[MD] humpty dumpty

[David Thomas]

On 8/2/12 8:41 PM, "David Buchanan" <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:

> dmb says:
> 
> Oh, that old problem again. I don't know what to tell you, Dave. I think the
> meaning of those terms ("social" and "intellectual" is as clear as any other
> meaning. I realize that some folks around here have found the difference to be
> perplexing but some folks are just easily perplexed and, at this point, I have
> no sympathy for your confusion.
[Dave]
I'll admit that 15 years ago I was perplexed by Pirsig work. Hanging around
here has solved that problem. You're right, the definitions of the social
and intellectual are minor issues. Following the lead of Phaedrus judging
Lila and Rigel as morally inferior to him, the appeal of Pirsig's work is
that it sets up a system that allows people who believe they are
"intellectuals" or "mystics" to claim they are morally superior to everyone
else. Sorry that's just how reality "really" is. No need for messy ethical
arguments. Your actions are of no importance, your position in the
metaphysical hierarchy determines your relative good.

Your lack of sympathy for others has been evident for years. As a self
proclaimed "MoQist" it's understandable.

Dave