[MD] Dewey's Zen

[david buchanan]

This might be fun but it's also a kind of experiment. I was reading a paper and saw many parallels to Pirsig, which wasn't very surprising because it's titled "Dewey's Zen". But I wonder if others read it the same way I do. In certain passages it seems like one could plug Pirsig's terms into the sentences and they'd still mean the same thing - almost exactly. Telling you more than that - like which terms I had in mind - it would ruin the experiment. How about if I just post a bit of it and let everyone take a shot at it? Maybe it would be fun to put in Pirsig's terms wherever you think they would fit. Take your pick or play with them all, but please be explicit enough to let me know if you're seeing the same thing that I'm seeing.

Or, when you whittle it down to the essentials:

...I wonder if others read [the passages] the same way I do.  ...Take your pick or play with them all, but please be explicit enough to let me know if you're seeing the same thing that I'm seeing [in quoted the passages].

Now do you see the core concept? Dan showed everybody how to do it. What's unclear about this? For a guy who doesn't even know what it is, you sure seem to have a strong opinion about it. 






> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:00:26 +0300
> From: mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Dewey's Zen
> 
> DMB,
> okay, what is the core concept?
> 
> -Tuukka
> 
> 
> 
> 25.3.2012 23:56, david buchanan wrote:
> > Tuukka said to dmb:
> >   I don't have time for this bullshit. You posted an useful article, I wanted to thank you for that. I guess I just couldn't believe you actually do think it's good to reject positive things other people give, such as respect. I'm not interested in playing your game, because it is not relevant practice for my work. I was interested in the article you posted. You were useful for me, but in a way which you did not intend, and now you seem to say this implies that I'm stupid. Talk about drivel.
> >
> >
> >
> > dmb says:
> > You'll forgive me if I doubt the sincerity of your "respect" for my irrelevant bullshit games.
> > And do you really think I'm going to suddenly take a liking to bad ideas just because somebody flatters me? I think that would be super sleazy and profoundly dishonest.
> >
> > The complaint was that you don't get the core concept and I guess it would be fair to say this implies a charge of stupidity. I realize that isn't very nice but how does it fail to be accurate? The accusation seems just as true now, even after two more replies from you. The best way to dispute this charge is simply to show that you do get the core concept. Can you do that? You certainly haven't and I'm honestly not sure if you can. It seems that most people would be very keen to INTELLIGENTLY dispute the charge of stupidity.
> >
> >    		 	   		
> > 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