[MD] Another parallel

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 14 Jul 2009 at 9:40, X Acto wrote:

> > Platt,
> > That first part was aimed at Bo,
> > But I ask, in reference to my questions to you, is how then , is MoQ
> > expected to make any difference? How is it to give value to a value-less
> > intellectual pattern?
> > I really have a hard time understanding how you can equate MoQ with anti-intellectualism.
> > 
> > -Ron
> 
> Platt:
> Do you have a hard time understanding this from Pirsig?
> 
> "Remember that the central reality of the MOQ is not an object or a 
> subject or anything else. It is understood by direct experience only
> and not by reasoning of any kind." 
> 
> Ron:
> In refence to the question I asked, yes, I do not understand your meaning.
> Again, what does that statement have to do
> with teaching the metaphysics of quality in a classroom? what does that
> statement have to do with it being stated in a classroom setting by a professor?
 
Do you think classrooms and professors, except for those involved in 
the arts, are immersed in SOM? I do, so much so that the MOQ hasn't 
gained a foothold in any major university in the U.S. that I know of. The 
proof, as they say, is in the pudding. If a professor at Harvard or Yale 
wants to teach the MOQ, more power to her. I just wish I could live to 
see it. 

Platt
   
 
> ________________________________
> From: "plattholden at gmail.com" <plattholden at gmail.com>
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:15:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Another parallel
> 
> On 14 Jul 2009 at 8:38, X Acto wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Platt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > ________________________________
> > From: "plattholden at gmail.com" <plattholden at gmail.com>
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:16:25 AM
> > Subject: Re: [MD] Another parallel
> > 
> > On 14 Jul 2009 at 6:33, X Acto wrote:
> > 
> > > These statements are meaningless and exhibit a social level
> > > value of ignorance in the wake of saving face. Like the social level
> > > values of the religios figures you so like to compare yourself to, the
> > > dogmatic blind faith to your own ideals is staggering.
> > 
> > I express an opinion and you launch a personal attack. What's with that? 
> > And what religious figures do I like to compare myself to? 
> > 
> > > Platt, 
> > > Anthony is an "Academic" does this place him with SOM also?
> > > Does this invalidate everything he has to say about the MoQ?
> > > 
> > > If not why not?  was the liverpool conference a sham in your eyes? 
> > 
> > Sure. Anthony is with SOM. So are you. So am I. Whatever anyone 
> > says about the MOQ is SOM tainted.  But, "getting drunk and picking up 
> > bar-ladies and writing metaphysics is a part of life." (Lila, 5)
> > 
> > I'm sure the liverpool conference was great for the participants, 
> > especially having the privilege of meeting Pirsig in person. I wish I could 
> > have been there. But as for the value of the papers presented there, 
> > well, for me not much. 
> 
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 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/