[MD] John Carl: Ignoramous or Troll?

Wed Nov 9 11:50:45 PST 2016

and to answer your question, ignoramus.  Definitely ignoramous. I'm no
fraud.   I may be ignorant of a LOT of things, but at least I'm honest
about it.    Socrates taught me that.

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:49 AM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the disparagement of any serious thinker for either their theism
> or their anti-theism is an easy and facile way of turning away from the
> actual issues and not worthy of a serious thinker.
>
> and I admire serious logicians, even though I can barely follow their
> work.
>
> I can understand why you come down so hard on any whiff of theism in the
> MoQ.  That's fine, even commendable because philosophy has a certain
> relationship with religion that it's very important (moral) to maintain.
>
> However, rejecting as inferior thinkers, those who find it logical to
> conclude in a theistic explanation for the unknown, throws out most of
> classical philosophy and a lot of good post modern stuff as well.
>
> methinkest thou protesteth too much.
>
> But then, you always have, so at least you're consistent.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 8:34 AM, david <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Moq_Discuss <moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org> on behalf of
>> John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:48 AM
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Subject: Jeez, what a Fraudulent Ignoramus!
>>
>> John said to dmb,
>>
>> So... Pirsig would fit well with Whitehead except that  Whitehead isn't
>> anti-theistic enough?
>>
>> For my part, I'd rather see RMP aligned with a prominent and accepted
>> philosopher, but hey, thats just me.
>>
>>
>> <http://robertpirsig.org/SneddonThesis.html>dmb says:
>>
>> RMP has aligned himself with mainstream American philosophy, with
>> Pragmatism and Radical Empiricism, and there is a mountain of evidence for
>> that as well as clear and explicit claims by Pirsig in Lila. Whitehead, on
>> the other hand, is not particularly prominent or accepted among
>> philosophers BECAUSE of his theism and his metaphysics. This is not my
>> opinion but rather a fact about the world of philosophy. Here is some clear
>> and simple evidence from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
>>
>>
>> 6. Whitehead's Influence
>>
>> Unlike the logical apparatus Whitehead developed with Russell,
>> Whitehead's attempt to provide a metaphysical unification of space, time,
>> matter, events and teleology has been less than enthusiastically embraced
>> by members of the broader philosophical community. In part, this may be
>> because of the connections Whitehead saw between his metaphysics and
>> traditional theism. [...] Thus, although not especially influential among
>> many Anglo-American secular philosophers, Whitehead's metaphysical ideas
>> continue to have influence among some theologians and philosophers of
>> religion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Will this evidence have any effect on your easily defeated claim, John? I
>> seriously doubt it. Are you even capable of being persuaded by evidence or
>> reason? I've never seen any evidence of that.
>>
>>
>> I suggest a different hobby, one that involves your hands but not your
>> intellect.
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > [http://robertpirsig.org/MOQ20Shop20April202011.jpg]<ht
>> > tp://robertpirsig.org/SneddonThesis.html>
>> >
>> > robertpirsig.org : A Process Analysis of Quality<http://robertpirsig.
>> > org/SneddonThesis.html>
>> > robertpirsig.org
>> > a process analysis of quality: a.n. whitehead and r. pirsig on existence
>> > and value . by. andrew sneddon
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Moq_Discuss <moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org> on behalf of
>> > Andre Broersen <andrebroersen at gmail.com>
>> > Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 8:47 AM
>> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> > Subject: [MD] "RMP: Ignoramous or fraud?
>> >
>> > John:
>> > So "ignoramous" non-perjorativel then, but the fact is, he DID at least
>> > read some AN Whitehead.  Quotes him
>> > from reading his book on history of philosophy, in the bowels of the
>> > troopship.
>> >
>> > dmb:
>> > And speaking of fraudulent ignoramuses, nobody around here will be
>> > surprised if John has tried to slander Pirsig or if has dishonestly
>> tried
>> > to smuggle in a theistic view. Again. It's like a hobby, I guess. Trolls
>> > will be trolls.
>> >
>> > Andre:
>> > And not only that but John bases the slander on false claims he invents
>> > himself. Phaedrus did not read A.N. Whitehead at all in the bowels of
>> the
>> > troopship! He was reading F.S.C. Northrop ' The Meeting of East and
>> West".
>> > A simple reference to page 117 of ZMM will suffice (Corgi edition).
>> > 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
>> > MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
>> > moq.org
>> > Robert M. Pirsig's MoQ deals with the fundamentals of existence and
>> > provides a more coherent system for understanding reality than our
>> current
>> > paradigms allow
>> >
>> >
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "finite players
>> play within boundaries.
>> Infinite players
>> play *with* boundaries."
>> 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
>>
>> [http://robertpirsig.org/MOQ20Shop20April202011.jpg]
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> "finite players
> play within boundaries.
> Infinite players
> play *with* boundaries."
>
>

-- 
"finite players
play within boundaries.
Infinite players
play *with* boundaries."