[MD] The value of static patterns.

[david buchanan]

Marsha said:
Andre's cryptic little equations without full quoted statements AND without exact posts referenced is a little defensive game that I have no intentions of playing.

Marsha quoted Pirsig:
"The MOQ divides the hominem, or “individual,” into four parts: inorganic, biological, social and intellectual. Once this analysis is made, the ad hominem argument can be defined more clearly: it is an attempt to destroy the intellectual patterns of an individual by attacking his social status. In other words, a lower form of evolution is being used to destroy a higher form. That is evil..." (LILA's Child)


dmb says:
This is just more evidence that you no business here, Marsha. You can't even see that our arguments and objections count as such. When reasoned arguments and textual evidence is presented, you dismiss it as a game, a trick, a lie or a personal attack. And so the objections are never properly acknowledged, let alone answered or addressed. Instead of replying to the objections, you simply repeat the objectionable nonsense over and over. This has gone on for years! This is not what fair and reasonable people do, Marsha. How do you explain or justify this behavior to yourself? You really can't see how there might be something wrong here? Seriously?!