[MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics

[MarshaV]

On Jun 28, 2010, at 10:03 AM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR wrote:
 
> [Arlo previously]
> What about the social pattern of slavery? Denying women the ability to vote was
> a "social pattern", should that have been "sustained"?
> 
> [Marsha]
> This is not a now event.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Really? So its a "then event" or a "soon event"?

Show me this experience?   


> [Marsha]
> You are using the past to sustain it for some intellectual argument  which is
> much ado about yesterday. 
> 
> [Arlo]
> Oh so its only NOW that we should sustain biological and social patterns? A
> hundred years ago your pet quote would've been inappropriate?

Not yes, not no, not yes & no, not neither yes nor no.   


> 
> [Marsha]
> Hypothetical-social/intellectual bullshit.   
> 
> [Arlo]
> Right. Your most common "I can't answer with substance so I'm going to make
> idiotic accusations" tactic to get out of replying.

Your question had no substance either.
   

> 
> [Marsha]
> What do you do to improve anybody's situation, but intellectualize?   
> 
> [Arlo]
> I've suggest a lobotomy for you. Is that not enough? I am trying to help you
> kill all those horrible interlictial patterns.

Right, as I thought.  You intellectualize, and DO nothing.    

> 
> [Marsha]
> Do you think that you are teaching me something?  No, it's seems like ranting.  
> 
> [Arlo]
> I don't care nor intend to "teach" anyone anything. Whether its "ranting" to
> insist Bo take his revisions to their only valid ground or not, well, I suppose
> to Bo's "We Hates Us Them Gall-derned Interlictials" Cadre it would be. 

All made up in your mind.   


> 
> The point is, its a VALID argument for Bo to say his revised MOQ is better than
> Pirsig's MOQ. You can have that argument all you want and you'll get nary a
> peep from this evil interlictial (except perhaps to chime in my agreement with
> Pirsig).

The point is that Bo believes within RMP's many words there is support of his 
position.   

The 'interlictial' thing is really a very stupid tactic.  


> But it is an INVALID argument to claim that, despite Pirsig's ignorance about
> his own meaning, the SOL represents what Pirsig "meant". 

Bo sees confusion MRP's statements that opens the door to his argument.  




Marsha
 
___