email protected]> 
<cakpdw3nhvdm-souhphvze0fioteykbrov46wakcf5w7t0jg...@mail.gmail.com> 
<[email protected]>
From: Jan-Anders Andersson <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11D201)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 22:09:07 +0200
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)

Thanks David

Your inlays are quite worthy as John is not the only one that needs some of t=
his.=20

I have some discussions now and then who I have to spend some time on to get=
 what kind of language they'll understand. John doesn't seem to understand y=
ours or RMPs, thats sad but it can't just be impossible.

JA


> 22 jun 2014 kl. 19:49 skrev david <[email protected]>:
>=20
>=20
> John insists that Pirsig isn't accounting for something in his explanation=
?
>=20
>=20
> John said to Ron:
> ...  In a word "society".  In Pirsig's metaphysics, intellect is on top of=
 society and distinct from it.  I think this was the way Pirsig himself expe=
rienced life, but that's not the general experience.  Metaphysics deals in u=
niversals, much more, generals.  I think the MoQ is a slice out of a man's l=
ife. ...
>=20
>=20
> dmb says:
> It's not that Pirsig fails to account for society but rather you don't lik=
e his account because "intellect is on top". It seems that this disapproval i=
s another symptom of John's anti-intellectualism.=20
>=20
> And what reason does John give for rejecting this account? It's just Pirsi=
g's experience, he says, not the general experience. There are so many probl=
ems with this argument that it's hard to know where to begin. John has once a=
gain exhibited an anti-intellectual attitude, humorously defined as "the bel=
ief that my ignorant opinion is just as good as your expert knowledge". And,=
 more concretely and more importantly, by characterizing Pirsig's account of=
 "society" as mere personal opinion John has misconstrued the levels as some=
thing other than a description of an evolving universe and as a series of hi=
storical conflicts. That is to say, Pirsig's account is based on our common h=
istory and the current mythos and not mere opinion. His account includes a v=
ery large number of examples, any one of which can be found in a common ency=
clopedia.=20
>=20
> And this is John's standard operating procedure. He distorts and misconstr=
ues Pirsig's ideas and then criticizes Pirsig for his own distorted construc=
tions. When he's not doing that, he's offering improvements to the MOQ that a=
re already contained in the MOQ. Of course Pirsig's original version has the=
 advantage of being intelligible.
>=20
> It's just an ordinary logical necessity.  One MUST understand a thing befo=
re one CAN criticize that thing. That's why John can't criticize the MOQ. He=
 may and he might someday but only if he understands it first. And he refuse=
s to believe that anyone could know better than he. That's why John's critic=
isms are never worth addressing and why they probably never will be. Bet you=
 ten bucks he won't even deal with this logical necessity honestly or fairly=
. He'll likely dismiss it as mere insult or mere opinion or otherwise evade t=
he issue.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>                        =20
> 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
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

Reply via email to