[MD] Nagarjuna and the MOQ

[Ham Priday]

Hi Mark --


> When some do not have any idea how to refute an argument,
> they will attack you personally.  Has happened to me until they
> learned not to debate me.  Happens to Marsha, John, and others
> who are serious about progressing MoQ.  Comes with the territory.

I appreciate your encouragement, Mark.  What you say about "the territory" 
is true, of course, and I seem to recall mentioning this caveat when you 
joined up.

But when a charter member and chief spokesman for the MD defines it as "a 
forum dedicated to 'Pirsig says'," there can be little doubt that "regulars" 
here view its purpose as requoting and rehashing the author's tenets and 
metaphors.  The ongoing month-long debate on Free Will is a case in point. 
This issue could easily be resolved by acknowledging the subjective self as 
the free agent of a deterministic world.   Instead, arguments are built on 
the "sacred authority" of MoQ which attributes freedom to an insentient, 
indefinable force.

While "evolutionary progress" is the traditional goal of Philosophy, as well 
as Science, I see little hope that Pirsig's thesis will ever advance beyond 
its present cultist phase.  As much as the Pirsigians voice their abhorrence 
of religious beliefs, they have in effect made the MoQ their religion.  They 
are content to march in lockstep with its founder.  They are persuaded that 
to question MoQ's inadequacies and paradoxes is nothing short of heresy. 
The Word of Pirsig is to be accepted "on faith", along with its 
unconventional notions of Goodness, Morality, and Freedom.

Had I not introduced Essentialism to support my concepts, the "soapboxing" 
charge would have been uncalled for, as would the accusation that I've never 
"understood" the thesis I am critiqueing.  By way of history, Bodvar was 
excommunicated for expounding an original theory of Intellect which didn't 
comport with the official Quality hierarchy.  Tim (with whom I've had some 
offline contact) was also regarded as too controversial for this dedicated 
forum, and I understand that Platt was disenchanted (probably with the 
prevailing collectivist sentiment of this group) and left on his own accord. 
I've tried to avoid politics in my posts, focusing mainly on metaphysical 
issues that to my way of thinking are, or should be, central to Pirsig's 
philosophy.  Unfortunately, my concepts seem to have been rejected out of 
hand by all but a few "adventurous" participants.

Although I still feel a certain kinship with MoQ's Value theme, and believe 
I bring something useful to the MD table, I've started looking into other 
philosophy forums that may be more receptive to new ideas.  Meantime, if 
it's any comfort to you, I do not intend to give up on the MD unless forced 
to do so.

Thanks for your interest and understanding, Mark.

Best wishes,
Ham