[MD] Another parallel

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 14 Jul 2009 at 7:02, X Acto wrote:

> It's this kind of thing, the inability to put aside prejudices built by years of the
> re-inforcement of SOM static patterns, that has me doubting the MoQ's
> ability to change anything in our culture. the fact that these sorts of statements
> are made by our senor members of this forum is disheartening to be sure.
> 
> The inabilty to distinguish the difference between teachers and schools from the thought that
> dominates them is blindness on the level of religios dogmatism.
> By your rational if MoQ WERE to be taught in universities, it would
> STILL be considered SOM. HOW dumb is THAT?
> 
> pretty fuckin dumb

Again, the personal attack. Why?

Pirsig himself says the MOQ employs SOM reasoning. But, he explains 
why SOM reasoning misses the central reality of the MoQ.

"The central reality of the MOQ not an object or a subject of anything 
else. It is understood by direct experience only and not by reasoning of 
any kind." (LC,132)

Pretty fuckin dumb? I guess by your lights it is. 

Platt

> ________________________________
> From: ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu>
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:41:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Another parallel
> 
> [Platt]
> Words that should be etched in stone above the entrance to every ivy-covered
> building in every college and university in the world.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Right after we etch above every school in the world "right-wing reactionaries
> wanted to toss Pirsig out of his teaching job for being "radical"".
>