Hi All,
Caught this out of the corner of my eye and reluctantly interrupt my
meanderings through the Chinese mind-set:
Bodvar:
Intellect has now spawned the MOQ...
Andre:
This is a huge misunderstanding on your part Bodvar. The MOQ is not out of
intellect! Reading and re-reading ZMM, Lila,
And Bodvar, I hereby declare myself inSOLvent.
Cheers
Andre
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
Ron:
Andre,
History and Facts are for acedemics? makin stuff up to support your own
prejudices..
now thats DQ!!!
Andre:
Thanks for this Ron, you've led me to the light again...it's so easy to stray
from the Path.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Marsha to Andre:
What was Buddha doing sitting under that Bo Tree? My guess he was
meditating and using his intellect (rationality scientific observation) to
study the mind.
Andre:
Hi Marsha, not sure he was doing this. At least, this is not what 'legend' says
about his quest.
He was deeply
Platt to Andre:
The full quote: If that is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist. What does
that refer to?
Andre:
'that' dear Platt, refers to the distortions, misrepresentations and
misunderstandings Marx found with persons using his writings to justify their
own little agenda in much the same
Marsha to Andre:
I would rather see the MoQ relating to Quantum Physics towards an
enlightened Philosophy of Science than looking back to James, Northrop and
etc., but that would take hard work, not just regurgitation. What the Buddhist
discovered by looking inward seems to be reflected by the
Platt to Andre:
Can you be more specific about what Marx found objectionable?
Andre:
Look Platt, you are the one who claimed that 'Marx sanctions despots'.
Can you substantiate this claim?
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
dmb to Andre:
Wow! Nice work, Andre. You nailed it. In just a few short paragraphs, Buddha,
Northrop, James and Pirsig are all connected on the same essential point.
Thanks.
Andre:
Thanks for the encouragement Dave. Just a pity that it appears to have been
totally lost on Marsha who drags
Mary to Ian:
Digging ever deeper... So, Ian, I gotta ask ya (and DMB and Bo and
all) WHAT is the purpose of the Intellectual Level. If we can agree
that each level is something that has taken off on a purpose of its
own and achieved levelhood because it wants/desires/values something
Marsha to Andre:
I do support Bo's point-of-view when if comes to the
intellectual level being SOM and the MoQ representing an emerging
Quality Level, but my choice of 'outer' and 'inner' has more to do with
seeing where the West and East focused their interest. I could just
have easily written
Platt (indirectly, because he does not want to expose himself but,
unfortunately, has nowhere else to hide but behind other people's
quotes, the intelligence behind which he could not even phathom):
What the Metaphysics of Quality indicates is that the twentieth-century
intellectual faith in
Marsha to Andre:
Greetings Sweet Andre,
Andre:
Don't marshmellow me sweety... I said to Medusa.
Marsha:Reality is Quality
Andre:
Dear Marsha, this is a fallacy. Reality is not quality. I wish I had
more time but must go. Will try to connect to some of your patterns later.
Moq_Discuss
Hi Jon,
You have used my response to Platt ( it seems) to substantiate the point
you want to make. To wit:
We will be governed by God... so I respond (in a very critical mood)
Andre:
This is blasphemous and I hereby charge you that you have absolutely no notion
of the MOQ, Quality, the
Jon to whoever:
The smartest thing comment referred to Pirsig, not Platt!
Andre:
And speak for yourself Jon! Crap! Taking a comment out of context makes it
yours because it is used to substantiate Platt's point (and seemingly yours as
well) and not the way it was used, by Pirsig, in the
Jon to Andre:
If you would like to learn why I think as I do, put down your cool-aid, take
a prozac, and open your mind
Andre:
That is exactly what I think all you theistic characters have done: too much
fucking prozac and fiddling with little five year olds! Don't get me started.
You have
Bodvar:
Andre does not represent the MOQ (rather the weak(minded) interpretation) so
don't take him too seriously.
Andre:
Yes Bodvar, it is a pity you are resorting to this sort of tactic. Indirect and
condescending. You have not answered any of my points in the positing of a
different point
Bodvar to Ian:
I have done nothing but debate, but its water on geese backs. The
SOL point is that SOM was the intellectual level (before the MOQ
revealed its true role) In LILA Pirsig writes:
Or, within historical time, the day Socrates died to establish the
independence of
Hi to all you weak minded,
Another thing just occurred to me: ZMM is a reminder of what we have
lost. I remember, in ZMM Phaedrus talks about and reflects on the little
patches of grass in front of people's homes. He'd rather they were not
there because they remind him of what has been
Andre:
I think I just burnt my arse!
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
Marsha to Andre:
Have you ever contemplated the nature of static patterns? Not their
name and designation, but their nature?
Andre:
As I added Marsha, I think I have just burnt my arse.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Marsha to Andre:
Have you ever contemplated the nature of what the
Buddhist call conventional/relative reality, or truths?
Andre:
Hi Marsha,
Am really not sure what you are wanting me to say or what you are driving at.
The 'nature' of conventional reality is the static perspective (as far as I
Mary to dmb [and Andre]
Mary said:
So, I ask again. What are the Intellectual Level value patterns? ...and am I
doing any better at making myself understood?
dmb says:
I think there are way too many pattens to name so I guess I don't understand
the question.
I don't think there is an
Bodvar to Andre:
Hi Andre
Andre:
Hi Bodvar
Bodvar:
About the MOQ replacing SOM and that
intellect is a moral level, has that just dawned on you?
Andre:
It has just dawned on me that you agree that the intellectual
level is a moral level within the MOQ program, and, by implication
that it has
Marsha to Andre:
It's that static truths are empty of independent existence, and after that
statement what is, useful or not, actually left over. The results: Ho hum
to neutrinos (not really, but kind of).
Andre:
Are you actually looking for the 'stuff' 'left over'? Full circle: Quality.
Ron:
Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which
guarantees the others.
- Aristotle
Andre:
Hi Ron, you know I am thick and I tried to give this quotation a place, a
context to the stuff you pasted below your post about the discussion with Mary,
dmb and my self
Marsha to Andre:
There's no-thing to look for...even your smart-alicky burnt arse.
Andre:
Then we understand each other Marsha, but must add that there is very little
left over of my 'alicky...arse' and not because of burning... rather the rice
and noodles variety here, one is asked to
Ron to Andre:
Mary was asking what does the intellectual level value. Courage is a fairly
good answer for the reasons
Aristotle mentioned.
Most Primarily, the intellectual level values the social level. That
objectivism does not, highlights
the problem of Bo's SOL.
Andre:
Thank you Ron, this
Platt to Jon:
Interesting. I'm sure it hasn't escaped you, Jon, that many today revert to
ancient beliefs of God-in-Nature, .i.e., pantheism. Environmentalism is
now the new religion, especially in academe, with Al Gore, a radical left
politician, the new pope.
Andre:
You are proving once again
Mary to Marsha:
That is the crux of it, isn't it? Static Truths are EMPTY of independent
existence. Once that is clear only DQ remains. I admire your earthquakes.
I am but a neophyte. I can intellectually accept this, but have never felt
an earthquake.
Andre:
I have Mary, and it is
Mary to dmb and Bo:
Dmb, I can't believe you just said that! You say, since Social patterns are
pre-intellectual, Bo must equate them with the pre-intellectual cutting edge
of reality, DQ, as though Bo doesn't have the sense to see the difference.
Well, why stop there? Biological and Inorganic
Marsha to Andre, (for consideration):
While awakening, realization or enlightenment seem to transcend the subject/
object dichotomy, Buddhist wisdom has always participated in the Intellectual
Level., at least it seems to me.
Andre:
Well Marsha, I can only refer you to Annotation 132 and 133 in
Hi Arlo,
I have been trying to find your post on what levels respond to Quality
and remember that you suggested that Pirsig said that 'only human beings
can respond to DQ??? Sorry I have lost it completely but my memory tells
me (mind you it have failed on me before) that Pirsig used the word
Marsha to Andre:
Yes, I'm saying that to suggest Eastern Philosophy is something special,
outside of logic and the scientific method (SOM), and therefore disproves
Bo's claim is false. Buddhism does not represent some strange kind of
non-s/o intellectual patterns.
Andre:
In the MoQ direct,
Horse:
Lots of value judgements to consider but all based on what and how we value.
Andre:
And here's another thought about the is and ought.
is=sq
ought=DQ
..and morality will be served.
Well, don't kill it off just yet...its just another thought.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
Horse,
I'll slightly amend my is/ought dichotomy:
is=sq...ought is the tension between DQ/SQ
For what it is worth
Andre
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
Marsha to Andre:
Thanks Andre.
Andre:
Marsha, this is at the end of your post. I can take it to mean that this is now
finished for you? Could be, but please let me indulge as I am learning from
this exchange with you.
Marsha:
I have not fully understood Bo's SOL to endorse it. I agree with
Marsha to Andre:
If you have no questions, how are you going to learn anything?
Andre:
I have just learned that you think I am a fool. This is an important learning.
Am I Ron? I will use a ubiquitous Chinese answer: 'maybe'.
Cheers.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Jon to dmb:
In Christianity, Christ is the Logos, the Logos who became flesh and dwelt
among us. The book of John opens with 'In the beginning was the logos, and
the logos was with God and the logos was God.
Andre:
And Jesus was begotten by Mary, in mythology (read Campbell's Masks of God')
Bodvar:
...Then the million Euro question is: What does SOM and Aret? translate into in
a MOQ context?
Andre:
What is 'the MOQ context'? And, whilst we are at it, what is the
'Quality context'? And staying with this, what is the 'super
rationality' level you proposed? I ask this because you
Ron:
sounds like nothing but an objective opinion about the teachings of the
buddha
not the buddha
Marsha:
That's the Buddha, the teaching.
Andre:
Yes Ron, Marsha is correct...you see: those anthros were there with him, under
the tree, with a tape recorder running, (they didn't have
Bodvar to virtually All of us:
What does SOM and Aret? translate into in a MOQ context?
What is this in a MOQ retrospect?
Andre:
This, in an MOQ context means simply that SOM was one hell of a pattern of
intellectual value and that arete was the Quality that the Sophists taught;
Quality,
Marsha to Platt and Bodvar:
Now you two have me confused. I understand it to be that
the Social Level is made of social-spovs, and the Intellectual
(SOM) Level is made up of intellectual-spovs, and the Biological
Level was made up of biological-spovs, etc., and that ALL
patterns are conceptual.
Platt to Horse:
you conflate intellectual patterns of
value with the intellectual level. The two are separate concepts
(thoughts, ideas).
Andre:
Hear all hear all, intellectual PoV's have nothing to do with the intellectual
level!
Platt:
Intellectual patterns of value is a broad concept
Marsha to Horse ;
I still understand the Intellectual Level to represent a formalized
subject/object (SOM) manipulation of abstract symbols, whether
they are concepts such as justice, neutrinos, or energy.
Andre:
Direct experience formalizes nothing Marsha. The MOQ invites the analysis of
your
Marsha:
Let's take, for instance, the pattern: horse. I understand horse to
be a biological static pattern of value. It's also best for me to
understand it as opposite-of-non-horse. By doing so I allow for
many individual's history of the pattern. If one individual's exposure
to horse has
Marsha to Andre:
Andre:
Direct experience formalizes nothing Marsha.
I haven't the slightest idea what you're getting at with this sentence.
Andre:
This shows your learning and your non-commitment to anything...which is
fine...but do not use it to evade and dodge. When you commit yourself
Platt to Andre:
You got it partly right, Andre. It was this intellectual level that was
screwing everything up. (Lila, 24)
Andre:
Well, blimey Platt...we (partly) agree on something. Problem still remains (and
this seems to be the basis of our disagreement with regards to the intellectual
Marsha to Andre::
The MoQ is both 1.) a intellectual pattern explained by ZMM
and LILA, and 2. a designation for Reality = Quality.
Andre:
So long as you are aware that it is a 'designation' and not
reality itself as Bodvar would have it.
Marsha:
I have no reason to rely on your
Bodvar to Ron and Andre:
This is much like DMB's tactics of not addressing the issue. If SOM
was ONE intellectual patter then Aret? was another intellectual pattern
pressed under inside the 4th. level.
Andre:
Oh dear! I am taking this post as it comes, paragraph by paragraph so I do not
know
Sometimes I can be a real nice fellow. Sometimes I am a prick, sometimes
I can be an arse hole but sometimes I can be a real bastard!
Jon fucking Bennet or whatever your name is! You open your posts with
'Hey Guys' in true fucking Christian mentality where the female
contributors on this
dmb:
Scientists used to think that diamonds were the hardest material on earth but
this fact has been altered by the discovery that Bodvar's head is 9 times
harder than a diamond.
Andre:
dmb, your usual straightforward and informative, no nonsense style, mixed with
this gem.
Solid as a rock!
All,
I apologise for my temper tantrum of yesterday. It was uncalled for and
MOQ discuss unworthy. Low quality indeed.
What motivated me was the so-maniest attempt by someone to bring 'god'
and 'creator' into the MOQ as a discussion topic.The MOQ rejects 'god',
or, for that matter any form
Dan to the 'liberals':
Exactly. Even after Robert Pirsig writes two books postulating that
rather than subjects and objects being primary to intellect, patterns
of value are primary, many, many people will not believe.
Andre:
I think you've hit the nail smack bang on the head Dan. Thank you.
Bodvar to Platt, Andre, Group:
See, he he's not capable of understanding the first thing.
Nor does he understand that the the agent of change is DQ. Phew!
Andre:
This shows just how 'thick' you have become Bodvar. I was merely begging the
question.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
Bodvar to Ron and Andre:
The Aret? that ZAMM gives examples of in the demi-gods of Homer's
Iliad were from at least a thousand years before the Sophists and
their courage, duty, honor, pride... etc.? are all solid social goods.
While Protagoras' man the measure is easily recognized as (what
came
Marsha to Andre:
The definition of MoQ that I hold most close to my heart because I know it
most intimately is: Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned experience),
which I formally extend to : MoQ = Reality is Quality(DQ(unpatterned
experience)/static
quality(patterned
Jon to Andre:
I am a theist and a Christian without apology, and it is a part of all I do
and all I am, and certainly my thought. So when I enter a room or a
conversation Christ enters with me. And that, I imagine, is the reason you
have twice now tried to shoo me out.
Andre:
We all have our
Platt to Horse:
No doubt in some instances Pirsig considers thought to be the
intellectual level. But, in other instances he considers the intellectual level
to be the subject-object understanding. There's the rub.
Andre:
With all due respect to you both I, once again, jump in here to be
Platt to Andre:
Can you give us some examples of spiritual rationality? Sounds
suspiciously like theology. But, of course, your adamant denial of
anything approaching theism precludes that avenue.
Andre:
Hi Platt, I think you are a little unfair and unreasonable now. The phrase
'spiritual
Andre to nPlatt:
Hi Platt, I think you are a little unfair and unreasonable now. The phrase
'spiritual rationality' comes from Pirsig.
[Platt]
Where did Pirsig say that? Specific reference please. He indicated just the
opposite in Annotations: When you here the words 'spirit' and 'faith'
dmb to John:
In both cases, the danger has always been that the static patterns will be
mistaken for the felt, lived reality that they refer to.
Andre:
Hi Dave:it appears to me (and please correct me if I am mistaken) that the SOL
interpretation falls in this category as well?
Moq_Discuss
Bodvar to Platt, Horse, Andre and All:
One can get too smart-ass. About the MOQ as a (subjective)
representation of reality in contrast to the MOQ as (objective) reality
reflects SOM and I recommend ZAMM's Newton parable. His theory
created the Gravity Reality and the MOQ will create the Quality
Ian to Andre:
PS, and yes Andre SOL is surely one such stepping stone on the road
beneath our wheels.
Andre:
Hello Ian, but what I was getting at is; is the SOL interpretation a 'stepping
stone' as you say, or a hindrance, as I was hinting at?
My question comes from Bodvar's oft pontification
Bodvar to dmb:
As said before look how OBJECTIVELY and ACADEMICALLY - i.e,.
somishly - Pirsig went about to present the Quality Idea in ZAMM.
Andre:
Sorry to interject but Bodvar, you are missing the point completely...once
again. It is not incredibly important how ' Pirsig went about to
Bodvar :
The essence of the MOQ is of course to transcend SOM...
Andre:
And in true Plattonian fashion, I demand to see specific evidence and
references to this claim. Where, exactly, has Phaedrus stated that the 'essence
of the MOQ is to transcend SOM'?
Make it hard Bodvar...as a diamond,
Platt to Andre:
If you think the intellectual level includes mystic understanding or aesthetic
appreciation you have some explaining to do.
Andre:
No explaining at all from the MOQ point of view, YOU have some explaining to do
from your intellectual (SOM)point of view as to why this isn't so,
Anthony to Andre:
Just to let you know that the MOQ in Oxford DVD is now finished and on sale
(at robertpirsig.org)!
It includes the three films produced specifically for last October's Study Day
(which just feature Robert Pirsig) plus David Buchanan's MOQ lecture.
Andre:
Excellent Anthony,
Horse to Platt:
Apologies in advance for the length of this post - it just seemed to
take on a life of it's own!
Andre:
Hi Horse, Platt, yes, that is usually what happens when quality writing
appears. An excellent post!
Your description of the painting/music process reminded me of some parts
Platt to Andre:
Your right. I do see justification for capitalism as being more moral
than socialism.
But, I see a lot more in the MOQ, too, like the moral justification for
pursuing beauty in all endeavors, whether expressing oneself in writing
with directness and simplicity (no Victorian
Bodvar to Andre:
In your anti-Bo frenzy you - Andre -
Andre:
'Frenzy' Bodvar? I merely oppose your SOL and your argument that the MOQ cannot
be an intellectual PoV. Just in case it has escaped your notice, I am not the
only one here and have not been either.
I link the 'MOQ not intellectual'
Bodvar to Matt, DMB, Steve, Multitude:
I do NOT oppose that inside the MOQ quality has existed for ever but
THIS QUALITY IS THE DQ OF THE DQ/SQ CONFIGURATION not a Quality that
exists independent of the MOQ.
Andre:
I'll throw myself into this and expect to be kicked in the bum if I
represent
Bodvar to Andre:
No doubt the Quality Idea arrived intuitively, but my point is that he
couldn't go down to the town square climb a soap box and tell people
he had had a vision. He lived in a society totally SOM-steeped and if
his idea would make it, it had to follow the rules of that society.
Bodvar to Arlo:
You who fight the SOL interpretation does the MOQ a disservice because a MOQ
declared (by you to the be) the highest INTELLECTUAL pattern will
make intellect's real value (its objective attitude) into low intellectual
value.
Andre:
I thought it was quality we were after Bodvar
Andre to Bodvar and Arlo:
Addendum to my last post:
I thought we were after Quality Bodvar, not an 'objective attitude'
(whatever that means).
This so-called objective attitude has been used and abused too long.
John Lennon captures the feeling pretty well:
I'm sick to death of seeing
Platt to Horse:
The only real issue we seem to have is about the nature of intellect and its
place in the MOQ evolutionary structure. Going back to the container
analogy, the following quote from Pirsig supplies evidence that the MOQ
stands above its static intellectual level:
What the MOQ
Bodvar to Platt:
Page up and page down in LILA
Pirsig harps on intellects undermining social control which has resulted
in nightmarish conditions in many big Western cities. Only intellect's
OBJECTIVE OVER SUBJECTIVE attitude that makes morals into
subjective irrelevancies can work this ill
Marsha:
Andre,
Please provide full quotes for a full explanation.
Andre:
Just read them again Marsha, if you find this difficult to follow. I am not,
sorry!, go through the effort again to spoon feed them to you or anyone else...
and then get a single sentence dismissal of Pirsig's work.
Andre to Marsha:
I remarked on the conventional SOM.
I apologize for having been abrupt and terse Marsha when you asked for
full quotes plus explanation. A summary you will find in Anthony's PhD.
More stuff, as said, in LILA and the LC.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Bodvar to Marsha:
The SOL is no Bo hobbyhorse but Phaedrus' of ZAMM's point where
the first deliberations on the Quality Ideas was pre-intellect/intellect,
this becoming Quality/SOM (the only level at that stage) And had the
final MOQ kept the 4th. level = SOM all trouble would have been
Marsha to Andre:
I suppose that is the best you can do when you try to use
forceful insults and fragmented quotes instead clarity and
consideration for the reader.
Andre:
A quote is always a 'fragment'. And the quote is quite clear, I would have
hoped. 'Forceful insults'? Where have I been
Bodvar to Marsha:
Rules for their manipulation .. smacks of thinking and/or intelligence,
but thinking precedes the 4th. level by hundreds of thousand of years
Andre:
Bodvar, are you really suggesting that 'thinking' does not take place at the
intellectual level?
Bodvar:
But this is spot on.
Arlo to Andre:
But then my own psychology says intellect is worth saving, there is a
great value in it, and I think Pirsig's placement of it as the
highest moral order shows he feels similarly. The MOQ is not a burn
down the universities philosophy, it is a reclaim the universities
philosophy.
Mary to everyone:
The platypus of truth. Either you believe something is true for all time
regardless of whether it is known or understood at the time, or you believe
truth is contextual and provisional - true now but not true before.
Andre:
All you have written is SOM!
'Truth' is no
Bodvar to Andre:
All trouble is the ten plus year's quibbling over the intellectual level
and it is not me creating it...'
Well, intellectual is the rational attitude, knowing objective from subjective
and THAT ought to be the 4th level's definition.
The correct definition would (in
this
Horse to Mary:
That it has a smiley at the end is irrelevant - being rude and obnoxious
will likely result in a retaliation.
There was no need for the above comment from Bo and I can't see how you
would justify it in any way shape or form.
This is yet another instance of Bo's attitude to and
Mary to Andre:
You post is most puzzling. You seem to disagree with me in some way, but
without further information I cannot discern what way. I would like to know
what is very, very clear to you that is not in agreement with what I said?
It must be something important, because you sound angry
Mary to John and Arlo:
Well, let me say it a clearer way, then. The metaphysics itself, the books,
the logic, the arguments, the explanations, are all SOM\SOL. If they
weren't, we wouldn't be able to read about it in books or talk about it
here. The MoQ - the Metaphysics - is a static
Bodvar to Mary;
I don't think you Mary mean the MOQ to be intellectual because it's
conveyed by language (like the fundamentalist do) but maybe you hint
to it being static just because of that?
Andre:
And you were occupied by this 'all day and most of the night' Bodvar? That Mary
is beginning
Bodvar to Andre:
You dare refer to the Paul Turner letter
Andre:
Hi Bodvar, am I wearing something that belongs to you...? Yes I 'dare' refer to
Pirsig's letter to Paul. It has cleared away many misunderstandings and
misgivings except to those who have a different interpretation and or
Arlo to Marsha:
[Arlo]
Hence, ALL intellectual patterns are misconceived, as this misconception
defines SOM.
Again, if ALL intellectual patterns are SOM, there is no conflict in ZMM as
both the Sophists and Aristotle were peddling the same SOM-Intellect.
[Marsha]
What?
[Arlo]
.. all
Bodvar to Arlo:
Quality is the DQ of MOQ's DQ/SQ configuration,
Andre:
No it is not Bodvar. DQ is the static intellectual reference to Quality. See
Anthony's PhD.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
Marsha to Andre:
Move on, or not. I still think Bo has the better point-of-view. The best
would be not to have a point-of-view. I'm working on it.
Andre:
And here you go again...copping out... you pretend not to be engaging in the
conventional world. I think that this is irresponsible
[Marsha]
We have strayed far from my questioning your elevation/inferior dichotomy
[Arlo]
Not mine, those who peddle the SOL.
Andre:
You've hit the blind spot Arlo and the 'liberals' are simply not aware of what
has hit them, or, perhaps, (taking the past as a learning device)they'll deny
it
Hi Adrie,
I wasn't snubbing your request to me. It's just that Dan's response was
complete and I couldn't add anything that wasn't already said. And your
response to Dan made my possible other post to you superfluous.
Regards
Andre, the poster of obsolete posts.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Adrie to Andre:
Well , sorry ,but given your name ,i was assuming that you were a native dutch,
residing in England, my misconception of course but is was generating results!
Thx to Dan's response.
Andre:
Hi Adrie and Dan, I am native dutch and after a 20 year stint in Australia I
now reside
Bodvar to Andre:
Why not think for yourself for a change.
Andre:
Bodvar, the thing is that you have started to think for yourself too soon,
after your so called 'epiphany' of your own first reading of ZMM and following
this the raping of the entire sequence: the MOQ.
Mr. Pirsig has devoted 45
Bodvar to Andre:
Come back when you have something sensible to say.
Andre:
Okay Bodvar, I'll bite, but since, in your eyes, nobody, who does not agree
with your SOL, HAS anything 'sensible' to say I have two simple questions, to
be answered with a very simple yes or no: 1) do you equate the
Steven to DMB:
I've asked you three times already to please supply a definition of relativism
with respect to truth.
Andre:
You guys are talking in a high caliber philosophological language here,
throwing names and concepts about the place a 6-year old child cannot
understand it
Steven to DMB;
I've asked you three times already to please supply a definition of
relativism...
Andre:
Sorry guys, I'm butting in again: Steven your are asking for
definitions...isn't that a typical SOM thing to do? The way Socrates destroyed
rhetoric with his dialectic method (objectifying
[Frank P. Broersen]
Only the nose knows.
[Andre P. Booth]
Whichever way the wind blows.
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/
1 - 100 of 1536 matches
Mail list logo
