[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[Andre Broersen]

Marsha to Andre:

Andre:
>  Direct experience formalizes nothing Marsha.

I haven't the slightest idea what you're getting at with this sentence.

Andre:
This shows your learning and your non-commitment to anything...which is fine...but do not use it to evade and dodge. When you commit yourself to a dialogue...commit your self. In dialogue all is static Marsha, do not hide behind, and fade within the 'unpatterned' (your favourite expression to escape or evade the issues in question).

Marsha:

The MoQ is both 1.) a intellectual pattern explained by ZMM and LILA, and 2. a designation for Reality = Quality.

Andre:
So long as you are aware that it is a 'designation' and not reality itself as Bodvar  would have it.

Marsha:
Yes, the subject/object thinking is dualistic, and SOM is a formalized representation of subject/object thinking.

Andre:
So what does this have to do with the MOQ?.S/O thinking is one way of abstracting (intellectually) what we translate into epistemology and ontology. Pirsig has argued that the premises upon which the SOM epistemology and ontology are built is false. SOM does not accept direct , pure experience. It only accepts postulated theoretical hypotheses...proven or disproven in the process. It rejects Quality.

Marsha:
I don't think you understand Bo's point-of-view enough to say that it is a detriment to the MoQ.

Andre:
I think I do understand Bodvar's point of view and I am not the only one on this discuss who suggests that his pov is a detriment to the MOQ. Even Mr. Pirsig has said so!!!( Annotn. 132/133)

Marsha:
What you think I've learned is not very important to me.

Andre:
Sounds like it isn't very important to you either.

Marsha:
'The farther you go away from DQ the more divisions you'll encounter'.
Here, I agree with you.

Andre:
(I'll keep on being an arsehole): do you understand and experience it as such though??!!and doesn't that tell you anything?

Marsha:
Yes, I agree that the MoQ is fine.  But it is our confusion that makes
it messy.

Andre:
Don't generalise...it is your confusion. Bodvar has a way of doing this and it is not constructive. Rather it is destructive which is not good teaching. Every time a newby comes on this discuss he pounces with the SOM intellectual level which he has fucked up. This is confusing. The MOQ intellectual level is fine.

Marsha:
  
The only thing you have going in this post is swearing and sarcasm.

Andre:
This response reminds me of what Phaedrus went through in ZMM when confronted with the University's Great Books Program and the relevance of the classics to twentieth century society. Phaedrus played no games, he didn't just accept the idea...he 'passionately and fanatically knew it'.

Platt and Bodvar are playing games...they are playing their own agenda's. Platt's is political, Bodvar's is social...reputation...(commitment of one point of view upon which he has staked his entire life's work and reputation). And it is my conviction that the MOQ is very relevant to the twenty-first century. I am not playing any games here, I do not simply accept this idea on belief... I passionately know it... and (to quote Phaedrus in ZMM):'..he assailed them with every kind of invective he could think of' and I do this because they are presenting a distorted view of the MOQ and Mr. Pirsig's accomplishments...and I care about the MOQ and about Mr. Pirsig's accomplishments.

Marsha:
I think you've lost heart, which is nobody's fault but your own little
ego.  Keep up with the swearing, it reflects you little self very well.

Andre:
This has nothing to do with 'ego' Marsha. Again, I'd hoped you'd have learned something. Alas dmb was right! I am concerned about my little self. This is a very different concept from 'ego' as you should be well aware...small self-big self...? But I have my doubts....you seem to be confused.

These two personalities (Platt and Bodvar) are distorting the relationship...they have no idea about DQ/SQ. (talking about ego's!)

I have not lost heart...I care vehemently....... but alas! You are stuck in SOM and do not understand the basics of the MOQ. You may do so theoretically, i.e pay lip service to it,  but you do not recognize it as such within your own experience.

But I cannot tell you what you experience (you don't either) and I will not tell you how to conceptualize it...you have your own analogues. The MOQ is only a guide. But by all means Marsha, go your own way...but then................................................................. all the way.