[MD] Art and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

[Ian Glendinning]

Fair enough John, but that was mainly about the Tim / Spam situation - yes?

My "roll-eyes" was specific to the Andre / Joe exchange - and
incidentally was the most polite response I could be bothered to think
of.

The limits of whacky / playful / neurotic tolerance are simply
pragmatic - you can only care so much, eventually someone has to wash
some pots.

Ian

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 11:06 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ian,
>
> You recently complained about the amount of garbage in your inbox when you
> subscribed to lilasquad.  So I thought I'd cross-post my response over
> there, to you here and now.  I won't make it a habit, but it seemed
> relevant to the very thing causing  your eye-rolling below.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Ian Glendinning
> <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> So Andre advises Joe to read ZMM & Lila, and Joe tells me Pirsig's
>> metaphysics is defined by words defined by logic.
>>
>> "Roll-eyes"
>> Ian
>> On 9 Jan 2014 19:57, "Joseph Maurer" <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Ian and All,
>> >
>> > In DQ/SQ metaphysics words express reality through logic, logos-logic.
>>  DQ
>> > is indefinable, maintaining meaning through structure, metaphysics,
>> words.
>> > How can a meaning of words be indefinable?  One size does not fit all!
>> Keep
>> > looking DQ/SQ until you feel satisfied!  Individuality has meaning
>> before 1
>> > moves.  DQ/SQ hosts structure, reality.
>> >
>> > Joe
>>
>
> There is no doubt that Tim is bright.  Nor is there any doubt that he has
> trouble being socially accepted - the signs are all around.  And as people
> who are interested in the life and work of Robert M. Pirsig, we all have a
> certain amount of sympathy for intellectual social rejects.
>
> But no group can put up with an individual who is so out of whack that he
> refuses to abide by common communication norms.   TCP/IP wouldn't work if
> acks were gibberish and likewise, human discourse requires a linguistic
> common ground in order to function.  If the gibberish shows promise of
> evolving toward some system of understanding then we can be patient while
> it gets worked out, but if it's just getting more and more insane and hard
> to understand, then it's going in the wrong direction.  And blurting out
> gibberish has a way of putting off newcomers to the list - it obviates
> growth which means it's violent towards any success.  None of us are here
> solely to please ourselves.  We all want better communication and
> understanding.  Without that premise, that caring, we are doomed.
>
> It takes caring about others, to put your words and ideas into easily
> understood format.   When that care is not taken, it shows the opposite of
> care - it shows disdain.
>
> Tim may hate his mother, hate his life, hate the world he lives in, but why
> should we all be the brunt of his anger?  We didn't cause his problems.
> The fact that we can't solve them isn't because we don't care, it's just
> the way reality works.  "Work out YOUR OWN salvation in fear and
> trembling."  (Phil. 2:12)  Don't come bugging us about it.
>
>
> Maybe I'm wrong about all this.  I'm willing to listen to reason.  But
> spamming my inbox with verbal temper tantrums just pisses me off.
>
> John
> 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