Tuuk (and John)
I think what Dave is asking, and is being far too polite about it,unlike
me, is - are you interested in a meaningful discussion relating to RMP's
MoQ or is this just another boring wind-up or point scoring exercise.?
We've all wasted far too much time in the past on list members who
misinterpret or fail to understand the MoQ and, given your past record,
this looks like another of those time-wasting exercises. Dan has gone
quiet, I imagine, for the same reason. Why bother trying to have a
meaningful discussion with someone who is only interested in confusing
and/or misinterpreting and twisting the MoQ for their own purpose and
has bugger all interest in what Pirsig has to say and, additionally,
what those who have a thorough understanding (i.e. a lot better than
yours it would appear) of Pirsigs work have to say as well?
It's exasperating, time-consuming and more than a little sad when this
happens.
And, as for the 'Ignoramus or Fraud' bullshit, if you or John want to
come on here and be deliberately disrespectful and inflammatory then you
can fuck off back to your own inconsequential little list and talk
amongst yourselves over there - along with the other nut jobs!
Are we clear now?
Thanks for your interest!
Horse
On 31/10/2016 05:14, [email protected] wrote:
dmb,
dmb says:
You're confused because instead of presenting my criticism, I've
asked you if you're interested in my criticism?
Tuukka:
Yes. Why should you care about me? Shouldn't you care about yourself
now that your stance turned out to be the losing one?
As I see it, I've offered some criticism but you haven't really
responded to it.
Tuukka:
I skipped the parts that had nothing to do with what I wrote.
Last time you defended your logic, even though I said nothing about
logic,
Tuukka:
That's the problem. Unlike Pirsig and I, you refuse to pay attention
to logic.
and this time your response pivots around the distinction between
rhetoric and dialectic. Neither of those things are relevant to the
critical points raised.
Tuukka:
You didn't raise critical points. You gave me a pep talk. Now you call
your pep talk criticism and insist that this has nothing to do with
rhetoric. Are you kidding me? What you're doing is nothing but rhetoric.
So I'm just saying that I don't want to repeat the criticism that
has already been offered, especially if you don't care. But since
I'm offering an answer to the question you've posed (about the
status of mind and matter in the MOQ), you seem to be deliberately
avoiding the content of my comments. If you aren't really
interested, then I won't bother.
Tuukka:
Why would a person, whose position in a debate is so bad as yours, ask
me if I'm interested of their reply? Well, I'm not a mind reader but
I've noticed how you've dealt with this topic so far. You've pretended
you're my mentor and then posted me a pep talk that doesn't pertain to
the issue I raised. I can see why you have to do that.
Your goal is to make your losing stance seem good to an audience that
doesn't understand logic. X Acto there mightn't understand logic since
he doesn't even write grammatically correct English. Maybe there are
more such people around?
And how do you pursue your goal? If you even tried the dialectical
approach I could catch you making a mistake. Dan tried to do this and
now he doesn't say a thing. So you're not going that way.
Maybe there are no mistakes in rhetoric? Your only remaining option is
to post something that has nothing to do with the Heinous Quadrilemma
and to write that post as if you're my mentor giving me a pep talk.
Because, if someone reads that really carelessly, he or she might
actually believe you're my mentor. That I'm a novice, struggling to
understand the MOQ, but you already do and you're so generous you give
me a pep talk.
This is what you've done.
And now you ask me if I want more of that. Oh man... that's not an
easy question to answer! I really don't know. I still need more time
to think about that.
It's a lot of work, you know?
Tuukka:
I used to complain about the work, too. Didn't make it any easier to do.
You know what. Yeah, I'm interested about your critique. Please do
send it. I'll reply when I have nothing better to do.
Regards,
Tuk
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
--
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take
our breath away."
— Bob Moorehead
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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
