In a message dated 12/14/99 8:30:34 AM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I will no longer respond to your posts. Your favorite argument is to
insult those who disagree with you. Or you dismiss any cogent
argument against your views by saying it’s an excuse for not acting
like you think everyone ought to act. To top if off, you don’t offer
any means to accomplish the changes you desire. Finally--and this
is the main reason--you don’t ever attempt to use the MOQ to
support your opinions. The purpose of this site is to discuss
Pirsig’s philosophy, not to serve as platform for your sermons. >>
Platt, I'm sorry if you feel that I insulted you. There's a P.S. on the end
of one of my posts a few days ago where I express my desire for nothing I say
to be taken personally. Maybe that P.S. seemed superficial, but I really
meant it. Again, if my comments came across as a personal insult, I'm sorry.
And Pirsig's work has had a profound influence on my thinking, ever since I
first read ZMM. It opened my mind to new avenues of thought I didn't even
know existed. I also think that everything I have suggested in my "sermons"
is of high Quality. Is caring for humanity and wishing that someday more
people would care about humanity on a deeper, more profound level than they
currently do, really so bad?
I know that there are millions of caring, good people in the world, Platt.
I'm just saying that most of them don't want to be confronted with the fact
that they could care *more*. Nobody wants to hear that. All too often the
messenger gets attacked and the message is conveniently dismissed. Especially
when society at large deems the message unimportant.
My message is that humanity is guilty of not caring enough about humanity.
Is this really a message of low Quality in the eyes of the MOQ? Does in fact
the MOQ dismiss this message as being utterly false?
If I've come across as insulting, it's only because many of the responses to
my message seem to confirm exactly what it says. The responses have
essentially been reasons why it is OK not to care.
Sometimes this sparks outrage inside of me. How can anyone who calls
themselves a human being suggest that it is OK not to care about other human
beings? Or that we should only care when it is convenient? Or that we should
only care when we have enough money to care? This is what I see. Should that
not upset me? I find it truly disturbing that it doesn't upset *more* people.
Wouldn't I be committing an immoral act if I failed to point out to people
that I felt their lack of caring was costing millions of human lives every
year? Should I just keep quiet and hope that one day everyone sees the true
depth of uncaring complacency which inhabits the heart of humanity at this
point in history?
People seem to view my ideas as political. Or they have to compare my ideas
to some kind of political system (or political leader) of the past or present
in order to give reasons why my ideas are wrong. Welfare and dependency pops
into people's heads when they hear my ideas, and this shows right away they
are looking at the ideas from a totally incorrect angle. I'm asking people to
wipe their minds clean of the muck of politics and see the deeper meaning.
The deeper intent. An intent which transcends the lust for money,
entertainment, and social acceptance.
Intent to care about humanity. For humanity's sake.
Jon
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
