[MD] now it comes

[skutvik at online.no]

Horse, All. 

26 July you whin(ni)ed.:

> That's SIMian logic for you Dave - in severe danger of disappearing up
> it's own ineptitude. Bo's version of the MoQ is so incredibly mangled
> that I don't believe that anyone who adheres to it has the faintest
> chance of making sense of what Pirsig has said in his writings. 

You have yet to deliver one single practical  example of how the strong 
intepretation fails and the "orthodox" delivers. On the contrary I have 
shown a lot of examples of Pirsig when he USES the MOQ ends in the 
(original) SOL. If this is "incredibly  mangling" and not "having the 
faintest chance of making sense" so be it.       

> And given the general level of nonsense created in support of Bo's
> version this appears to be the case. The passage you quote seems to be
> very clear in what it says but explaining this to Bo is pointless
> because he has no interest in seeing anything in any way other than in
> terms of his SIMian interpretation. 

Your philosophical and/or logical abilities haven't  impressed me much, 
you trust DMB to come up with arguments and when I show them as 
really mangling the MOQ (his SQ = concepts bit for instance) you 
resort to kindergarten name-calling. It suits you ill dear Mick White.   

> A consequence of this is that what you say will be similarly distorted
> because it doesn't conform to Bo's interpretation and therefore ends up
> mangled in the same way as almost everything that Pirsig has said. 

Pirsig has said many things and not all are MOQ compatible or directly 
harmful, particularly the "Quality/MOQ" meta-metaphysics (can't find 
any other name) that outright nullifies the MOQ. And when it stands 
between the latter-day Pirsig and the MOQ I vouch for the latter.  

> Could I interest you in a nice hard wall against which you can bang
> your head - it feels so much better when you stop!

Poor Dave what he has to endure.


Bodvar