[MD] Problems with Intellectual control of Society

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Ron]
It is quite an honor and well deserved in my own opinion. His value 
patterns are missed.

[Arlo]
Agree.

[Ron]
I think it's quite remarkable that Dave was singled out of the 
discuss, I think it brought more headache to him than honor, the 
celebrity thang. Either their building you up or tearing you down, 
thats a lot of pressure for anyone.

[Arlo]
Yeah, I didn't think of it that way, that's a good insight. I don't 
think DMB saw himself as any sort of celebrity, mind you, even after 
the endorsement of Pirsig. Same with Ant (while we are talking about 
those whom Pirsig endorses).

[Ron]
This ought to answer Andres questions about why Pirsig doesent just 
settle some things here on the discuss, I mean look what happened in 
Daves case. It should go to show, that any sort of Papal Bull would 
create more conflict than settle it

[Arlo]
Well, I excuse Pirsig only partially. You can't build a house with 
two pieces of wood. He really should articulate his views, or clarify 
them, more than he does, in my humble opinion. I have no qualm 
arguing against him, or for him, but I'd really like to know 
precisely when I am doing each of things. All bodies of though, as 
someone mentioned about "pragmatism", have many sub-schools that 
revolve around them, and the MOQ will be/should be no different. This 
is not about maintaining an orthodoxy, its about clarity so that 
progression can be made without second guessing. And sometimes that 
progression is into competing views, or "heresies" as it were.

[Ron]
To me, it has exposed a brand of rigid elitism held here on this forum.

[Arlo]
I'm not entirely sure I understand your point. I see it more as a 
"rigid anti-elitism". We are so determined not to allow anyone to be 
an authoritative voice, we shout down everyone, even those endorsed 
by the very man whose ideas we are here discussing. See, I have no 
problem with "authority" as representing one view, because that makes 
it clear when and where I disassociate myself with said authority. I 
know who the people are, for example, who are the accurate 
authoritative voices for Peirce, but that helps me determine when and 
where I disagree with his ideas. God forbid, for example, the world 
thinks that Ant or DMB understand Pirsig and can speak more 
accurately than we can about what the man meant. Personally, I am 
fine with that. So when I formulate my own "heresy" about his 
exclusionary limitations of the social and intellectual levels to 
"humans", I know precisely where I must draw that line.