[MD] Flying Spagetti Monsters

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>:

>      Platt, you can't make the moral decision
> according to Pirsig, which states the intellectual
> level is the highest static quality.  To be able to
> hold a dialogue between other people takes
> intellectual ability.  By reading what they [Ian and
> Arlo] say and ask in a conversation, is to
> intellectually have the ability to know what they are
> clearly saying.

Disagree. The burden is on the writer to make himself clear, not on the reader
to guess at what the writer really means.

> Yet, you are holding a conversation
> by yourself.  It's as if what Ian and Arlo are saying
> and asking does not exist.

Ian asked if there were any circumstances when I would disobey an order of my
commanding officer. I answered, "In battle, no." When I asked for an example
in a case that didn't involve battle, he replied with personal insults. You call
that an intellectual dialogue? Arlo asked if on orders I would shoot
a dead girl in battle. Does that question make sense to you? Furthermore, Arlo
admitted he would rather face a firing squad than drop the A-bomb on Hiroshima,
thus shortening the war which, in spite of the fact that the war ended shortly
thereafter, he called propaganda. You consider that a rational response? 
 
> You are ignoring their
> statements and questions, but this is all probably due
> to your thinking that the intellectual level is purely
> an individual level, so, when you are providing
> thought to a dialogue you have cultivated an
> intellectual habit of talking to yourself.  That's
> what it seems.  

See above as examples of not talking to myself.

>      By the way, dynamic quality has no definition, no
> boundaries, no concept.  Dq is at the edge of
> experience before and after static patterns are
> cultivated.  I would say noticing Dq is to think
> outside of the box, thus, ones first inclination is
> conscious decision making.

Disagree. Noticing DQ is not to think at all. It is an intuitive, not an 
intellectual (thinking) response.

> This makes a solider good,
> especially when war situations call for immediate
> flexibility and nimble transfer into behavior.  A
> solider that can't think for him/her self is a robot
> that will constantly wait for orders in all changing
> events and in such an environment as war where chaos
> reins, to wait for orders in every new situation -
> will kill you.

As you rule you are more likely to be killed if you refuse to obey orders. Rarely,
under extraordinary circustances, disobeying orders can turn defeat into victory. 

> Hence the intellectual ability to move
> with changing, chaotic events, thus, in Pirsigian
> terms to have intellectual level above the chaotic
> level, not allowing chaos to confuse the solider. 

Is it DQ or intellect that is best to handle a chaotic situation?

> The
> solider that notices the good, will be tough minded,
> intellectually nimble and help convey to everybody the
> way through a battle.
> In battle, the way through
> would be dynamic quality, as the experienced battle
> must climb beyond the chaotic level to where the
> battle (chaos) will not be all that remains and
> biological, social, and intellectual levels will be
> able stay in pattern.

Here you suggest DQ is best to handle a chaotic situation. I'm confused.

> The solider will maintain
> static patterns throughout the battle, thus,
> preserving life, and the only way through such cutting
> edge events is to notice dynamic quality glittering
> outside the box of the immediate experienced battle. 
> These are the leaders in any walk of life.  Leaders
> are those that have the good to contribute to
> everybody.  The good solider has something good to
> contribute for the side the solider fights for.  This
> is the solider that not only follows orders, but can
> clearly think for him/her self and thus be a leader
> during those trying times when waiting for orders will
> only end in the killing of the soldiers.  These
> soldiers, I would assume, are the soldiers that move
> up the ranks, become leaders that others depend upon
> for those strategies and creative ways through battles
> delivering the good when the dust settles.

Too abstract to be clearly understood. Some specific examples would help
convey your meaning.



-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/