[MD] Static Patterns Rock!

[Andre Broersen]

dmb:

And that is why, I suppose, Andre posed the question the way he did. Marsha's assertions about the static world being "like an illusion" should raise moral objections, I think, and it totally makes sense that Andre would frame his question with the use of atomic weapons and the holocaust. The question becomes, "in what sense is the murder of millions of innocents like an illusion"? Saying this is as conventionally real as rocks and trees is unhelpful as an explanation, of course, and the emotional coldness is more than a little disturbing. I mean, Pirsig is referring to social and intellectual values in that quote. Those moral codes are "as real as rocks and trees". Why is morality so strangely absent from the scene, even when question so obviously involves morality? I think it's very creepy.

Andre:
Exactly dmb (as usual). I was quite guarded in my use of words to Marsha but I do seriously mean a re-consideration of my subscription here. My participation here with people who espouse ideas that are deeply immoral and offensive to any not naively thinking human being is, to use a euphemism, undermining the MoQ (See Anthony's PhD for Pirsig's idea of a 'naively' thinking person).

Immersing oneself in the MoQ avoids that type of wavering/malicious bull.

I am going so far as appealing to Horse to make a decision about this type of behaviour. I am all for exploring new ideas/interpretations of Pirsig's MoQ but this is deplorable. This is NOT Pirsig's MoQ!
  
Freedom of speeech is fine but those that proclaim immoral statements in the name of free speech should be taken on decisively and unequivocally (we have a few politicians in this country doing the exact same thing which is populistic and has little to do with intellect).

Pirsig wrote the MoQ in an effort to improve the world a little bit. This means every one of us must take their moral responsibility and not hypothetically, conditionally play this game.

Marsha has stated more than once that if Pirsig himself does not object to her statements and claims DIRECTLY she feels fine about making these. How grandioze, deluded and ego-centric can one get??

Should Horse take my appeal seriously. Should he be as concerned as I am ( and I seem not to be the only one) about (among others) Marsha's behaviour, I truly hope that Marsha understands the difference between a conditionally real decision and simply a decision.

I appeal to your wisdom Horse.