[MD] xacto vs Lord Arioch

X Acto xacto at rocketmail.com
Sun Jul 18 06:14:37 PDT 2010 

yea, I know, sounds like a lotta bullshit
when some lays that stuff on you doesent it.

eat my grammar


 


----- Original Message ----
From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Sun, July 18, 2010 8:49:24 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] xacto vs Lord Arioch


yawn...    


On Jul 18, 2010, at 8:35 AM, X Acto wrote:

> Marsha,
> 
> so who made you the grammar police?
> 
> what gives YOU the right?
> 
> What, now we all must bow to the great Marsha's sense of Grammar?
> 
> Who made YOU the authority?
> 
> stop trying to control what I think!
> 
> it's all just inter-related patterns of value
> 
> not this not that
> 
> try dancing in the moonlight!
> 
> -Ron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Sent: Sat, July 17, 2010 11:58:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Bo vs. Bob
> 
> 
> Ron,
> 
> You finished your post with "so how can one make a 
> comment about any of it."  
> 
> Try using the rules of grammar if you expect to be
> properly understood.
> 
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 17, 2010, at 11:50 AM, X Acto wrote:
> 
>> Marsha,
>> And all I did was comment
>> on it was a branch of philosophy
>> that examines explanations.
>> 
>> -Ron
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Sent: Sat, July 17, 2010 11:43:49 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Bo vs. Bob
>> 
>> 
>> Ron,
>> 
>> I cannot comment about Aristotle's definition of 
>> metaphysics; that is true, and I didn't comment 
>> on Aristotle's definition of anything, but offered 
>> a simple, modern definition:
>> 
>> met·a·phys·ics  -  Philosophy  The branch of philosophy 
>> that examines the nature of reality.  
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha  
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 17, 2010, at 11:25 AM, X Acto wrote:
>> 
>>> Marsha,
>>> Then you can't make a comment one way or the other
>>> about it can you?
>>> 
>>> -Ron
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>>> Sent: Sat, July 17, 2010 11:08:17 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [MD] Bo vs. Bob
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ron,
>>> 
>>> I am not much concerned with Aristotle 
>>> since it would be too easy to translate ancient 
>>> greek by modern points-of-view.  Scholars are
>>> still arguing what is the proper interpretation.  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Marsha 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jul 17, 2010, at 10:56 AM, X Acto wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Metaphysics
>>>> 
>>>> that which comes after physics
>>>> 
>>>> regarding the complete works of Aristotle.
>>>>  as it sat in the library of Alexandria.
>>>> 
>>>> Aristotle called it a collection of class notes
>>>> concerning the theory of explanation.
>>>> 
>>>> a misnomer
>>>> 
>>>> on a collection of works most philosophers have not read.
>>>> 
>>>> so how can one make a comment about any of it.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>>>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>>>> Sent: Sat, July 17, 2010 1:27:33 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [MD] Bo vs. Bob
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> 
>>>> Seems to me the subject line is a setup!  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> p.s.  
>>>> 
>>>> met·a·phys·ics  -  Philosophy  The branch of philosophy 
>>>> that examines the nature of reality.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jul 16, 2010, at 8:44 PM, Matt Kundert wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi John,
>>>>> 
>>>>> John said:
>>>>> The thing is, we're born at the top of the mountain.  All the 
>>>>> paths (intellectual games and religions) lead DOWNWARD, 
>>>>> away from the top of the mountain from that point.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matt:
>>>>> That is an interesting gestalt switch.  I think it's _misleading_, 
>>>>> but that's because I think the kind of "back to origins!" 
>>>>> rhetoric that is latent in almost every religious and intellectual 
>>>>> tradition is misguided (the kind of rhetoric that has us talking 
>>>>> about how DQ the baby is).  What about this: being born is 
>>>>> like falling from the sky, out of nowhere, to the ground.  
>>>>> Being intellectual is climbing that mountain, or building that 
>>>>> Tower of Babel, trying to get back to what you imagine as 
>>>>> the origins.  The misleading bit of the very traditional Fall 
>>>>> Story is that there is somewhere to get back to.  I think the 
>>>>> better part of 2500 years of Western philosophy has taught 
>>>>> me that there's no there there.  The climb up the mountain is 
>>>>> real, as is the process of climbing into a culture (the length 
>>>>> of the "fall"), but there is no heaven (which has its parallel in 
>>>>> the Eastern notion of Enlightenment) where you completely 
>>>>> evacuate your connection to "fallen" life, the world.  I think 
>>>>> that's just a specific kind of effect created, like everything 
>>>>> else, from a specific kind of connection to the world.
>>>>> 
>>>>> John said:
>>>>> As far as the point that intellect = SOM, I agree completely 
>>>>> with Bo. That's just the definition of the term and the 
>>>>> metaphysical reality of the concepts.  Intellect is only half 
>>>>> the evolved human consciousness, however, and Pirsig 
>>>>> calling the 4th level "intellectual" was due to Pirsig's 
>>>>> particular blind spot - the one that Phaedrus hated and 
>>>>> overthrew in ZAMM.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> From my perspective today, (and I'd claim from the snip of 
>>>>> the Oxford DVD that Mary shared, Pirsig's as well)  It should 
>>>>> have been called something indicating the 
>>>>> Intellectual/Artistic continuum  and perhaps we wouldn't 
>>>>> have suffered so much conflict and strife in our attempt at 
>>>>> making this map back up the mountain.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Because Intellect IS SOM.  Make no mistake about that.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matt:
>>>>> Might you more systematically deploy the kinds of 
>>>>> definitions you are using for your terms.  Because, 
>>>>> argumentatively speaking, you beg the question about 
>>>>> whether intellect is SOM or not when you define it that 
>>>>> way.  The obvious response is, "Well, of course 'intellect is 
>>>>> SOM' if you _define_ it that way.  What if you don't?"  
>>>>> Which means we need to talk about what parts of reality 
>>>>> are being picked out by our terms, and then whether they 
>>>>> fit together in the specified kind of way (and then whether 
>>>>> Pirsig also thinks they fit together in the specified kind of 
>>>>> way).
>>>>> 
>>>>> For example, do you differentiate between a 
>>>>> "subject/object distinction" and a "subject/object 
>>>>> metaphysics"?  That'd be a good place to start.  And then, 
>>>>> "how do you define metaphysics and the performance of 
>>>>> that activity (if it is an activity)?"
>>>>> 
>>>>> You seem to be saying that you wish the levels had been 
>>>>> named Inorganic/Biological/Social/Consciousness, with 
>>>>> the top level broken into, roughly, Classic and Romantic, 
>>>>> as Pirsig had it in ZMM.  Right?  If that is so, then--moving 
>>>>> to Pirsig interpretation--you'd need to defend the notion 
>>>>> that in ZMM (or, in some other complicated inferential 
>>>>> pattern based on what he's said), Pirsig defined "classic" 
>>>>> as "SOM."  That doesn't strike me as true, but I haven't 
>>>>> read ZMM in a long while (and have no complex 
>>>>> interpretational pattern on hand).  The interpretation of 
>>>>> "the S/O distinction as classic" strikes me as decent, but 
>>>>> I'd need to know more about what you mean by 
>>>>> "metaphysics," and how you differentiate (or relate) 
>>>>> Pirsig's enemy in ZMM (dialectic) to his enemy in Lila 
>>>>> (SOM), and both to how you perceive a reconstruced, 
>>>>> I've-successfully-defeated-my-enemy version of any of 
>>>>> these items (i.e., are you saying there's no difference 
>>>>> between SOM before and after any critique of it?).
>>>>> 
>>>>> These, I think, might be some of confusions that haunt 
>>>>> appreciation of what ideas hide in the slogan 
>>>>> "intellect=SOM."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>                        
>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>> The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
>>>>>http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
>>>>>3
>>>>> 3
>>>>> 3
>>>>> 3
>>>>> 3
>>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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

More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list