Hmm, what's interesting to me is that any group is made up of people, and
people are inherently proud of themselves and their achievements. I'm a
newcomer to this group, having joined yesterday, and I hope that maybe I can
learn from this. Pirsig borrows from a Zen koan that deals with 'emptying
your cup' before you can acquire new ideas at the beginning of Lila.
One of the reasons I traveled from group to group as a younger person was I
was searching for someplace to fit in. Failing that, I decided to stay where
I was and search for the gems in this sandbox instead of going from sandbox
to sandbox.
Many times, pride is a very deadly thing. People can be proud of their
intellectual/philosophical stances and ideas and are often bullish in their
refusal to even consider something different. When people begin trading
verbal blows, it comes across to others like a drunk man trying to pick a
fight with sober people on the street. Occasionally another person will
answer and begin fighting, but most try their best to ignore them.
People often try very hard to take an idea and make something of it. But
I've always found the purpose of philosophical thought to be more of making
something of me. I don't try to 'get something out of it' when I read a
book, I try to see how it can be applied to me.
In short, I guess I feel that its not what you make of a philosophy, its
what the philosophy makes of you.
Perhaps I'm naive.
-Stephen
Wombat McClain
Wombat@sinewave.com
People will do anything to better themselves other than work at it.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Lind <Trickster@postmark.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: MD Moral Compass
> Okay, so I'm starting to feel like the parent who has to keep asking
> the kids to play nice. Why do I do this? Two reasons come to mind.
> 1. It's much more enjoyable to read these posts if there isn't all the
> flaming happening.
> 2. Ideas are better aired/viewed/discussed/considered if they're not
> surrounded by nastiness of peronal attacks.
>
> So, once again, I ask that people direct their arguments to WHAT i
> said not WHO said it (or HOW it was said) We can all find reasons to
> blast another person for their beliefs, but why bother. And PLEASE
> check out what you have an issue with before you respond with a flame
> or attack. Too often I've seen misunderstandings in these posts lead
> to huge flame flights. And at times the flames obscure what the
> original argument was about (Hatfield and McCoys anyone?) :o)
>
> There. Said my piece. And now I wish you peace.
>
> Shalom
>
> David Lind
> Trickster@postmark.net
>
>
> MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:14 BST