[MD] Fwd: Re: Static Patterns Rock!

[Andre Broersen]

DM to dmb:

'I can't see any benefit in me setting out how I understand what James,  Pirsig,  Northrop are saying because I am arguing that what they appear to be saying in certain specific ways is wrong or confusing,...

Andre:
Isn't that reason enough to check for yourself David the difference between what they 'appear' to be saying to what they are actually saying 'in certain specific ways' without you having to realy on dmb or others to tell you you might be wrong... and then criticising dmb for doing so. I mean this is Lucy's trick and has been since her inception.

DM:

'... it seems to me that the people who disagree with me should be able to show me why I am wrong or how I can resolve my concerns...

Andre:
Well, perhaps you should put in a little more effort David. In the same thread to me you said:

DM: yes I call this exploration of alternative ways to distinguish between DQ,  biological SQ and cultural SQ philosophy, are you on the wrong forum or am I,  are we just meant to sit around read Pirsig,  give a round of applause,  pat each other on the back and never think for ourselves?

There you go. It may be an idea to DO read Pirsig. Dmb provides James and Northrop to assist you in understanding where Pirsig comes from, what he is trying to do and how he has complemented both of them by producing the MoQ thereby improving on their writings.

Yes, it does require a little bit of effort but if you want to really think for yourself, which is always culturally grounded of course you'll have to learn to accept other people's evidence. If you do not do so...when despite all the evidence you still refuse to accept... well then you get the 'amateur psychoanalysis' which you find so 'embarrassing'.