[MD] Step One

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:50 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> mornin' Dan.
>
>> Dan:
>>
>> Why would Bo deserve an apology? He was rude, insensitive, and left
>> the discussion of his own accord.
>>
>> I never subscribed to the incessant arguing over what defines the
>> intellectual level. When I read LILA, I had no problem understanding
>> what Robert Pirsig was on about. So I don't second your vote. I am
>> sure someone else here will engage you though.
>>
>
>
> john:
>
> Don't put no money on it.  People engage when they feel like, not when we
> want them too.
>
> For instance, you seemed critical of my misuse of basic MoQ terms, but don't
> seem to want to pinpoint or discuss or correct or anything constructive
> about these abuses of mine.  And when I try and engage you on key concepts,
> you demur, as if it was all beneath you.   As far as understanding what
> Robert Pirsig was on about, I agree with you there.  I don't think he was at
> all unclear or mysterious.  He's a good writer with good ideas who spent a
> lot of words communicating those ideas and I don't see how people could get
> so confused over them.

Dan:
I don't recall you trying to engage me on anything but the definition
of the intellectual level, which we both already know. There has
already been a huge waste of time here debating that particular
question. And now you suggest Bo deserves an apology? What is unclear
to you about the intellect?

>
> But I remind you, that it was your complaint that I am one of those
> "confused people" so I'm just suggesting that I'm open to you pointing out
> wherein my confusion lies.

Dan:
Okay.

>
>
>
>> I attempted to draw you into a discussion centered around a few
>> paragraphs from ZMM but you seemed pretty well set on your own
>> interpretation... practice, practice, practice.
>
>
>
> Dan, it's not like I didn't deal at all with your posting of climbing the
> mountain.  I certainly shed more thought, more time and more response on
> that post than anyone else did.  Not to mention that I've posted my own
> snippet from ZAMM (which costs me more time than it does you since I don't
> have no fancy digitized version) wherein RMP turns back from the peak of the
> mountain, leading to Chris's disparagement of "you're not very brave, are
> you."  And the author's response "no, but you'd be surprised at how smart I
> am."

Dan:

The ZMM version is available online at Henry Gurr's site and various
other sites. A quick google will get you there. Thank you for your
time in responding. I do appreciate it.

>
> I take both passages as bookends, Dan.  Encompassing a meaning of refusing
> to climb that means more than "not caring enough".  That's my take.  You can
> disparage it as silly, clownish, stupid or whatever.  But I don't see how
> you can disparage it as "refusing to discuss."

Dan:
Well, again, it is not that Phaedrus didn't care enough. It is that he
didn't care in the right way. I thought perhaps the quotes from The
Guidebook to ZMM might help explain it better than I can.

>
> I just got my own viewpoint, is all.
>
>
> Again, if that's all
>> it took, why aren't all music students playing at Carnigie Hall? There
>> seems something else missing from the equation but you don't seem
>> interested in pursuing what that something might be. You seemed
>> offended by the mention of holiness, as if someone were asking you to
>> kneel and pray. But much of ZMM and LILA are devoted to touching upon
>> the Dynamic aspects of experience that include devotion and belief in
>> that which is beyond intellectual desciption.
>>
>> Quality... we know what it is but we can't explain what it is that we know.
>>
>>
> I got no beef against holiness.  I got a beef with you saying I'm not
> displaying enough reverence.

Dan:
I don't know how else to put it. I thought by using the quotes from
ZMM might help you see what I was trying to say but obviously I
failed.

>
> No.  That's not right either.  I got no beef with your criticism.  I find it
> instructive and helpful even.  But I do have a response to make to the
> charge.
>
> I Woke up this morning, thinking about something from a book I read once.  A
> description of a scene,old friends meeting new, on a front porch, the late
> afternoon sun shafting in over the canyon top and illuminating our hero,
> sitting between old friends and new, the Deweeses and  the Sutherlands.
>
> After a while, a note of underlying discord creeps in.  Where does it come
> from?  What does it portend?  The ole' intellect kicks in and thinks about
> it a bit.  It comes from a disparity of perception and a conflict of
> attitudes.   The new friends have an easy-going, take-it-for-granted air
> that bugs the old friends, very much.  They would like to see more reverence
> expressed.  The new friends detect this and sort of compound the conflict by
> exaggerating their expressions of irreverence even more, referring to our
> hero with the halo on his head with epithet's of  demeaning endearment "that
> joker sitting there".   The old friends know things that the new friends
> don't.  There's good reason for the reverence.  Things have happened in the
> past that deserve reverence.  To ignore what has happened, like it hasn't
> happened would be... just crazy.
>
> What does it portend?  It means that we are all different people, all the
> time, to all the different people around us and while everybody has their
> own expectations and preconceptions about their own relationships, it takes
> the guy in the middle to see both sides, interpret them to each other and
> bring harmony into the room with a shrug, a smile, and a story.

Dan:
Yes I think the same thing happens in the discussion group. Some of us
have been around a decade or more. I recall my old friend Krimel
showing up unexpectedly with me greeting him with "asshole." Now,
someone who didn't know our history would no doubt take that greeting
as an insult, but it wasn't meant that way at all. It was actually a
term of endearment, if you will. I like Krimel a great deal. But he
can be trying at times too, which is his style.

That isn't the reverence I am talking about, though. It is something
you feel inside yourself. No one can tell you what it is. You can be
pointed towards it, but there is a difference between being told how
to walk, and walking. We were all too young to remember our first
steps, but what a rush that must have been! That is the reverence I am
pointing to.

>
> Dan:
>
>> To surpass the teacher doesn't mean to denigrate the teacher, which is
>> what you do when you call Robert Pirsig "holy Bob." Why not just call
>> him the Great Author? Anthony McWatt and David Buchanan both are
>> working at surpassing Mr. Pirsig when it comes to academia and he
>> seems more than happy to help them in any way he can. But they don't
>> belittle the man by calling him names. If they did, I doubt they'd get
>> far at all.
>>
>>
> Well, perhaps my explanation about might help you understand my supposed
> "denigration" then.  I think it applies exactly, except of course my idea of
> friendship is entirely a projections on my part - a creation in my own
> mind.  But still, we Idealists are tricky buggers because if something is in
> my mind, it's as real to me as anything else in this world.

Dan:
I address most all my posts here as "Hello everyone" to remind myself
that anyone could be reading. Anyone. And I have a great deal of
respect for Robert Pirsig. He is not only a wonderful writer and a
warm and generous human being, he went out of his way by offering the
annotations for LILA'S CHILD when he didn't have to. And so when
someone disrespects him, it irks me. I can't help it.

>
> As for McWatt and Buchanan, I which them well in their careers and
> endeavors.  But Their high road is not the same as my low road.  If you
> think it'd be a good idea to restrict this list to sycophants and academics,
> I suggest you put the idea to Horse and see what he thinks.

Dan:
I don't recall ever suggesting that. I would be excluded from the
list. I have no academic standing and probably never will. Besides, I
don't offer suggestions to Horse... he does a fine job and needs no
help from me.

>
>
>> > Now, I know there is no way I'm gonna surpass this particular teacher.
>>  Nor
>> > even match him, much less one-up him or anything like you describe in
>> your
>> > ego-bound eyes.  But hey, if I could at least inspire one other person to
>> > try, I'd have done enough to justify my calories, I figure.
>>
>> Dan:
>> It's okay to insult me, John. I just take it in and rarely give it
>> back. But we have nothing more to talk about either.
>>
>>
> I'll take your word for it Dan.  You're the expert, after all.

Dan:
No I am not an expert. I am just a regular guy.

>
> Take care,
>
> John
> 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
>