Keith
Couldn't resist the title of this email, so I had to open it. I'll
probably skim the rest but don't expect to find much.
It might seem like I'm not participating in the morality discussion, but
I just want to point out that I've been thinking about the MoQ and
morality almost constantly this month. I have posted a couple of things
but other than that I haven't come up with anything that I thought worth
mentioning. However I still find the programs valuable. They help me
concentrate on one thing at a time. Reconstructing the moral hierarchy
of the world isn't something you can get your head round in a couple of
hours and it's good to set yourself a specific task so that you don't
lose sight of what you're doing.
To answer your question the structure of the Lila Squad has not changed.
The objective remains:
"To look more closely at the MoQ and to come to some consensus about
what the MoQ says, how appropriate it is and how we can use it."
In an open forum we can't force people to stick to objectives. However
the more people who post high quality messages the better the group will
be as a whole.
Diana
Keith A. Gillette wrote:
>
> Fintan,
>
> While I enjoy your energy and share your love of alliterative phrases, I am
> not terribly interested in the Metaphysics of Meaning. I am interested,
> however, in the Metaphysics of Quality and in this month's topic, Morality.
> I'm having a hard time seeing how the Metaphysics of Meaning furthers our
> discussion of the Metaphysics of Quality or helps us attain our objective
> (quoted from the listserv sign-up) "to look more closely at the MoQ and to
> come to some consensus about what the MoQ says, how appropriate it is and
> how we can use it." If you would like to proselytize your MoM, please found
> a mom_discuss forum.
>
> I don't say this to be mean or condescending, but merely to remind everyone
> that, unless the rules have changed while I wasn't looking, we're involved
> in a *structured* discussion of the *Metaphysics of Quality*. I realize
> that everyone has their own personal philosophy and some amount of
> discussion of our personal views with respect to the Metaphysics of Quality
> and the monthly topic is unavoidable and even often useful. However, this
> is not the forum to create a wholly new philosophy even if it happens to
> use some of Pirsig's terminology. That does little to help us understand
> the Metaphysics of Quality and in fact derails our conversation.
>
> Please correct me if I'm way off base on this! Otherwise, I encourage the
> group to get back on track in our discussion of Morality...
>
> Cheers,
> Keith
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> gillette@tahc.state.tx.us -- <URL:http://www.detling.ml.org/gillette/>
>
> homepage - http://www.moq.org
> queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
> unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
> body of email
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:39 BST