Re: MD science/society independence (correction)

From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Mar 01 2002 - 02:00:53 GMT


Hey Erin,
    'The smoking gun' is, literally, a reference to the weapon in a murder.
But metaphorically, it's dispositive evidence.

    For example, the District Attorney on TV's 'Law and Order' is sometimes
heard to instruct his assistants not to prosecute a certain suspect unless
they can find a 'smoking gun'. When the DA says this, he's not just
demanding evidence of the suspect's guilt... He's asking for seemingly
incontrovertible evidence.

    So when Glenn points to the Dharmakaya quote as a 'smoking gun', he's
suggesting that it's dispositive evidence of Pirsig's belief in 'social
blinders' (that is, evidence that the light is NOT seen at all). And when I
pointed to the 'eye' passage, I was suggesting that it was dispositive
evidence of Pirsig's belief in a 'social filter' (that is, the light is
seen, but ignored or explained away).

    All figures of speech aside, I think you and I are mostly in agreement
on this one.

Sorry to confuse you,

rick

> Hi Rick,
>
> No I don't disagree I guess I am not just too familiar what this "smoking
gun"
> phrase and misinterpreted what you said. The only definition I found said
it
> was evidence of a crime.I interpreted that Glenn was making the accusation
> that Pirsig was saying it was because of our culture that we were blind to
the
> dharmakaya light. I wasn't sure exactly what your intepretation of
dharmakaya
> light but when you called it a smoking gun also I thought you were saying
> Pirsig had said something outrageous also (but for a different reason then
> Glenn).
>
> P.S. Don't worry about typos...no smoking gun there (used correctly?)
>
>
> Erin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"I'm not sure what's confusing you here. My 'smoking gun' reference was
just
> >a reply to Glenn's assertion that Pirsig's notion is that some don't see
the
> >Dharmakaya light and that the quote was a 'smoking gun' as evidence that
> >we're 'blind' to the light. I was simply saying that reading the
additional
> >passage (about the iris and eye), shows that Pirsig is not making an
> >argument that Social quality is a 'blinder' but rather a 'filter'. Do
you
> >disagree?"
> >
> rick
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>

MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:56 BST