[MD] MOQ is good. What is it good for?

[John Carl]

So....

I think John McC might have had a different point in mind than the one
picked out here.


On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Andre Broersen <andrebroersen at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> It is sad really but, since the above mentioned pattens’  gripe seems to
> be that the MOQ does not fulfill their innermost longing



 I think his point might have been something along the lines of the
following essay, composed by Royce in homage to his friend and mentor,
William James:

"James's view of religious experience is meanwhile at once deliberately
unconventional and intensely democratic.  The old-world types of reverence
for the external forms of the church find no place in his pages; but
equally foreign to his mind is that barren hostility of the typical
European freethinkers for the church with whose traditions they have
broken.

In James eyes, the forms, the external organizations of the religious world
simply wither; its is the individual that is more and more.  And James,
with a democratic contempt for social appearances, seeks his religious
geniuses everywhere.  World-renowned saisnts of the historic church receive
his heary sympathy; buth stand upon an equal footing, in his esteem, with
many and obscure and ignorant revivalist, with faith healers, with poets,
with sages, with heretics, with men that wander about in all sorts of
sheepskins and goatskins,  with whomsoever you will of whom the world was
not and is not worthy, but who, by inner experience, have obtained the
substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

... he loved too much those who are weak in the eyes of this present world
-- the religious geniuses ( like the Zuni Brujo, no doubt --Jc) the
unpopular inquirers, the noble outcasts.  He loved them, I say, too much to
be the dupe of our now popular efficiency doctrine.

In order to win James's most enthusiastic support, ideas and men needed to
express an intense inner experience along with a certain unpopularity which
showed that they deserved sympathy.  Too much worldly success, on the part
of men or ideas, easily alienated him."

Josiah Royce,  William James and the Philosophy of Life, page 35