From: Mari (mld2001@adelphia.net)
Date: Sat Nov 30 2002 - 14:36:39 GMT
Greetings to All,
In the "individuality" thread David wrote:
The world
of ideas is a constant source of exhileration and excitement for me. Its one
of the reasons I like to engage in discussions here. Call me a nerd if you
like, but this kind of thing is my idea of a really good time. I'd crawl a
mile over broken glass for a good conversation. (Or crawl through a mile of
posts for it.) Sure, it IS a matter of what we care about, of what we value.
The things we get passionate about tell very much about where we are in
Pirsig's hierarchy. And even though it'll seem like I'm just tooting my own
horn, the things that Lila and Rigel care about bore me to tears, while the
things Phaedrus is interested in rock my world.
Mari says: Something troubles me here. i'm going to take a risk and state
as best i can what it is that leaves me thinking and feeling as i do. i
hesitate often when it comes to posting here in MoQ_d. My guess is i don't
want to come off sounding less than 4th level wise or worse yet judged to be
Lila-ish.
Some of these threads go round and round with lots of words and little
resolve. Why is that? If ideas and issues are run through the 4th level
filter how/why is it that a meeting of the minds does not show up in these
cases? Is it possible that the line between subject and object is not clear
so therefore there is no agreement on what is so and what is thought to be
so? For instance David said:
"I'd crawl a
mile over broken glass for a good conversation. (Or crawl through a mile of
posts for it.) Sure, it IS a matter of what we care about, of what we
value."
What is "good conversation" How does "value" shade and or color accepting
anothers point of view? Wouldn't a pure 4th level weed out everything but
the truth? If "truth" is subjective aren't we back to SOM? Is there anything
wrong with SOM or is it just that in some peoples mind it is limited
therefore it is useless? Does MoQ eliminate, invalidate, make obsolete SOM
or does it/ can it possibly include SOM. For example: the space shuttles
computer all but eliminates manuel landings but the possibility is still
optional if need be. So it is worthwhile keeping the oldest method of
landing an aircraft available.
Sam wrote to David:
It's amazing the lengths you're going to to try
and justify a rhetorical statement! Are you really arguing that Lila is not
a person?
Mari asks:? How is it that Sam doesn't know what David is saying or "try"ing
to "justify"?
Yoda says: " 'Try' NOT Luke. Do or do NOT. There is no "try".
One more thing: Is anyone familar with the word GROK from Stranger in a
Strangland? By Robert Heinlein
Hope you're not too cut up David crawling through this post ; )
Mari
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 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 30 2002 - 14:38:30 GMT