[MD] Putting SOM back into the MOQ by excluding SQ, let's not do that say some of us

[ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR]

[David]
Yes you keep going back to things that have nothing to do with what I am saying, has a robot hacked your account?

[Arlo]
Dan wondered if you're suffering some sort of meltdown. It seems that way to me too. What you're doing is trying to skirt the valid (and precise) criticisms about your ideas, why they evidence a misunderstanding of Pirsig (by multiple people), and why they are inherently a SOM perspective ("SOM" used in the correct way, by the way), by throwing sand in the bull's eyes (to you the ZMM analogy). After weeks of being shown exactly where you SOM misunderstandings are, you accuse everyone else of being "SOM" (I call this the Great Pee Wee Maneuver, its used quite a bit out of desperation).

I can't say I'm surprised, Pirsig's ideas are rather revolutionary and the single biggest mistake I've seen over the years is people trying to dress up their SOM views with MOQ clothing. And while you seemed absolutely intent before about overlaying an SOM (i.e., "patterns have to exist in experience before you then go on to conceptualise them") perspective with Pirsig's terminology, it seems that also has a psychological rabidness to it.

Its clear you've hit a "messiah point", where continuing to point out even your most basic misunderstanding will only reinforce your idea that you alone understand Pirsig and everyone else is "SOM" (psychological mirroring). So there is little point in talking, like Dan said.

Good luck.