[MD] Knots

[Platt Holden]

Hi Mark,

We had much in common before and now even more. I, too,
suffered a nervous breakdown years ago over a conflict of values
that had potential devastating effect on my life. It was deep enough
to require 22 shock treatments and hospitalization for three months.
So I can relate to Pirsig's experience and like him, have worked to
understand the underlying premises which affected me and why
they turned out to be so self-destructive. Needless to say, his
passage to higher understanding and sharing it in his books has
led me to answers I never could have attained on my own. The
experience proved to me the delusions S-O critical thinking can
so easily create by it's infinite ability to weasel around any issue to
justify a preconceived conclusion. The evidence of its shortcomings
are everywhere, most recently in yesterday's U.S. election, but most
notably in a highly educated Germany populace electing a Adolf
Hitler. Probably the most egregious shortcoming of SOM is when
it appeals to values without having the slightest idea of what its
talking about.

But, I digress. I just wanted to say, "You rock!"

Platt.

.





On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:44 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 5:19 AM, <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Platt,
>
>
> Thank you for the proposal, good idea.  I will review my posts from the
> recent to back when I was posting from my aol account.  If nothing else it
> may bring clarity to myself.  Much of my writing could be termed "automatic
> writing".  That is, it stems from an awareness of the moment which I then
> try to transcribe into words, hopefully logically, but that is up to the
> interpreter.  As such, sometimes I learn something from rereading my own
> posts.  Strange I know.  A summary could be analogous to Phaedrus
> collecting
> thoughts on cards and then shuffling them continuously to make sense of
> things.
>
> In terms of Phaedrus, I also went through a temporary breakdown in the
> early
> eighties.  It was not destructive enough for shock therapy, and I did have
> a
> community which supported me at the time.  However, at the root of it was
> serious questioning which resulted in a complete dissociation from any firm
> footing in reality as I was used to.  It was all quicksand without
> grounding.  The creation of certain premises that I accepted as true,
> allowed rebuilding.  The notion of everything being an analogy can have
> destabilizing consequences, if one is not ready for it.  However, it is in
> the presentation of such analogies and their acceptance, that we coexist.
>  Our coexistence is based on agreement, and such agreement has no basis
> outside our own communication.  We create a world of knowledge as a result
> of some Quality stimulus.  Had to be there to understand, perhaps.
>
> Thus my insistence on lateral analogies for the expansion of the concept of
> Quality.  The power of the word is somewhat limited and limiting as we know
> through discussion of SOM.  If I choose, I can view the world free of SOM,
> converting that to discussion is the hard part.  Just another jumble in my
> head I suppose.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> Hi Mark,
> > Sorry but I missed a lot of what you say you covered. Can you  repeat
> your
> > analogies and insights on a single page in summary form without
> > compromising
> > your thoughts?  Someone once said, "If you can't write your idea on the
> > back of
> > business card, it's not a good idea." Probably an exaggeration, but it
> > forces
> > an Occam approach, like Pirsig's summary of the MOQ -- "Some things are
> > better
> > than others."
> >
> > Any sort of brief summary would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Platt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 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
>