[MD] Dan's appearance

[John Carl]

Hi Adrie,


> I agree on this all the way , Dan,..Timeless beauty will last forever.
>
>
And I agree completely with the three of you.




> Simple...The statement looks and feels simple, just by the grace of the
> total harmony,
> however the content it's carrying is the opposite of simple.
>
>
Interesting.  Opposite of simple is complicated.  Content depends upon the
discrimination of the beholder.  So sometimes simple is complicated.




>  So one can say correctly that--Dan quoting Pirsig.
> Dynamic Quality is both infinitely definable and undefinable because
> definition never exhausts it." [Robert Pirsig, LILA'S CHILD
>
> "Exactly both infinitely definable and undefinable because definition never
> exhausts it"
> Total harmony, i agree, but not simple.
> The possible projections that are incorporated-embedded,are on the cutting
> edge of what man
> is capable to understand or is trying to expirience.
> I was thinking of one of Mary's phrase's , as Pirsig is refusing or not
> wanting to define quality,
> But i tend to think that Pirsigs stament is--It cannot be defined-it is to
> be perceived/expirienced.
>


Yes, interesting distinction to ponder.  Pirsig refusing is like daddy
saying NO. But  he's not refusing, like some meany who is torturing his
students by refusing to define Quality.  He's in it with them!  He was
hoping one of THEM would have an answer.  A teacher asking his students?

No wonder the howls of outrage.

I agree completely.


>
> But, (ps) found finally some time to read LILA'S CHILD, this evening and
> tommorow,
> Taking some Qualitytime for my own.
>
> Greetzz, all (Dan).
> Adrie.
>
>
>
Well over here it's Father's day tomorrow.  Which I'm gonna spend with my
dad and we're looking forward to it.  In honor of Fathers, I offer an early
father's day present to whet your taste for your coming treat.  I myself
will address some of these concerns, which J Kegely also addresses in her
comparison of Royce and MacIntyre in her book, Genuine Individuals and
Genuine Communities.

Old Horse:

Another problem is that with much of

Communitarianism, and MacIntyre in particular, this system is based

on neo-Aristotelian Virtue theory. The big problem here is that this is

a personal ethical system, which does nothing whatsoever to curb the

excesses of the real social problem, the social institutions of

government, church, and the multi-nationals.

Communitarianism plays right into their hands. No wonder these

institutions advocate such a system. The proles get on with being nice

people whilst the institutions get on with shafting us; this is repeated

again and again throughout history and will continue whilst idiots like

MacIntyre propound their particular brand of oppression. Oops! Sorry

I’m getting political but hopefully you see the point I am making.


Although my favorite quotes are from some guy named RMP:


After the beginning of history inorganic, biological, social and

intellectual patterns are found existing together in the same person. I

think the conflicts mentioned here are intellectual conflicts in which

one side clings to an intellectual justification of existing social

patterns and the other side intellectually opposes the existing social

patterns. A social pattern which would be unaware of the next higher

level would be found among prehistoric people and the higher

primates when they exhibit social learning that is not genetically hard-

wired but yet is not symbolic.

I agree completely, RMP, but I do like to make a point about "beginning of
history".  After all, we're not even talking about written history, but an
oral tradition that is very, very old.  Much older than literacy - which is
pretty old in itself!


And in a sense, until humanity's mind took off in this level of abstraction
way, they were just other animals.  It's is intellect that sets man apart,
thus wherever you find man, you find intellect.  Whatever primitive
precursor you postulate before man, was a different animal entirely.
 Intellect is man, man is intellect.


Oops!  And woman too, of course.  Silly habits.


Please set Bo straight on this because he keeps insisting that the levels of
hierarchy work like some sorta mechanism that just winds upwards and people
used to be "of a merely social level" which is obviously not according to
this quote  and it's frustrating everybody.


I mean, he (Bo) had a lot to do with Dan's tackling Lila's Child.  You'd
think he'd read it once in a while.


Take Care, Dads everywhere.


John