[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

I strongly and very persistantly agree with Dan,this game you'r trying to
induce here , Mark , in common streetwise talk is called mindfucking.

But there is a real name for it,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

good reading stuff too anyway.


2010/11/8 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>

> Hi Dan and everyone who agrees with Dan,
>
> Now you stated that you were anti-theistic.  However, the command to keep
> dynamic quality concept free is straight out of the hand-book on Theism.
>  Do
> you know why there is a command against the worship of false idols?  This
> is
> because God cannot be encapsulated in such idols, it is concept free.
>  Creating concepts of God does not lead to God, worship does.  You are
> asking us to worship dynamic quality.
>
> I assume you know this since you put yourself squarely in the camp of
> anti-theists.  You cannot take this stand and then use Theistic concepts to
> further the cause of Quality.  MOQ is based on rational thought, not in the
> denial of rational thought.  This kind of dictate is dangerous and you know
> it!  If you are going to drag Pirsig in, then please explain why you deny
> rational thought to dynamic quality in your own words?  Is there any
> rational reason besides a Theistic one?
>
> I believe you owe the group an explanation, not some sentence from Pirsig.
>  In my opinion you are clearly on a wrong and dangerous path here.
>
> If you are a disciple of Hegelian philosophy (for example) does that mean
> you subscribe to every precept of Hegel's?  I wouldn't think so, because if
> so, why would there be any reason to further his philosophy through debate.
>  Pirsig is no God, he is not infallible, he would tell you that himself.
>  You are treating him in a Theistic way, which is unbecoming of this
> metaphysics.
>
> Please explain why you deny rational thought to dynamic quality.  Have you
> read anything but Pirsig, for example Theistic premises?
>
> I await your response and from anybody who agrees with you.
>
> Patiently,
> Mark
>
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:09 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello Everyone,
> > > I would disagree with the notion of keeping Dynamic Quality concept
> free.
> >
> > Dan:
> > You are disagreeing with Robert Pirsig, who wrote the MOQ. He
> > specifically states that Dynamic Quality is to be kept concept-free.
> > Of course, you would know that if you bothered reading anything.
> >
> > Dan
> > 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
>



-- 
parser