[MD] [Bulk] Re: MOQ and Completeness Theories (Sorry, Godel.)

[MarshaV]

I love you.   



On Apr 1, 2011, at 5:34 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:

> Marsha,
> Tell me something (useful) that I don't know.
> Ian
> 
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 10:32 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Ian,
>> 
>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Arlo Bensinger wrote:
>> 
>>> "In fact, when proposed that I could perhaps interpret ZMM and Lila in a way different from some, this was also met with incredulity.  Any good book has multiple interpretations, and nobody has rights to the correct interpretation." (Marsha)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> This quote is not something I ever stated.  Arlo is mistaken when
>> citing me at its source.  Another 'oops' mistake.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --------------
>> 
>> On Apr 1, 2011, at 4:59 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>> 
>>> Arlo, Mark, Mary, Marsha, DMB,
>>> 
>>> Mary called it an "entre" I call it between a rock and hard place.
>>> 
>>> Mark said to Arlo "Get a grip".
>>> I have to say I've had that sentiment in this (and similar) thread for a while.
>>> 
>>> And the others interpreted each others quotes. thus :
>>> 
>>> Arlo quoted Marsha:
>>> "In fact, when proposed that I could perhaps interpret ZMM and Lila in
>>> a way different from some, this was also met with incredulity.  Any
>>> good book has multiple interpretations, and nobody has rights to the
>>> correct interpretation."
>>> Arlo said:
>>> ... I think a sentiment like "it's all interpretation" is readily
>>> evident. In a world where nobody has rights to the correct
>>> interpretation, please tell me how Ron's "interpretation" of Pirsig's
>>> MOQ supporting rape and torture would be dismissed?
>>> 
>>> dmb says:
>>> I guess Marsha thinks that interpretive freedom means never having to
>>> answer any criticism. It means you don't have to worry about making
>>> sense. Imagine how much work that would save! How how lonely that
>>> would be.
>>> 
>>> Ian says, I just want to bring this debate up a level, it's all so
>>> interpersonal, and as Mary suggests you have to question people's
>>> motives in the twisted sarcsasm before even looking at the words and
>>> the subject matter.
>>> 
>>> Ian
>>> What's so funny 'bout ....
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:18 AM, Mary <marysonthego at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hello Arlo,
>>>> 
>>>> Pretty late for me on a 'school' night, but your excellent post deserves a
>>>> response - quickly.
>>>> 
>>>> [Mary]
>>>> I disagree with your interpretation of Bo's interpretation.
>>>> 
>>>> [Arlo]
>>>> I can tell by this start, that we are going to be in a big disagreement.
>>>> This sort of "everything is interpretation" type thinking (and no, that is
>>>> not a quote of anyone) is really faulty, and I argue is very stuck in pure
>>>> subjectivism.
>>>> 
>>>> [Mary now]
>>>> Of course it is stuck in subjectivism.  Absolutely!  Remember, I am one who
>>>> thinks the Intellectual Level is SOM all the way, for all of us, all the
>>>> time.  I happen to think that anyone unwilling to admit that is kidding
>>>> themselves - and I see you, DMB, Andre, and Dan kidding yourselves daily
>>> 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
>> 
> 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


 
___