[MD] [Bulk] Re: Humanism

[118]

Hi Arlo,
OK, my mistake.  I welcome any "mistakes" as divined by dmb.  I may not
respond to them, however; I think I understand where dmb is coming from.  I
have presented Humanism as a new subject.  Perhaps the dialogue will be more
for agreement than negation of one's own interpretation.
Mark

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:

> [Mark]
> Arlo, you avoided Marsha's original suggestion.
>
> [Arlo]
> No I didn't. You asked a question about Humanism, a few other people chimed
> in, DMB entered to make the points relating humanism to Pirsig's ideas. I
> don't know what the problem is there at all?
>
> And I see no evidence that DMB is "blaming" people who disagree with him
> (whatever that means). What I see is a condemnation of twisting Pirsig's
> ideas, and holding to a foundation from which our disagreements can
> germinate. I disagree with Pirsig on a few points, and I have no problem
> separating out where my disagreement is from what he wrote. And I imagine if
> I wrote a post to the forum saying Pirsig actually meant what I want him to
> have meant, that DMB would correct me as well.
>
> [Mark]
> If dmb is the gatekeeper, fine, but he should describe what is inside the
> gate for us newcomers.
>
> [Arlo]
> Gatekeeper? Why do I think you are trying to twist this into a condemnation
> of disagreement. Disagreement is healthy. Disagreement spawns the evolution
> of ideas. Even minor disagreements that lead to better contextualization are
> necessary and should be encouraged. No one is saying otherwise. But the
> issue is not one of disagreement, its trying to manipulate a text to force
> agreement where no agreement exists, and it is against that form of
> dishonesty that we should all take a stand.
>
> 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
>