[MD] Zen

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Krimel <Krimel at Krimel.com>:


> But look at the old "someone had to be first" argument. The issue is so
> what? If person X invents a widget that no one uses then it matters not at
> all. If X invents a widget and Y says cool and starts using it then Y is the
> first person to recognize the importance of X's widget and should be given
> credit. But if it's just X and Y using the widget then it is likely to wind
> up being lost. But then Z catches on and P and Q; so the most significant
> individual in the chain is the next person to catch on. Call him X+n. 
> 
> Platt wants to say that what is significant is X. I would say that what is
> significant is the magnitude of 'n'.

Thanks for backing up Pirsig (and me): "A tribe can change its values only
person by person and someone has to be first." X is first, then Y, Z, P, Q 
and X+n -- each individual person by person. But without the primacy of 
inventor X, the rest could never follow.

   



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