[MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics

[Horse]

Hi Mary

On 28/06/2010 11:41, Mary wrote:
> Hello Horse, Arlo, Bo, and all,
>
>   [Horse]
>    
>> Can't see that happening any time soon Arlo - this is an ego thing with
>> Bo. Until he gets his ego under control we'll continue to get the same
>> old drivel that we've been getting for some time.
>>      
>
> [Mary Replies]
> Is this [questioning a person's motivations] an updated variation on the
> theme that the first person to mention the Nazi's has lost the argument?
> Seems like it.
>    

Seems like you're taking a leaf out of Platt's book in arguing like this 
Mary. Talk radio distortion.

> [Horse]
>    
>> Even as an alternative to Pirsigs MoQ the SOL sucks.
>>      
> [Mary Replies]
> Though in disagreement with this, you nevertheless have the right to say so.
>    

I would hope so - not a lot of point in 10 years or so of maintaining 
this list if I can't join in.

> [Horse]
> But with so much
>    
>> time and ego invested in SOL Bo will not let go of it.
>> However, one thing I am going to start insisting upon is that Bo
>> refrains from saying that Pirsig supports the SOL as this is completely
>> false and to continue doing so is not only wrong but is intellectually
>> dishonest. Pirsig has stated quite clearly that the he does not
>> consider
>> SOL/SOM as Quality Intellect etc. as part of the MoQ and has also
>> stated
>> that it undermines the MoQ.
>> So Bo if you are reading this then please take note of the above.
>> Pirsig
>> does not support your interpretation of the MoQ and you should not try
>> and make out that he does.
>>
>>      
> [Mary Replies]
> It is one thing to moderate a conversation and quite another to censor one,
> particularly when the objection is prefaced by casting aspersions on
> motivations about which one can only speculate.  We can hurl quotes at one
> another all day without reaching consensus as to exactly what Pirsig meant
> by what he said.  This is likely purposeful.  Pirsig is averse to papal
> bulls.  Have you given consideration as to why?
>    

Seems to me that whenever I ask someone to behave reasonably I'm accused 
of being censorious - which ain't the case.
Far from censoring Bo, I have given him (and his followers) a platform 
(MD) to express those ideas (also publishing Bo's SOL essay on the main 
site) - even though I completely disagree with him! A very odd form of 
censorship!
As far as I'm concerned Pirsig has stated quite clearly that he does not 
support the SOL and I am asking Bo to stop trying to pretend otherwise. 
This, in my opinion, is not only dishonest but unnecessary. Apart from 
Pirsig's comments on the subject it would appear blatantly obvious that 
Bo's position and Pirsigs position are at odds. If Pirsig had thought 
that the Intellectual level was the S/O divide (or whatever such 
nonsense is being posited) he would have made the case for it in either 
ZMM, Lila, LC, SODV etc. He was capable of it, he didn't do it, he's 
voiced his disagreement and to ignore all this and continue to pretend 
otherwise is Just plain wrong. I fail to see how the following can be 
speculative or unclear:

Platt:
SOM is the current mental framework and means of communication in which 
we operate from day to day....

Pirsig:
I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS IS INCORRECT because many forms of intellect do 
not have a subject-object construction.. (My emphasis)

This is crystal clear, no interpretation necessary. Platt champions Bo's 
position, Pirsig thinks it's incorrect. Full stop. Period. End of 
conversation. Whether Pirsig is correct or not is irrelevant. He doesn't 
agree with Bo's position. Bo should defend his own position, in 
opposition to Pirsigs view on it's own merit and not dishonestly distort 
Pirsigs position.
Bo should not continue to remain in denial about what is obvious to 
anyone who can read. This is why I have asked him to refrain from saying 
that Pirsig agrees with something that he quite plainly disagrees with. 
This is not censorship, it is intellectual honesty and good manners.

My comments as to Bo's motives are as relevant as his comments towards 
other peoples motives - so how come you're favouring Bo and ignoring his 
disrespectful treatment of others (including Pirsig) and trying to pull 
me up for stating what I believe is the reason (ego) that Bo persists in 
his fantasy?

Cheers


Horse

-- 

"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
— Frank Zappa