[MD] Proud to be a Brit / Pommie

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Ham]
I could make short work of rebutting your argument with Platt's 
reminder that MOQ is also an ideology.

[Arlo]
What a grand rebuttal!!.. if PLATT says it...

But, even if we accept that the MOQ is an "ideology" (I don't think 
it is, but so what...), I would say (and I think most here would 
agree) that there is as much danger in deifying Pirsig's writings as 
if they alone have succinctly captured the cosmos as in embracing any 
other "ology" as if it too has captured the totality of "what is 
good, what is right, and what is best". The dangers of that thinking 
are evident, consider Platt who at times pretends to be a "MOQ 
loyalist", but he does so only by summarily ignoring anything in 
Pirsig that does not conform to his worldview (almost half of what 
Pirsig has written, and something you call him on repeatedly). As 
such its no surprise to me that Platt sees the MOQ as an ideology.

In short, no one here (maybe) would posit that the MOQ is the "end 
all, final, only True metaphysics" out there. And if you notice who 
plays the "fear -ology" games, it is rarely people who do not claim 
to hold the One True Path.

[Ham]
While it is true that the proponent of an ideology seeks to justify 
it by showing how it explains the workings of man and his universe, 
this is hardly imposing a "belief system" on others.

[Arlo]
Demonizing, villifying, engaging in distortive and distractive 
rhetoric, all to "prove" how not only do I possess "the One True 
Philosophy" but that every competing "ology" or "osophy" out there is 
evil and held by horrid little people who seek the doom of mankind 
typically is the only end for the Ideologue. Certainly, people should 
argue for what they believe is "best", and no this is not "imposing a 
belief system on others". But personally I find anyone who sells "the 
One True Path" to be at once and always a snake oil salesman, if only 
because rather than opening the eyes of others he actively seeks to 
throw sand in and blind others to ideas and thoughts that are 
rejected out of hand simply because they are "outside" or "compete" 
with the ideology at hand.

[Ham]
Unlike prophets, popes, and despots, the philosopher can do little 
more than try to persuade others of the logic and virtues of his ideology.

[Arlo]
The so-called "philosophers" have a lot more rhetorical devices at 
their disposal than simple "logical persuasion". As you evidence when 
you say...

[Ham]
With the exception of nihilists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher 
Hitchens, philosophers generally have something positive to offer the public..

[Arlo]
Thanks for the clear display of my main point.

[Ham]
However, I do find black-and-white moral appraisals of Science, 
Ideology, and Pragmatism overly simplistic for a philosophy forum.

[Arlo]
And yet read what you just wrote...