[MD] Intellectual honesty

[John Carl]

Oh yeah, one other thing you're expert on dave,

Refusing to ever, ever admit a single point in your dialogic opponent's
favor.  And when confounded?  You get your skirts in a tizzy, flounce out
the door and announce, "this just isn't fun anymore."

I'm callin' you out, you metaphysical sissy



On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:55 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> RMP says:
>
> "So It has really been a shock to see how close Bradley is to the MOQ. Both
> he and the MOQ are expressing what Aldous Huxley called "The Perennial
> Philosophy," which is perennial, I believe, because it happens to be true.
> Bradley has given an excellent description of what the MOQ calls Dynamic
> Quality and an excellent rational justification for its intellectual
> acceptance. It and the MOQ can be spliced together with no difficulty into a
> broader explanation of the same thing."
>
>
>
>> dmb says:
>>
>> Pirsig's endorsement at the end? That's a good example of intellectual
>> dishonesty. In this case, I'd characterize the violation as a "selective use
>> of evidence". Anyone who reads the annotations can plainly see that Pirsig
>> finds similarities with Idealism but he also grows increasingly irritated by
>> Bradley's theism and he says the MOQ drops that part of it cold.
>
>
>
> John says:
>
> And I'd definitely characterize your "increasingly irritated" as the
> plainest intellectual dishonesty.  How can someone become increasingly
> irritated and then make an about-face that the author deems, "a shock"? and
> all you point to is the increasing irritation?
>
> I'd say the increasing irritation is in the mind of dmb, as the
> intellectual dishonesty in construing your favorite "antitheism" quote as
> the gist of the whole.
>
> tsk tsk indeed.
>
>
>
>
>  He thinks its quite wrong for Bradley to be sneaking his theistic goods in
>> through the back door. And of course I have not forgotten that you came here
>> with a religious agenda and that Absolute Idealism is more or less your way
>> to try and sneak your goods in through the back door.
>>
>>
>
> Sneak?  I'm about as up-front and honest with who I am, where I come from
> and what I believe as anybody on this list.   Just about everything that is
> me is described in detail in these missives and open to perusal in the
> archives.
>
>
>
>> It's dishonest and sleazy. You know perfectly well what Pirsig said about
>> the MOQ being anti-theistic.
>>
>> Deal with it.
>
>
> I have dave.  I have and am and will.
>
> I also know that when it comes to "dishonest and sleazy", you're the
> expert.  Just like you're the expert on "projection".
>
>
>
>
>
>