[MD] Ham & swiss cheese

[ian glendinning]

Thanks for that Scott - I'd forgotten where that "anti-theistic" quote
had come from.

In Bob's defence, I'd say the phrase "in this regard" is missing from
the final sentence, implied, following the same form as the preceeding
one. Isn't language wonderful :-) ie he is effectively being
"pragmatic" in his denial of God here.

As has been said in earlier mythology vs mystical symbols debates, the
static (symbolic) idea of a God once and for all would have a hard
time finding a place in the MoQ framework. So, as a "relic of
suppression of dynamic freedom" (ie in this regard), it would indeed
be positively unwelcome, not just a- but anti-.

As usual Scott we're agreeing :-)
Ian
PS - so I won't respond to your other post "clarifying" our
differences. Still mainly linguistic, strectching our metaphors to
breaking point at or near "first cause", IMHO. Another time maybe ?

On 2/27/06, Scott Roberts <jse885 at localnet.com> wrote:
> Kevin and Ian,
>
> Ian said [to Kevin]
> Anti-theistic - correct, it's not explicitly so. It is anti the
> "static" baggage that seems to go with most theism, and most religion
> for that matter. Beyond that, it is agnostic on theism / religion per
> se. (Clearly anyone bringing their religion / god into the MoQ is
> however going to face some tough tests of fitness.)
>
> Scott:
> Here's what Pirsig said in the Copleston Annotations
> (http://robertpirsig.org/Copleston.htm):
>
> "The MOQ would add a fourth stage where the term "God" is completely dropped
> as a relic of an evil social suppression of intellectual and Dynamic
> freedom.   The MOQ is not just atheistic in this regard.  It is
> anti-theistic. "
>
> >From the same source is also his ridiculous statement "faith is the
> willingness to believe in falsehoods" (who ever thinks "such-and-such is
> false, but I am going to believe it anyway"? -- and most any theologian will
> note that faith is not about the truth content of propositions).
>
> Of course Ian is correct that it is the static baggage of theism (and other
> religions, and atheism) which is the problem. But there are many theists who
> are very much aware of that static baggage, and want to do something about
> it, but who get excluded from the conversation by those who share Pirsig's
> attitude. In this case, it is Pirsig who is carrying around some static
> baggage.
>
> - Scott
>
>
> 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/
>