[MD] CA 2

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:47 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> In reference to Pirsig's annotations, John said:
> You gotta love the guy.  Look at him dodge and weave!  What a complicated tour-de-force! ... Ok, so let's move on, with the realization that RMP is being very cagey for some reason. ...You gotta give credit to the guy, he's tap-dancing up a storm here. ... See what I mean?  If that's not some fancy dancin', I dunno what is.  ... Ok, at this point I'd like to pause and ask a question.  How?  How does the MoQ take both sides?  ...So how can one take "both sides"  from an MoQ perspective,  hmmm???
>
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> I think you have to remember that Pirsig comments were directed at Anthony McWatt, who was working on his Ph.D. thesis at the time. His answers can be very succinct because by then Ant had already spent a lot of time getting to understand philosophy in general and the MOQ in particular.  It's my impression that it only seems like cagey tap-dancing to you because you haven't done that kind of work. I'm saying your accusations of dodging and weaving are without merit.
>
> Would take a huge dose of humility to accept the proposition that Pirsig would know which ideas the MOQ can and cannot go along with? I don't think that's too much to ask.

Hi John and David

I tend to agree with dmb here though that is not to slight any
contributor who hasn't been around long enough to consider the context
of certain RMP quotes such as the Copleston annotations. I seem to
remember Anthony McWatt warning us of just this instance... of someone
taking the annotations out of context.

Thank you for reading,

Dan

>
>
>
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>