Hi Wim,
You wrote:
I do thrive on vegetarian food for 25 years now. (I confess I eat meat
maybe once a year when food isn't easily recognisable or properly
labelled as 'carnivores only'.)
My reason for renouncing meat is not that it would be immoral for me
to be instrumental in killing lower
Hi Jonathan:
But in the end, Pirsig was glad to get rid of Lila:
Too true. Many moons ago, I stirred things up by suggesting that in the end,
Phaedrus was the posing moralist, slinking off and leaving the real job of
caring for Lila to Richard Rigel.
The elements of hypocrisy that come
Hi Wim Nusselder:
Your wrote:
I'd say: suffering from the limitations of lower levels' static patterns of
value is the negative fact of Quality. DQ is the drive to eliminate that
suffering, the drive behind evolution. Doesn't really contradict Pirsig,
does it?
Suffering as I interpret the
Platt,
Do you honestly think the goal of all humanitarians is to eliminate all
suffering? That would be the ideal of humanitarians, but im sure they know
that that's never going to happen. And, personally, i dont think Pirsig's
intended connotation of suffering was of the sick and starving
Hi All
On 4 Jul 2001, at 8:37, Platt Holden wrote:
By the way, humanitarians dedicated to eliminate suffering should note
the following passage:
If you eliminate suffering from this world you eliminate life. There's no
evolution. Those species that don't suffer don't survive. Suffering
Hi Platt, thanks for the response. Two things:
1. The structure of Pirsig's argument. You quote him -
Is it immoral, as the Hindus and Buddhists claim, to eat the flesh of
animals? Our current morality would say it's immoral only if you're a
Hindu or Buddhist. Otherwise it's okay, since
Hi Horse and others,
I'm probably accusing the MoQ for being Emotivism in disguise, as Struan Hellier
called it. That would explain all these Libertarians here, which surprised me at
first.
But this has off course been up for debate earlier, and I will read the e-mails from
march 1998 and
Dear Roger, Marco, Platt, Dan, Andrea, Sam, Horse and everyone else.
I'm addressing this to certain individuals because it links strongly to
previous discussions we've engaged in. I'm not going to make this explicit,
but I will use some of my favourite catch words.
MARCO, PLATT
But in the end,
Stephen,
One thing that bugs me
about the MOQ ... is why the MOQ gives no footnotes to any research
if it where re-edited as a MOQ without the
character development parts (which
could be annotated) it would be easier to refer to in these discussions.
Ya' know, a lot of people have complained
Platt said:
So, like you, I have my doubts. But this group is so intelligent on
balance that by the simple expedient of talking things through I fully
expect us to collectively arrive at a higher plane of understanding
eventually. I just hope I'm still around when it happens. (-:
Are your
Hi Dan:
Thanks for your comments on how different people interpret the MOQ
differently. Here's a case in point. You wrote:
DAN:
Robert Pirsig is an author and Phaedrus is a fictional character in his
books. They are not the same.
I wonder how many others agree with you. I've always assumed
Dear Sam, Gerhard, Bo, Horse others,
Sam wrote 2/7 16:45 +0100:
I write this as someone who was vegetarian for ten years, but who now
isn't, on the grounds that whilst it is possible to survive on a
meat-free diet, it is not (IMHO) possible to thrive.
I do thrive on vegetarian food for 25
Hello everyone
From: Gerhard Ersdal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MD Pirsig's hypocrisy
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:16:57 +0200
Hi Horse and others,
I'm probably accusing the MoQ for being Emotivism in disguise, as Struan
Hellier called
Hello everyone
From: Platt Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MD Pirsig's hypocrisy
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:42:04 -0400
Hi Dan:
Thanks for your comments on how different people interpret the MOQ
differently. Here's a case in point. You
Hi Marco:
But in the end, Pirsig was glad to get rid of Lila:
Across the cabin, on the pilot berth, Phaedrus saw that her suitcase
was gone. There was a nice empty hole there. That was good. That
meant he could get the trays of slips back out and have room to get to
work on them again. That
Hi Horse, John B:
The MoQ is a statement about reality. Pirsig is part of that reality but not it's
entireity - the
MoQ would be as true a statement about reality whether he existed or not.
The MoQ gives us a target to aim for - a bullseye is great but not necessary. To be
the best
Platt wrote:
By the way, humanitarians dedicated to eliminate suffering should note the
following passage:
If you eliminate suffering from this world you eliminate life. There's no
evolution. Those species that don't suffer don't survive. Suffering is the
negative face of Quality that
(Sorry, I sent the former version by mistake)
More and more I become aare of the relevance of the very concept of a point of
view
(and some flexibility in switching from one another) to the MOQ (that good old
Sophism).
The very same sentence you quote, Platt, also tells us that we must strife to
As for being the best you can be, join the U.S. Army. That's their
motto--the point being you don't need the MOQ to inspire you to
excellence.
You may be interested to know that that slogan -- Be all you can be -- was
quite consciously developed for the US army by a group of people who were
Platt,
I think we should have a goal: To live fully after our principles. I also believe that
the goals you set, should be something to strive against, and nothing you should
expect to suceed in easily. In short; I think you are setting to high
It the moment I'm not certain that MoQ are
Dear Platt,
You wrote 4/7 8:37 -0400:
By the way, humanitarians
dedicated to eliminate suffering should note the following passage:'If you
eliminate suffering from this world you eliminate life. There's no evolution.
Those species that don't suffer don't survive. Suffering is the negative
Hi Sam:
SAM:
This may or may not be germane to the question of Pirsig's posited
hypocrisy, but in point of fact, the MoQ itself does not require
vegetarianism. In this instance RMP is making a tacit assumption about the
viability of human life on a vegetarian diet; if that assumption is
Hi Platt and All
On 4 Jul 2001, at 8:58, Platt Holden wrote:
It's hard to remove Pirsig from the MOQ because the novel in which it is
set forth is all about him. Lila is autobiographical, unlike any of
Shakespeare's plays.
It may be hard but it is also necessary - otherwise you don't
Hi Gerhard
On 4 Jul 2001, at 21:13, Gerhard Ersdal wrote:
It the moment I'm not certain that MoQ are defining my goal, as I am more confused
now on the deductions from MoQ
than I was when I joined this list. I was used to having the goals defined by
humanitarianism and utilitarianism, but
Hi Platt
On 4 Jul 2001, at 20:17, Platt Holden wrote:
Neither you nor I nor most of Western civilization can accept that moral
precept, throwing the metaphysics of evolutionary morality-- that
Pirsig invented and delineated -- into question.
So because of the moral decrepitude of much of
Horse Wrote:
I'm looking at my watch. The time is 14 miutes and 10 seconds past 1
o'clock in the morning.
Would this change if I were a murderer, a rapist or a child molester (I'm
none of these I
hasten to add - honest!). Of course it wouldn't.
The world's biggest fool can say the sun is
Hi Glen:
GLEN:
Again if want perfection, GO TO CHURCH.
PIRSIG:
His favorite Christian mystic was Johannes Eckhart who said,
Wouldst thou be perfect, do not yelp about God. (Lila, Chp. 30)
. . . perfection, a synonym for Quality. (Lila, Chp. 11)
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail
Hi Marco:
MARCO:
Phaedrus tries uselessly to convince her (Lila) to stay with him, and is
sad when she goes (ch. 31), so he is not selfish.
PIRSIG:
He stood on a mound of sand beside the juniper bushes and said,
A! He threw out his arms. Free! No idols, no Lila, no Rigel, no
New York, no
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Platt Holden
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 05:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MD Pirsig's hypocrisy
Hi Glen:
GLEN:
Again if want perfection, GO TO CHURCH.
PIRSIG:
His favorite Christian mystic was Johannes Eckhart who said,
Wouldst thou be perfect, do
with a strange sort of paralysis as Rigel's boat turned and then headed
back north across the bay.
(end of Chapter 31)
Bye, Marco
- Original Message -
From: Platt Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: MD Pirsig's hypocrisy
Hi Marco
Greetings one and all,
Platt wrote:
Actually I was unaware of this hypocrisy in the MOQ and appreciate
your pointing it out. Frankly I was shocked to learn that the MOQ
considers vegitarians to be morally superior to the vast majority of
Americans and Europeans, at least as regards their eating
From: Platt Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MD Pirsig's hypocrisy
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 10:47:53 -0400
Hi Horse, Gerhard, Andrea, Marco, All:
Horse, rather than debate your point about a re-run of the Florida
election as being the highest
Hello all!
In a message dated 7/2/01 4:23:22 PM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I will now re-examine the MOQ in the light of an author who may be
pulling our collective legs.
One must accept that ones heroes will inevitably have clay feet?
All the best,
Squonk. :-)
Platt,
Platt wrote:
Frankly I was shocked to learn that the MOQ considers vegitarians to be
morally superior
to the vast majority of Americans and Europeans, at least as regards their
eating
habits. That I never picked up on this before illustrates once again that
one tends to
see what one
Platt,
The Latin philosopher Seneca used to say When I talk about virtue, I'm not
talking about my virtue. Hypocrisy? No, if you are sincere. This vegetarian
passage is a minor point. Pirsig states even that all his work is immoral:
Writing a metaphysics is, in the strictest mystic sense, a
Platt
I'm looking at my watch. The time is 14 miutes and 10 seconds past 1 o'clock in the
morning.
Would this change if I were a murderer, a rapist or a child molester (I'm none of
these I
hasten to add - honest!). Of course it wouldn't.
In the same way, Pirsigs MoQ is entirely unaffected by
36 matches
Mail list logo
