John, On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 9:55 AM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > Dan, > > > On 6/26/14, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Dan: >> I tend to think of intellectual quality patterns as ideas while social >> quality patterns are those which have taken root and grown into the >> culture we inhabit. All our ideas evolve from social patterns, things >> with which we are so familiar we cease to even realize they are there >> at all. >> > > Jc: I agree. I think this is the way the 4th level gives birth to > the 3rd level - but it's more a mythic happening than any intellectual > achievement. The role of intellect is as the critic, the analytic, > that keeps bad ideas within bounds or looks for loopholes. I think > the 4th level is best understood as dualistic in nature, because of > the way these two are inseperable, the yin and the yang,
Dan: The ideas representing the intellectual level have to grow out of something... they do not just appear out of a vacuum. The social level feeds the intellectual in that regard. As for the dualistic nature that you point out, sure, there is that. But that isn't all there is to intellectual quality patterns. Dualistic thinking is only a part of it and not necessarily the better part. > > Dan: > >> Most people I know work regular jobs while I do not. Being >> self-employed I tend to stand apart from others in that I work my own >> hours, get up when I wish, go to bed when I am tired, and spend most >> of my free hours writing. >> >> When I go into the dealership where I do building maintenance I am on >> friendly terms with all the employees there. When I ask how they are >> doing, they invariably answer: oh... living the dream. >> >> What they mean by that is precisely the opposite. I know it and they >> know it. They are trapped by their jobs, by the hours they are >> required to work, and by watching the clock until they are finally >> free to go. They often lament (in a joking yet sad sort of manner) >> that time had stopped. >> >> The idea of having to live like that gives me the chills. Yet I fully >> understand the need to provide for kith and kin. I am in the world >> without being a part of the world, so to speak, and so I can see the >> debilitating effects that social patterns force upon most people. >> > > Jc: Well I know what you mean, Dan. The construction trade is an > iffy business. It can pay good at times and be slow at others so you > don't get into a routine but I'd work with people all the time who > would moan and bitch about having to work hard for a living and I'd > just shake my head and tell them. "Well that's not the way I look at > it. I'm out in the weather and the fresh air, building things which > is fun and getting exercize, which means I don't have to go to the > gym. Besides, look at the classy people I meet on the job" and this > positive attitude was infectious so the young kid or whoever would > come to the job with a proper attitude and work their butts off and > the boss would lay me off and not them. Dan: Kids these days. But you're right in that a positive attitude is infectious, just as a shitty attitude is. The way I look at it, I'm going to be there anyway so why cry about it? Seems better to enjoy my work. >JC: > But I'm good with being unemployed, too. there's a lot of stuff to do > and see in this world and now that my kids are getting married and > moving off, there's not the same pressure to produce income like there > used to be. Dan: Exactly... I'm a few years ahead of you in that regard. The kids have all grown up and left years ago. There is still the need to keep the lights on and other mundane matters like that but since no one is depending on me I can pretty much do as little as I need to get by and then write. > > >>>JC: >>> And yet, there is a way of thinking about problems in two different ways - >>> you can rely upon social authority, or you can think for yourself about >>> what seems right to you. But if that's the dividing line, then why does >>> dmb constantly harp on me for not following his authority? It's a >>> conundrum you see. >> >> Dan: >> Well, of course I prefer to think for myself. Yet at the same time I >> believe it is imperative to understand what it is that I am discussing >> or writing about lest I be thought a fool. >> >> I'm afraid I don't follow most of your discussions with Dave Buchanan. >> I presume it isn't his authority that he would like you to follow but >> instead Robert Pirsig's. I can't say that I disagree with that notion >> since that's why we're here... to discuss the MOQ as contained in >> Lila. >> > > Jc: Yup, I admit it's a complicated subject. I think I addressed it > pretty well to Dave but we'll see. As iron sharpeneth iron, so do the > arguing skills of a faithful enemy. I like arguing with RMP, through > his work. It sharpens me, that's for sure. I can't find much to > argue with, so I tend to jump hard on what I can. > > Pirsig's metaphysics is an interesting dichotomy, in my view. While > taking little to no note of the metaphysical impact of community upon > intellect and the individual, it has been promulgated through a highly > communitarian means! The internet vs the academy. > > Fascinating. Dan: The MOQ did not evolve out of thin air. It evolved out of the relationships between Phaedrus and his contemporaries, or social patterns. From what I understand, the internet evolved out of the academy. > >>> >>> Jc: Yes, I see what you mean. That works better for the 4th, also. How >>> can you call something that is theoretically unbounded, a level? >> >> Dan: >> I suggest that finding one's purpose in life is life's greatest >> challenge. That's where following the 'code of art' or Dynamic >> morality is of paramount importance. What is it we are meant to do? If >> money was no object, what would we be doing? And why aren't we doing >> it now? These questions aren't rhetorical... they require a real >> answer. >> > > Jc: right now there's a faint whisper of cooler air against my toes > and ankles and the sun has set and the air is soft and full of golden > shades. The crickets have started the sprinklers are tapping and > there is a beer in my fridge just behind me, in my camper parked on > the property. Its a nice evening and a nice feeling and I don't see > how money would improve matters much. Money would just make me > miserable with the responsibility of it and saying no to greedy > relatives. We've got water in a year of drought, here in the Great > Republic of Rough and Ready, and that's better than money. Dan: Sure, beautifully put. But still, when I go to the grocery they expect me to pay for what I've put in my basket. Same way with the pesky electric company... they keep sending me letters threatening to shut me off if I don't settle my account. Geez... don't they know I'm an artist? > >>> JC: >>> You can always conceptualize your >>> conceptualizations again and again. >> >> Dan: >> I don't know where creativity comes from. I do know I can't think >> something new into existence or to force it into being in any way. >> Sure, art either feels right or it doesn't but not during the creative >> phase... that comes later. >> >> I think you'll find that fine artists tend to approach their craft in >> a different manner than a layperson might, or a beginner. They don't >> try to see what they're about to create before hand. They are instead >> led by a sort of ephemeral vision that shifts and changes as the >> artwork takes form. >> > > Jc: That sounds right and I think is something that bugs Lu. She is > more an illustrator than an original artist. Imagining something new > into being is very difficult for her to do. I can imagine better than > her but she is crafty and clever and makes everything around her > beautiful. Dan: It is difficult to imagine something new for me too. Each time I sit down to write, I stare at the blank screen and wonder what I am doing here. Pretty soon I notice some words have appeared. I don't know where they came from but there they are. That is when the hard part starts... the cultivating and caring and crafting... making those rough-edged words into something beautiful. I'm not a poet or a song writer but I love poetry and music. Recently I read some stuff on Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan and how hard it is for them to write their songs. The words don't just appear in their heads and they have a song... oh no... it takes them months and sometimes even years to craft their work. Jimmy Page and Robert Plant talked about writing the song Kashmir as they were vacationing somewhere in the Far East and how hard it was to learn to play and sing the song... they said it was too powerful at first... they couldn't do it. It took them 2 years of working with it before they finally felt satisfied with the result. I think that is the mark of a true artist... making the difficult appear easy. > > > > >>> Jc: I'm reading a book right now my eldest brought home from college, >>> called Bird By Bird, by Anne Lamott who is saying something similar in the >>> current chapter - Shitty First Drafts. Here's what I just read - "A >>> friend >>> of mine says that the first draft is the down draft--you just get it down. >>> The second draft is the up draft-- you fix it up. And the third draft is >>> the dental draft, where you check every tooth, to see if it's loose or >>> cramped or decayed, or even, God help us, healthy." >> >> Dan: >> I've heard of that book but never read it. Actually, it's on my Amazon >> wish list but unfortunately so are 500 other books. If wishes were >> horses... I do like the title of that chapter. :-) With me though, it >> takes about a hundred drafts before I begin to think I have it right >> and even then I have my doubts. > > > Jc: I've never really tried. I write a lot, but I'm too > scatterbrained to focus upon an actual book. I got problems, I'm > sure. I mean, I've started a lot in that I've got five or six first > drafts up to about a third of the chapters. lol too much stuff > distracts me. I hope before I die.... Dan: I just write. As we were talking earlier, with the kids grown and off on their own I have time now to do the things I always wanted to do but was too busy earning a living to actually put into practice. I guess I'm a coward. I never had the stones to quit my day job and just write. So I work part time and write full time. It's amazing how much one can accomplish writing 1000 words a day, or a night in my case. It's curious. I never sat down and said, okay Dan, today you're going to write a book. Rather, I started out with one word. That grew into a sentence... and directly I had a paragraph. Pretty soon I had a short essay in front of me. Before I knew it, I had a novella. The next thing I knew I had a book without ever trying. Rinse and repeat. Giving credit where it's due, there was one fellow here a while back who seemed just a tad unhinged--what was his name... Mark something... Smit or Smith... claimed he was a scientist, just silly as he could be though if he really was one--anyway, I wrote a bit of goofiness in response to some of his goofiness. Just a paragraph or two, mind you. Then I looked at those paragraphs and said, hmmm... I can do more here. So I did. That goofiness turned into six books so far. Are they any good? I don't know. Doesn't matter. > > >>> Jc: Yes, that makes sense. My drive is also full of unfinished short >>> stories. It'd be interesting to go back through them some day. >> >> Dan: >> One of my collections of short stories evolved from writings I >> originally shared here. Something to consider. :-) > > Jc: I know this place has greatly shaped my thinking and my writing > will always reflect that. Right now, the book I'd want to write most > would be on Royce and Pirsig - two pretty esoteric philosophers, but I > think way ahead of their time and keenly insightful to the problems of > their times. > > And Gardening. Philosophy deals with the problems of the past. > Gardening deals with the problem of the future. Dan: I never get to pick and choose what I'm writing about. I mean, I can craft the story once it is going, make it better, hone the dialogue, yada, yada... but so far as saying, okay... I'm going to write about Zen today, I'm going to write philosophy... no. It doesn't happen like that for me. I'm sure other authors are different. They know what they're going to write about, bless them. Still, reading books written by folk like Henry Miller, Stephen King, Kurt Vonnegut, Lawrence Durrell, etc., I get the impression that their books evolved along with the writing. Other more genre-specific writers like John Grisham, James Patterson, Nicholas Sparks, etc., seem to follow a set outline of sorts, a road map, if you will, that has worked for them in the past so they keep using it. In the end, it is all about finding your own voice and doing what works for you. > > >> >> Dan: >> I often find myself mixing art, storytelling, and philosophy here. >> Some folk don't like it but oh well. They often claim that my reading >> comprehension is lacking. Instead, I think I just see things >> differently than most folk. I don't thrive on debate so much as I >> enjoy a good discussion. > > > Jc: I like both. I haven't gotten much of what I'd call, any quality > debate here, unfortunately. But it might be that my readings and > interpretations of things are so different from others that there's no > way to latch on. But then when I think about the history of this > list, and WHY there's not much dissent from an orthodoxy and it all > starts to make sense. Dan: I think of debate as taking one side over the other. I'm more a both-sides kind of person, I suppose. I think it is too easy to limit oneself while debating, to don rose-colored glasses, so to speak, and thereby blot out all the subtle nuances that appear along the way. A discussion, on the other hand, can take the time to examine the whole hog, as it were, and to delve in between the meanings presented by both sides of a debate. I seem to learn more by discussing than by debating. > > > because you like it, or any of that crap. >>>> >>>> Write because it is better than not writing. Period. >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> Jc: Well you are certainly mirroring Lamott's advice. I believe you. >>> I'm >>> not very good at that but I think that has more to do with the structure >>> of >>> the rest of my life than a conscious choice on my part. But maybe not. >>> Food for thought. >> >> Dan: >> I take that as a compliment though I'm sure Ms. Lamott is far more >> adept than I am. I will say that scheduling my time is of enormous >> importance, especially time to write. I think you'll find any artist >> has to do the same... there really is no choice. Either one makes the >> time for their art or they don't. > > Jc: I'm not a very scheduled or disciplined person. why not? psycho > therapy time, Too much to get into. But that's ok. I write when I > can and it makes me happy and the habit is good for me while I work > out my slef-sabotage, if that's even possible. The truth is, we're > all stuck. Just in differing ways. Dan: Define 'stuck.' I'm not disagreeing with you but that's not the way I look at gumption traps. We might all encounter 'stuckness' at one time or another but to stay stuck is quite another matter. I tend to look at it this way: one crazy guy that works at the dealership, a mechanic, is always there late... night after night. He's stuck and he seems to think by throwing more time at the problem he can solve it. When I walk by and look at his work the first thing I notice is that everything is half done. Rather than working on the brakes until they're complete, he'll tear down the rotors and calipers and leave them all over the floor while he starts replacing the fuel pump. When he drops the gas tank to do that, rather than installing the new pump and rehanging the tank, he'll leave it lay on the floor while he starts replacing the springs. The owner of the car calls wondering if its done. No, it ain't done! It ain't even close to done! The thing is in pieces all over the frigging shop! And the mechanic is working until 9pm every night trying to get caught up with his mess. His tools are scattered all over the place, the floor is a slime pit, and the stench of gasoline permeates the whole building, even wafting up into the showroom. Discipline isn't fun. It doesn't always make a person happy. But if a person desires something better, it beats the hell out of the next best thing. > > >>>> Dan: >>>> Why is that? >>>> >>>> >>> Jc: I don't know, Dan. I just am. I think about stuff, and connect it >>> up >>> with other stuff, all the time. Everything has connection and connations >>> that are infinite in scope and it's not a point of being driven to the end >>> of them all, it's a point of being driven to the good of them all. How >>> many mirrors do I need? Enough to get me peace of mind. But I seem to do >>> a lot of processing about the big picture, even when I should be focusing >>> more upon the little. >> >> Dan: >> That's interesting. I rarely consider the big picture... it is more >> brick by brick, or bird by bird, if you will. All my mirrors are >> either so dirty I cannot see my reflection or else they are broken >> into a million pieces that only tell me how scattered I truly am. >> >> That is why I have to maintain such focus. While others can play at >> watching television and going out to the bars and having good times, >> I'm forced to delve into my work, my art, my writing. Otherwise, I'm >> lost. Not that it matters one way or another, really... > > Jc: I don't watch tv or go to bars but I do have a good time and I > waste time too. But I think you are doing good and it does matter. > Putting good words out there always matters, Quality in thought and > word always matter. Dan: Thanks for that. We all die. We all only have so much time. I'd like to leave my readers with stories that they can figure out for themselves after I am gone. > > >>>> Dan: >>>> I use whatever tools are on hand for the completion of whatever task >>>> is before me. The scientific method seems perfectly suited for >>>> motorcycle maintenance, in my opinion. My bike won't start. What's >>>> wrong with the darned thing? Kicking it doesn't help. Learn as much as >>>> you can about it. Read the instruction manual. Form a hypothesis. >>>> Pounding it with a hammer doesn't help. Experiment with something >>>> else. Analyze your results. Make a conclusion. Oh! It's out of gas! >>>> Ah! Now it starts! >>>> >>>> >>> Jc: Nowadays its ask.com and yahoo.answers. Has networked intelligence >>> replaced direct experience? Another fascinating question. >> >> Dan: >> Nothing will ever replace direct experience. For me, it's Google that >> has the answers, but they are intellectual in nature, not Dynamic. > > Jc: It's true, but it's also true that millinials are very different > from you and me. Dan: Maybe. From what I see, the kids (and I classify anyone under 30 as a kid) these days spend too much time gaming, at least the ones I know. But I'm sure they'll figure it out. > > > >> >>>JC: >>> But for sure, in your example, the scienitific method is a lot less useful >>> than experience. When you've had a motorcycle a long time and you drive >>> it >>> everyday, you remember if it's out of gas or on reserve. But testing each >>> hypothesis in an orderly manner is better done in an intuitive way than a >>> precisely predetermined manner. >> >> Dan: >> But that is not what the scientific method is about... I know I made >> light of it but it incorporates intuition as well as rational >> knowledge. >> > > Jc: There is a for for it, I think "scientific skepticism" which > tests assumptions rigorously. I have a friend who is a good mechanic > and he drives me crazy - he doubts everything and everyone. It's > good, I suppose, but it drives his wife crazy too (altho in her case, > he's wise to doubt her) Dan: Science is all about falsifying. Make an assumption and then attempt to prove it wrong. > >>> >>> Jc: It's as simple as, good instruction manuals help me solve my problem, >>> bad ones don't. >> >> Dan: >> But why is that? Isn't that merely a symptom and not the disease? > > > Jc: It's the whole of the issue. Actually tho, the best manual I > ever read was the Idiot's Guide - the original Idiots Guide - by John > Muir - on how to keep your VW Alive. I had a bug and then a bus and I > lived by that book. His advice went beyond how to fix your car. It > taught you how to fix your relationship with your car. > > But it wasn't like any other manual I ever read. Dan: There you go. I just wrote a how-to manual about Twitter. It took me a couple weeks to write and it sells for $2.99 and no, it isn't just about Twitter. It's about life in general and relationships with others. I didn't set out to write it. A fellow asked me if I'd be interested in writing a blog for his website. I said sure. The next thing I knew, I had a book. Curious. > > >>>> Dan: >>>> We limit our perspective by viewing the world in terms of subjects and >>>> objects. I wouldn't say that is bad so much as it is a low quality >>>> endeavor, especially if we know of something better and more >>>> expansive. It's sort of like sending your kids to a crappy college >>>> when the best ones don't cost any more. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Jc: Hm.. This might work for you, I can't say. But for me there is a >>> usefulness to a conscious personal framework. I won't say it's the only >>> way to do it, but it sure works best for me. And I can't help but note >>> that it seems to be absolutely necessary for philosophical dialogue, so >>> it's the water in which we swim, at least in this forum. >> >> Dan: >> So you are saying we are all stuck in subject and object thinking? > > Jc: "we" as participants in discourse, yes. "we" as private > individuals in our personal lives, no. You can transcend subject and > object intellectually in your head, but reification is a norm for > discussion. Dan: I would say it depends upon who it is doing the discussing. As long as we remember that to reify is only one way of classifying, and does not pertain to reality in general, we'll do just fine. > > > >>>> Dan: >>>> I suspect you are talking about social patterns of quality vs >>>> intellectual patterns... right? >>>> >>>> >>> Jc: No, I was talking about a Sam Harris video I'd just watched negating >>> free will. And I'm sure he'd negate fundamental value, also, since free >>> will is intimately bound up with values. You can't have Quality if you've >>> got no choice and you can't have choice unless there is a betterness to >>> strive for. >> >> Dan: >> But you are really talking about being subservient to social quality >> patterns, at least so far as the MOQ goes. That is exactly what RMP is >> saying in Lila... that social patterns tend to bind us while >> intellectual patterns seek to free us. Sam Harris? Eh. > > Jc: I think it's important to realize that not all stuckness is > social. there is intellectual stuckness as well and what higher level > frees us then? DQ! Dan: Well, again, I hesitate to say Dynamic Quality is a level... it isn't, at least according to the MOQ. And sure, intellectual quality patterns get stuck too. I think I already described what I do in such situations. >JC: > Sam doesn't believe in DQ so he's stuck for good. Dan: :-) > > > >>> Jc: Possible experience is different for each individual and yet there is >>> something to the commonality we share - that is, the question of what is >>> real, comes down to a socially constructed agreement. This is partly >>> why I believe the 3rd and 4th are infinitely intertwined. >> >> Dan: >> There is something to the commonality we share as long as we inhabit >> the same culture. > > > Jc: And yet we learn even more about ourselves when we study other > cultures. If I'm saying "we" in it's most philosophically generalized > form, I'm talking about a cross-cultural human we. We inhabit a > space, a biosphere, and that has effects on our concepts also. > Realizing this is an aspect of Deep Ecology's teaching. Humans are > the voice of a place. We've come so far in the developments of our > "virtual reality" that our kids now prefer it to the real thing. > Scarey! Dan: In my experience, the only way to study another culture is to immerse oneself within it. I think Phaedrus goes on about that quite a lot in Lila as does his friend Verne Dusenberry in his book The Montana Cree: A Study in Religious Persistence. [http://www.amazon.com/Montana-Cree-Study-Religious-Persistence/dp/0806130253/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1404618648&sr=1-4&keywords=DUSENBERRY] >> >>> >>> Dan: >>> >>> >>>> Now, unless you happen to read ancient Greek, the bible you've read >>>> was most likely the King James version written in the 1600s by a group >>>> of 47 scholars who were all members of the Church of England. Not >>>> exactly an unbiased opinion, that. >>>> >>>> >>> Jc: There has been more than a little bit of scholarship on that book and >>> its origins, I know. But I'm not really talking about some kind of >>> fundamentalist dogma. I'm talking about the meaning of Spirit which is >>> the >>> individual's apprehension of what is good and what is not good. >> >> Dan: >> Why not simply drop the 'Spirit' and talk about the meaning, or the >> value, or the Quality of one's life. > > > Jc: Its true that spirit has religious connotations, but I use that > term in order to converse with religious people. Those are the ones > that are stuck most, and I think the MoQ can be useful to them. > Nobody agrees with me on this, I know. Everybody hates religion and > the whole thing seems hopeless. I agree. But something about a > pattern that goes on for centuries and holds most humans in its grasp, > is a force to be reckoned with and very real, in effect. Dan: That is a classical social pattern if there ever was one. It's interesting that the more education one has, the less likely they are to believe in an 'our father who art in heaven' type of god. > > >> >> Dan: >> Well, luckily for me I am a relative simpleton. Most people are >> smarter than I am but then again I don't invest a lot of my time in >> grooming ego. Again, if you read what I said, when I find myself in an >> intellectual bind, I simply do something mindless. > > Jc: intelligence is a tricky thing. I think you have to be of a > certain level of intelligence, to realize how un-intelligent you > actually are (this because the more you know, the stupider you feel, > seeing how much there is to know) so that makes you pretty smart in > my book, Dan. > > I myself feel really dumb in some ways, and pretty smart in other ways > and at times but its all a relative s cale and it's all shifting, all > the time to the point where it's the smartest who are often the most > stuck. Street smarts, as they say, is a good thing to have. Dan: I remember once telling someone that I went to the University of Hard Knocks and they exclaimed: oh! and where is that located? Everywhere and nowhere, my friend. ;-) > > >>>> Dan: >>>> Do you really think there is an actual future? >>>> >>> >>> Jc: I have an intuitiion there is. We'll have to wait and see. >>> >>> Hey, here it comes! >>> >>> Oops, there it goes. >>> >>> That's ok, the future is like a city bus, >>> if you miss this one, there'll be another along in a few moments. >> >> Dan: >> The reason I ask is that most folk I know believe in tomorrow. They >> make intricate plans and plot endless scenarios all predicated upon >> the future that they absolutely know exists in actuality. >> >> Instead, why not invest in the reality of today? All our carefully >> laid plans can vanish in an instant. None of us are immortal. But most >> of us live like we are. > > Jc: the first thing to know about the future, is that nobody can know > the future. We can guess, and sometimes guess good. all present > action has an idea for a future - and a future is an ontological > defining norm for "objects" (i.e. patterns which we expect to persist > - what means persist? Future!) So it's always an aspect o present > thought, except for a deep meditation upon immediate experience. > That's possible. But it's not where we live and breathe and have our > being. > > If you think about it, the future does really equate well to DQ > because by what do we mean if something is good or not? We are asking > if it comes out right in the end. the end, is the future. Dan: I disagree. The end is right now. Dynamic Quality is synonymous with (direct) experience, or now, as it happens, not in a statically projected future that might or might not occur. This article might help to explain things better: http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2014/07/01/mental-time-travel-dan-falk/ I think it is worth noting that there is no actual future. It is a static representation of how we believe the future will unfold based upon past occurrences. That isn't to say the future doesn't exist, however. > JC: > People can > take it way too far, and live for just future happiness in retirement, > like those friends you describe (and most of the country, I believe) > or people who live in the now - hedonists or criminals. These two > sides of the human psyche resonate on a see-saw, back and forth. Dan: I think hedonists and criminals exist in the biological realm... Lila, for example, was a hedonist as well as a criminal. She lived for the good times never considering the consequences of getting old. > JC: > Balance if found in the keeping of both, in their place - the will > intantiates in a triadic cooperation with past experience (memories > and concepts) expectation of some future and an indeterminate now. Dan: I have learned to expect nothing, that way I'm never disappointed. Memories fade. The only thing that matters is now... the moment. >>> >>> >>>>> Dan: >>>>> Platt? Is that you? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Jc: Funny. Good ole Platt, may he R.I.P. >>> >>> Dan: >>>> Wait a minute... did Platt pass away? >>>> >>>> >>> Jc: Yup. His wife Judy wrote and told us over at LS. >> >> Dan: >> I am sorry to hear that. I liked Platt. >> > > Jc: He was a contrarian, to an extent but a good writer and thinker. Dan: Either way, I liked him a great deal and I am saddened to hear of his passing. Thanks for letting me know. >> >> Dan > > > Sorry it took so long to get back to this and finish it off and send > it. things were pretty hectic and then I got a 2-week job building an > outbuilding to move the water heater for the pastor who is gonna marry > my daughter in 2 days. Dan: No problem on my end... write when you can. My time here is limited too. >JC: > That's going to be weird, having a married daughter. Dan: Remember, you are not losing a daughter, you are gaining a son. At least that's what they told me! :-) All my best wishes, Dan http://www.danglover.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
