[MD] Changes in 2011

[rapsncows at fastmail.fm]

dmb, (and an apology to the 'fits')

I'm not sure what to make of this post.  Do you implicate me or not?

On the one hand there is talk of 'year after year', and (from Horse)
'you don't have an original idea in nearly 15 years'...  But on the
other hand there is this big rant about 'misfit'.  I think it was me he
brought that unfortunate word into the discussion, on new year's eve:

"[Tim] You [to Horse] know, better than I do (I'm sure), that I fit in
amongst the
'misfits' here.  Almost exclusively in fact.  I have hardly taken part
in a conversation with other than Mark, Marsha, Ham, and John (there
have been noteworthy exceptions of course).  Don't take it lightly that
your forum has provided us such a high quality experience.  [SNIP]
  IF there were to be a problem with someone I had never
talked with, I would just advise you that in this corner it seems fine,
so...  if there was something I could do to help over there, cool, let
me know; but if what I was talking about over here with the other
misfits was inherently a problem... well, that would be a shame.  Seems
...  well, I don't want to tell you your job, or how to run your forum,
do as you like, but I think that Mark, Marsha, Ham, John and I will all
of us agree: we find high quality here, thanks, Horse; ..."

Ian has said, I paraphrase, 'certainly there is value to misfits, but
...'  He has also said that he considers himself a misfit here too.  I
think --- well, I'll shut myself up here.  Anyway, this term 'mistfit'
is my fault, and maybe a little bit Ian's too, but I don't think you can
pounce on anyone else for it.  So: 

> dmb says:
> That's really what it's all about. Ironically, the most inflexible and
> incorrigible participants respond to these complaints and criticisms by
> portraying themselves as heroic misfits fighting "the man". Clearly,
> "misfit" is self-serving and self-aggrandizing characterization is a
> distorted version Pirsig's ideas about the role of the contrarian in
> cultural evolution.

[Tim]
do you implicate me here?  My ability to read between the lines is only
so good.  But, because it seems you do care...  hmmmm, is there a
history to the term 'misfit' here that I have naievely stepped upon? 
'portraying themselves as heroic misfits fighting "the man"': to whom
does this refer?  Anyway, again, I think this 'misfit' faux pas is my
fault, so I'm 'a jump in.  IF you think, that I think, that I am a
heroic misfit fighting some 'the man', you have misread me.  IF this
implicates me, I would say that this is a situation in which you would
benefit from Marsha's perspective, that you are making me what YOU are
making me.  If there is some history about this which I am unaware, my
bad.   But again, it was me, almost exclusively, who used this word
recently, so...  If you are saying that you think that I think that I am
a heroic misfit, you are revealing yourself, not me.  But I don't care
if you're convinced.

I am fighting.  I am abnormal as a fighter.  But this abnormality is
more hateful than heroic; it's disgusting, but it's less disgusting than
the alternative.  Maybe it is my self-disgust you misconceive as
fighting the man...  Then again, since you don't specify about whom you
speak, maybe you don't implicate me and I am being a complete jackass. 
Again, I'm the one who said 'misfit', and I am a bit embarrassed to
admit that the comparison to the brujo, the social contrarian of
Pirsig's work, didn't even cross my mind!  Believe it or not.  I try to
shoot strait.  and, when I made the original comment, 'misfit', I used
that word because I was thinking that the Forum is not compulsory, I
entered it freely, and it is Horse's.  He can do whatever he wants,
arbitrarily, without explanation; but that doesn't mean I don't have an
opinion about what is best, or what I'd do if I were in his shoes, etc. 
So, I was merely thinking, 'I know I don't quite fit in with Horse, or
the people I see as his forum friends.'  misfit came from my thinking
that I did not fit the best hope he might have had for a forum member. 
But again, I don't care if you're convinced.

But, I hope to convince you yet.  so one more thing.  self-aggrandizing!
 I have a real hard time continuing to think that you are implicating
me, but I can't imagine who else you would be implicating either! 
hmmm...  This is where I wonder if you are showing yourself more than
you are seeing your object.  I don't have a high enough opinion of
anyone or anything to think that I can aggrandize myself by fighting! 
This is a nice little forum, and I certainly wish everyone here all the
best...  I don't have any desire to aggrandize myself - and certainly
not at anyone else's expense.  But, to be sure, if that were my hope, I
wouldn't be trying to knock over Horse's forum!  (and the only person
here whom I have seen that really has any hope of trouncing RMP is Ham;
and I don't think that you, or anyone for that matter, would read him as
anything but open and sincere in his efforts)  Anyway, this doesn't
change the fact that I am fighting, I do hope to win my arguments ---
this is even more so when by 'win' I mean learn something new / abandon
something false.  So you see, I hope: I don't care if you are convinced,
but I do care if you are convinced.

 
> [dmb] I think there is nothing heroic about incorrigibility. In a place like
> this, ignoring contrary evidence and evading questions is a very serious
> problem. It's a violation of decency and fair-play. It's not honest. That
> kind of behavior is the mark of very low intellectual quality. And yet
> that's exactly what the so-called "misfits" do, some of them for ignoring
> and evading for many years now.

[Tim]
again, about whom are you speaking?!  Perhaps I am at fault here too.  I
referred to the 'fits' (and the 'pirsigians'); this was a great mistake;
I am sorry; I won't let it happen again (no absolute guarantees though).
 I had made some general comments about people verbally abusing Marsha,
and I know I can find those references, but I was way too loose in my
characterization of the 'fits'.  Again, this is my bad - and it is no
trivial mistake - I really am sorry.  I hope this is not too buried, if
I offended you, reader, by my general statements regarding the 'fits', I
apologize to you now.  If you, any reader, want something specific and
direct, please ask.

anyway, what question have I evaded?  And, if you can find one, was it
from you?  And, if you can find one, was it one related to a position of
mine?

> [dmb] The problem seems to be plain,
> old-fashioned incompetence, not that they have a "different" point of
> view. These misfits don't fit into a philosophical discussion group
> because such a discussion can not function without answering questions,
> saying what you mean and honestly facing up to the relevant evidence. A
> conversation just can't work without these basic standards of decency.

[Tim]
even if you can prove that this describes me, conversation and rational
intellectual level doings are just tools: the aim is not in them (so I
think).  Philosophical discussion can have benefits, perhaps it is even
essential to the hopes of a moral society in a world full of people, but
it is just a minor part of life; and while these 'problems' (again, I am
bringing this word in, perhaps errantly) might appear to be superficial
benefits to philosophical discussion, I argue that 'philosophical
discussion' as you imagine is then a terrible idea.  First, people are
more valuable than their capacity to win a philosophical discussion with
dmb.  Second, the idea of apportioning parts of life to be purely
philosophical discussion is morally abhorent; and I think this should be
recognized most readily by an adept in RMP's MoM.  Again, I think the
most fruitful, and the most pure, philosophical discussions would be
attained in a moral world.  Aim for morality.  Treat people with love. 
Be patient and forgiving.  Be glad for the philosophical discussion that
happens in the midst of all this.  And call each other jackass or
asshole when it seems proper.
 
> 
>[dmb] As I see it, the participants who conduct themselves this way, year after
> year, really don't belong in a place like this regardless of the topic
> discussed. They kind of behavior would spoil ANY kind of philosophical
> discussion and if they ignored evidence and refused to answer questions
> in a court of law they'd be cited for contempt or laughed out of the
> courtroom. I mean, in some contexts it is literally against the law to do
> what they do here every day of the week. As I see it, Horse's contention
> is that this behavior interferes with the main purpose of this forum and
> I don't see how anyone can doubt that. On some days there is nothing but
> noise and interference so that decent conversation is completely shut
> out.

[Tim]
scapegoatism here at the end.  I can imagine situations in which 'noise'
might be a barrier to real discussion.  I don't think such a contention
holds water here.  If you think everyone here is an idiot, that's cool,
but it isn't the 'noise' that is keeping all the geniuses from typing up
their posts and responses.


>[dmb] This post - like almost every post lately - is about nothing
> philosophical and it's not even interesting. It's just about dealing with
> childish bullshit that should never exist in the first place. What a
> drag.
> 

[Tim]
haha.  (Though I thought this recent bout was a bit of a drag too.)  I,
for one, am a fan of children.  Therefore, I am quite glad that there is
childish bullshit to deal with - and knowing that so long as there is
man he will have childish bullshit with which to deal (do you think you
never produced bullshit when you were a kid?).  Do you really think that
QUALITY (Quality's Quality) is to be found somewhere in the arena of
philosophy?  To be sure, there is quality to philosophy, but it is
because it relates to us, children.  Grow down!  Jackass :)  At least
keep this in mind if you should come to despair over the aimlessness of
the 'purely' intellectual pursuits.  And sure, go ahead, find this out
for yourself, that's probably best, but at least consider a little
humility now: though I might not be able to prove it to you, now, we
noise-makers (not 'misfits') might have something that you will value in
the end.

Tim
-- 
  
  rapsncows at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...