[MD] Pirsig's revenge

[X Acto]

Bodvar (chicken little) sayed
Craig, All 

6 Mar you wrote:

> Galen Strawson--who gave a less- than- favorable review of Lila --is
> speaking this month at the local junior University.
> http://www.moq.org/forum/Strawson/strawson.html Does anyone have a 
> devastating critique  or clever retort that I can bring up  in the
> question & answer period?      

Bodvar squeeled:
Regrettably it's impossible to counter Strawson because the only 
approach that would render his criticism irrelevant - namely the SOL
interpretation - is vehemently opposed by the self-appointed MOQ
pundits. I can only watch with glee the impotence of  those very same
persons. Hey Horse, Daves of all denominations, Andre ..., you who are
so dead sure that the SOL isn't the MOQ, this is your great chance.
Come on tell Craig what "devastating critique" he could present
Strawson with! 


Ron:
Bodvar, why is it you expect everyone else to do the work? in fact, if the SOL 
interpretation is the only counter, then, it is your time to shine ,,no?
come on chicken shit. Offer an explaination that strawson would'nt laugh at you
about.
See Strawson has an agenda,
He argues for this position with what he calls his "basic argument", which aims to show that no-one is ever ultimately morally 
responsible for their actions, and hence that no one has free will in the sense that usually concerns us. In its simplest form, 
the Basic Argument runs thus:
	1. We do what we do, in a given situation, because we are what we are. 
	2. In order to be ultimately responsible for what we do, we have to be ultimately 
	3. responsible for what we are — at least in certain crucial mental respects. 
	4. But we cannot, as the first point avers, be ultimately responsible for what we are, 
	5.  because, simply, we are what we are; we cannot be causa sui 
	6. Therefore, we cannot be ultimately responsible for what we do.
 
Strawson is a relativist. So a metaphysics of value, one that states reality is composed
of morals is a very frightening, threatening concept to even entertain.

Simply dear Bodvar, and dearest anal retentive Craig, state that strawson neglects the good.
In his opinion, there is no account for it, his view undermines social quality. Dmb would tear
him limb from limb.

Stawson insists we are slaves to biology. Even Ham would make mince of his views....
How about you Bo? what, would be your arguement?

answer if you dare











------- End of forwarded message -------

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