[MD] The Mythos-Logos issue.

[John Carl]

I chime in here with Platt, Horse.  I believe allowing a stubborn curmudgeon
his say (and say... and say... and say) is ultimately a good thing for MD.
It sharpens one's wits to have to argue against a wrong position, and I've
learned a lot in wrestling with Bo's incoherence.

John

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:43 AM, <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Horse,
>
> Oh, oh. The spectre of censorship arises. Now the arbiters of "the truth"
> threaten. Does your warning to sentence Bo to Siberia also apply to me,
> Mary,
> Marsha and others who are at least willing to entertain the idea that the
> Pirsig may be wrong?
>
> Enforcement of purity of thought smacks of the totalitarian mind. And
> Pirsig
> would be the last person in the world to say you must agree with him or
> else
> you are persona non grata.
>
> I urge you to reconsider your position. No doubt your motive is well
> intentioned, but please consider that censorship violates the "moral right
> of
> intellect to be free of social control" -- a basic tenet of the MOQ.
>
> Regards,
> Platt
>
> On 1 Jul 2010 at 13:50, Horse wrote:
>
> > Hi Bo
> >
> > This paragraph extracted from your recent post is what I (and many
> > others) are objecting to and is precisely what I have asked you to drop.
> > If you continue to ignore my request there will likely be unfortunate
> > consequences. This _really_ is not what I want.
> > Ian has already pointed out your inability to see the honesty issue when
> > you say "point taken..." and then continue with the same old, same old.
> >
> > On 01/07/2010 07:18, skutvik at online.no wrote:
> > > OK, point taken, but listen: Pirsig is the origin of the Intellect =
> S/O idea (SOL) get that into your head,
> >
> > No Bo, get this into _YOUR_ head. YOU are the originator of the
> > "Intellect = S/O idea (SOL)". NOT Pirsig, but YOU.
> > Pirsig has stated quite clearly that he does not agree with your
> > interpretation and to continue to insist that he is the originator of an
> > idea that he has explicitly rejected is dishonest, misleading and plain
> > wrong. Please drop this now before it escalates to an outcome that will
> > please no-one.
> > On this list you are entitled to express your ideas about the MoQ, but
> > you are not entitled to distort the position of the originator of the
> > MoQ - Robert Pirsig
> >
> > > I'm dead tired of this being presented as some pet idea of mine,
> >
> > It is your idea Bo and deluding yourself into believing that Pirsig has
> > any connection to it is self-deception and consequently a means to
> > deceive others. Please stop now.
> >
> > > it's written clearly in ZAMM for you (all) to see.
> >
> > This is your interpretation which Pirsig has rejected. How many times do
> > you have to be told this by members of MD and Pirsig himself?
> >
> > > That was the revelation for me in its time: finally a
> > > thinker who had SOM by the throat, but then LILA where intellect
> > > looked uncannily like GOF mind, meaning that SOM was back in town.
> > >
> >
> > This is your opinion and interpretation Bo, not that of Pirsig. The MoQ
> > sees SOM and the MoQ itself as Intellectual patterns and not SOM as the
> > whole of the Intellectual level. If you want to argue your position to
> > the contrary then that's fine. Just don't try and make out that Pirsig
> > supports your position, that he is really the originator of your
> > position or that he supports the idea that SOM (or (S/O) = Intellectual
> > level. This position is dishonest.
> >
> > > It has haunted the MOQ for ten plus years and Pirsig HAS migrated
> > > back towards Phaedrus original insight.
> >
> > This is untrue Bo, you (and one or two others) have unsuccessfully
> > pushed for this position for at least the last ten years and attempted
> > to convince others that there is a problem where there is not a problem.
> > You cannot continue to claim support from Pirsig for a position which he
> > has stated clearly that he doesn't support. This now has to stop. Pirsig
> > has moved on, in many ways from the position that he held in ZMM - it's
> > time you did so too. Or at least it's time that you stopped claiming
> > support where it doesn't exist. Pirsig has expanded and enhanced his
> > position since ZMM was published. He hasn't back-pedalled, recanted,
> > lost his way or secretly (or overtly) supported your SOL interpretation.
> > This is all in your head.
> > Make the SOL stand on it's own merit if you can but please stop
> > dishonestly invoking support where it doesn't exist. Many members of MD,
> > myself included, have tried very hard over the last several months to
> > get you to see that this is wrong but you have refused to accept this.
> > Please don't continue along this path Bo, I like you a lot and you have
> > been at the core of MD for a long time so please, please please consider
> > what I have said very carefully.
> >
> >
> > Horse
>
> 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
>