[MD] Terry Eagleton's God Delusion

[David M]

Hi DMB

Not my problem if you're a slow reader, or haven't
realised my reading suggestions are the best ones you
are getting. I said simple, I never said short. Your guess
work about my motivations is fun but what a shame
if they are wrong!

Love to be your teacher if only I had the time.

David M





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "david buchanan" <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 7:36 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Terry Eagleton's God Delusion


> David M said:
> 'God' as a word for the source of all possibilities is well covered in
> Sneddon's thesis on Whitehead & Pirsig, it's simple stuff really, I'm sure
> you can grasp it.
>
> dmb says:
> It may be simple to read a master's thesis (although that's debatable) but
> it would consume many hours of my time. One would think, if it is so 
> simple
> and easy to grasp, that you would have simply answered my question.
>
> David M said:
> I think Whitehead's analysis of the distinction possible/actual is key to
> expanding what Pirsig says about static/dynamic. The physicist Shimon 
> Malin
> thinks Whitehead's approach is the ideal one for making sense of quantum
> theory, the connections to Pirsig are obvious if you look at the chapters
> in this: ...
>
> dmb says:
> Process philosophy and quantum theory expands Pirsig dq/sq split. Just a 
> few
> chapters and I'll see all this and its relation to Whitehead's
> possible/actual distinction? Oh yea, that sounds real simple. And again,
> this would take hours at least.
>
> If you have an answer to my question, that's fine. But I have way more 
> than
> enough to read already. I'll ask you (again) to refrain from giving me
> homework instead of straight talk. If the concept has meaning, then it can
> be explained. I suspect no explanations have been offered for that reason. 
> I
> mean, it looks like your (second) non-answer is just another evasion. If
> there are so many interesting connections, wouldn't all the readers gain
> something from it and isn't that the point of a forum like this one?
>
> Why is it getting any kind of coherent thought from you is like pulling
> teeth? Why would you tell somebody that the answer is simple and then not
> simply give it? Maybe I should try to be compassionate about it because
> you're not capable for some reason, but I'm not. This philosophical
> impotence only makes me angry. Its just more of the vagueness and
> abstraction I was complaining about in the first place. And the
> condescending attitude doesn't help either.
>
> Thanks for nothing,
> dmb
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a 
> month.
> Intro*Terms
> https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=4056&p=5117
>
> 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/
>