[MD] Intellect's Symposium

[John Carl]

Dave, your exaltedness,

I just wanted to point out that more than a few of my earlier contributions
to MD were a thorough reading , commenting and posting of Pirsig's
Coppleston comments and my responses to those comments.  Commenting upon
comments, as it were.  Too bad you missed that evidently but I ain't gonna
re-type.

As to the rest...

Well, I'm probably way over my head just discussing the rarified air of your
academic genius and at this time I think I'll stick loyally to the road I
follow.  The low road, admittedly,  but my own path.

John

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 7:35 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> Mary said to John:
> DMB (hi Dave, nice to hear from you again!  I was around when you were
> first posting and remember), DMB points out, rightly so, that you (and
> apparently this Royce) are Hegelists.  That's fine, but is not germane to
> the conversation. Spare me the Royce quotes unless they relate to the MoQ in
> some way.
>
>
> dmb says:
> Thanks for the friendly greeting, Mary, and hello to you too. I recently
> saw my former college girlfriend, who I hadn't seen for 25 years. We had
> lunch. Her name is Mary and, in fact, I thought you might be her. Just so
> I'm not too disappointed, let's pretend I was your virtual boyfriend ten
> years ago and now we're virtually having lunch. Don't worry, I'll pick up
> the virtual check this time.
>
> I more or less agree with what you're saying to John here but Royce was in
> the general neighborhood of pragmatism, or at least he had friends who lived
> in that neighborhood. I mean, Royce shouldn't be a problem here and his
> ideas might even be interesting in terms of contrasts and comparisons but it
> seems that John would need to do a little work to make it interesting. You
> know, the make Royce's comments relevant to pragmatism in general and the
> MOQ in particular he needs to present some context and some explanations
> along with the quotes. Most of the time, I can't really see any point being
> made. I suspect that's because he's quite sure what Royce is saying and so
> he doesn't really have a point. But he seems like a pretty good guy to me.
> He's smart, funny, expresses himself well and he's interested in philosophy.
> That's a charming combo, so I cut him lots of slack.
>
> In this case, for example, I'd say that pragmatism can be mistaken for
> Idealism because it is not Realism. It's also mistaken for Realism because
> it's not Idealism. Maybe I'm just confessing my own lack of clarity, but I
> think it's a pretty easy mistake to make. The difference between Idealism
> and the MOQ is so close that Pirsig himself was in agreement Bradley's
> descriptions. But only up to a point, right up to the point where Pirsig got
> angry about "God" getting smuggled in through the back door. Even though
> Royce is not a full-on Hegelian, he is still an Idealist of some kind. And
> so maybe those Copleston annotations would be a good place for John to
> start.
> http://robertpirsig.org/Copleston.htm
> Anyway, I wasn't really following this thread and was almost inadvertently
> rude. If I missed anybody else's hello, cover for me will you? Tell them we
> were having virtual lunch and I got virtual food poisoning and puked up a
> bunch of pixels.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>