[MD] Anti-intellectualism revisited

[Andre Broersen]

John to Ron:
I think there is an aspect of intellect, that is very close to DQ. Intellect is indefinable and yeah, I know everything is, but intellect is indefinable in a special way - since it's the means of defining as well. So defining intellect, is most of all,  more a creative art than a rigorously logical process.

That's all I'm sayin’.

Andre:
I’ve been keeping quiet John, following your twittering Facebook enhancing drivel. Let’s just say I agree with Arlo, Dan, dmb, Ron and Ant about your social media exploits and the quagmire of confusions you are finding yourself in. 

I also agree with Horse suggesting that he isn’t about to throw anyone off this MD who may have difficulties  or misunderstandings about Pirsig’s MoQ but who IS willing to listen and learn and then puts those learnings, offered by other posters into practice.

I do draw a line however with the poster who, justifying his/her own misunderstanding blames Pirsig for being responsible and that is just what you do John. This practice follows Bodvar and Marsha (just to name two) who also had a way of blaming Pirsig for their OWN ignorance, lack and subsequent drivel.

The above excerpt from you to RON is just a small sample of your preschool logic John and I wholeheartedly agree with dmb suggesting you look for another hobby. Perhaps your own initiative of joining the stoics is an idea but if you display the same preppy level of skillful manipulation of symbols you continue to display here on this MD I doubt very much if they let you in.

All the best anyway.