[MD] CA 2

Wed Aug 18 11:41:30 PDT 2010

Yes , thx John, i did not mean to say that it is not a valuable enterprise
to squirrel into the annotations,..
but yes , don't forget the audience i 'v meant to say
And it is not of course, if and when i don't comment on something , that i
don't like it or don't value it.
sometimes i'm occupied with other stuff.

Thinking about despise and label.
Hmmm,probably you are referring towards religion? dunno really, but if it is
religion, i don't despise it, or reject it,
it simply does not exist for me , totally.
"IT" is happening outside my reality.

relish, well, i relish quality, and i make no difference in quality provided
by you , Pirsig, Dave, Ian, Horse,Magnus , Marsha
and some others like Dan or Andre , this list is not limiting . if it is
quality , i will accept it.

Thanks for reading, dont forget the audience!

2010/8/18 John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>

> Tell you what, Adrie, guys,
>
> I'm gonna get through this thing, because I want to, for my own reasons and
> development.  I appreciate your thoughts and reading.  I'll try and take
> the
> reader into consideration BUT, the CA series I'm doing mainly for my own
> reasons.  And I've got enough off-list confirmation that I feel it's a
> valuable enterprise.
>
> I'll throw you this bone, Adrie - I'll keep a balance.  Instead of "not
> this, not that", I offer you "a little of this, a little of that".  With
> plainly placed labels so you can avoid what you despise, and relish what
> you
> like.
>
> Fair enough?
>
> Fair enough.
>
> jc
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:54 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Greetzz, Guys
> >
> > Been reading the annotations very extensively, at first , only with my
> own
> > insight and previous knowledge of the context
> > and general message of the work of Mr Pirsig, but then after that, been
> > reading them again,after i spoke with Dave of the
> > annotations , especially in regard of Pirsigs reflection on The
> Perrennial
> > philosophy(Huxley).
> > Dave placed the annotations in the same context as he is doing here,..and
> i
> > 'm able to see that Dan is doing the same
> > and on top of that , apparently Ant went the same path, trying to keep
> the
> > annotations in context.
> >
> > Yes well i agree, very important to keep them in context, and especially
> > this , the carefulll reader needs to read and to plow thrue
> > the black parts too, not only the red annotations,there is the need to
> keep
> > it all framed.
> >
> > But reading them, trying to explore them, i found no inconsistencies in
> > regard to the content/context of Mr Pirsigs Books
> > I found no inconsistencies in Dave's abstractions on this matter, nor on
> > his
> > abstraction on the Perrennial phil eye-wink of
> > Pirsig in the annotations.
> >
> > So i agree with Pirsig, Dan, Dave, Ant.
> > This point of view , however , is not in any way written on the purpose
> of
> > disagreeing with JC, i like your stuff , JC,..most of the time.
> > and i still remember a nice written posting , very crisp clear, neat, and
> > intelligent about the Monterey Bay area.
> > It took my interest for several reasons, it was superbly written,it had
> > content, was consistent and it showed you have something to say, without
> > the
> > nessecity digging in the annotations, you have stuff to say about your
> own
> > life's impressions, and i like to read it
> > i like to know this native things, how it is written, how it is
> > expierienced.........loved it all the way, good path.
> >
> > I like to know all this things Jc, you should write more of the good
> > stuff...not the lesser stuff.
> > What i meant to say JC, is this , throw of the backpack you are carrying,
> > will make you one of the best Squirrels around here.
> > Okay, and now i have to do some Quality-gardening, and thinking back
> during
> > that about this Monterey posting you made ,
> > will improve or make my day, maybe i will read some more of you guys
> later
> > this evening.
> >
> > Adrie
> >
> >
> >
> > 2010/8/18 Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com>
> >
> > > 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
> > > >
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > parser
> > 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
> >
> 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
>

-- 
parser