[MD] Babylonian intellectuals

[Platt Holden]

Bo:

Good explanation why some appear fearful of your MOQ stance. Thanks.

Platt

P.S. Prepared to be pelted with personal attacks and negative innuendos.

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:30 AM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:

> Hi Arlo
>
> 25 July :
>
> [Bo] before
> > Arlo has become a mean little Jr. of late and his "agony" over us
> > strong interpreters i a little pathetic...
>
> [Arlo]
> > Arlo's only "agony", I can assure you, is the embarrassment felt at
> > watching your blind quest for "interpretative legitimacy" lead you all
> > to new depths of dishonesty and distortion.
>
> Hold your fire. Pirsig's must be the strangest case in the Western
> cultural history by 1) presenting a system that will abolish academical
> philosophy (philosophology) by 2) postulating that it - with a welter
> rational disciplines - is the last and topmost level in a system of levels
> that violently resist being moved down inside the hierarchy.
>
> Now, the MOQ is no level, but its treatment of the topmost - intellectual
> - level is at least as humiliating for intellect as intellect's own was for
> the social level. This intellect vs. society struggle isn't over and
> intellect's resistance to the MOQ will be no less protracted , Not by
> violence, but by intellect's means, it will not allow itself to be reduced
> from thinking itself to the static value of a thinking subject/objective
> world.
>
> Intellect wants by all means to keep the MOQ an intellectual pattern as
> such safely inside its domain and you - intellect's henchmen - have
> already given us a show of its methods no less fierce than the social-
> intellect struggle which is waged on society's home turf - violence. The
> intellect vs MOQ will be with intellect's non-lethal weapons, but no less
> effective.
>
> > This whole "strong interpreter" nonsense is just part and parcel of
> > that. Once again, Bo, take your argument to its only valid ground,
> > champion the cause that YOUR ideas are BETTER than Pirsig's.
>
> See, you want it all shifted to an inter-academic dispute, harmless for
> intellect that happily sees countless "intellectual patterns" - i.e. ideas
> -
> pop up and compete, but there is just one MOQ and it is the one that
> reduces intellect from its role in SOM  - as mind - to SOM itself, so this
> your trap we will not wander into. Thank you..
>
> > So long as you remain trapped in your prison of interpretative
> > legitimacy, however, you are all just proving how intellectually
> > worthless the SOL truly is.
>
> Granted, the MOQ is intellectually worthless - just as worthless as
> intellect looked to society in its time. It's outright dangerous and its
> creator Phaedrus was treated accordingly by intellect's immune
> apparatus. The recuperated Pirsig did no longer dare forward the
> strong MOQ only the watered-down version where the intellectual level
> had been reduced to - on one page SOM itself, to the next page where
> it is back to SOM's mind.
>
> > And when that intellectual vacuum produces nothing but the dishonest
> > talk-radio bombast that it has, you are damn straight that anyone with
> > any shame whatsoever will become "mean".
>
> All this is expected from intellect's quarters, but as long as the MOQ
> holds water I'm not very worried. Phaedrus blasted the trail and as you
> - intellect's henchmen - are committed to argue from MOQ's premises
> you are forced to land in the MOQ.
>
> Bodvar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>