From: Steve Peterson (speterson@fast.net)
Date: Sun Jan 05 2003 - 17:00:28 GMT
> Hi Horse,
>
> Continuing the personal attacks by calling Glenn a
> liar* is not a way to forward your case Horse. Reading
> through the archives, this seems to be your natural
> response to dissent and that is sad.
Steve:
I think there is a big difference between calling someone names (liar) and
labeling something someone said as untrue.
>If you disagree
> with a position, YOU provide evidence to the contrary
> and leave it to the intelligent reader to decide for
> herself, but don't, for goodness sake, seek to insult
> your way to victory.
Steve:
I don't see how you could expect Horse to prove that Pirsig does not say
something that Glenn says he does. In effect, Horse is providing all of
Pirsig's work as examples of where Pirsig does not say what Glenn says he
did. I also think it is on Glenn to back up his claim or choose not to.
>
> As to me provding quotes to back up Glenn, I have no
> desire to do so. You will undoubtedly dispose of them
> in your own offensive, semi-literate, manner and that
> is not the level of debate I seek. As a practising
> neurosurgeon, I came here intrigued by Pirsig's
> concept of 'mind' but, I must confess, have become
> very disillusioned very quickly.
>
> If anyone knows of a place where these issues can be
> discussed intelligently and in an academic fashion,
> please drop me a line.
>
> John
Steve:
"semi-literate"? Now it sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.
> Hi Horse,
>
> Of course I will unsubscribe as you request, but, for
> your own good, I ask you to consider these points as I
> go.
Steve:
I don't think anyone has asked you to unsubscribe. You are being overly
sensitive.
>
> 1) Your belligerent, bullying manner is not only
> offensive, but it also stops you from being an
> effective moderator of this forum in that it places
> ALL of the burden of proof on those who dissent, while
> letting those who agree with your version of Pirsig
> get away with anything they like.
Steve:
The burden of proof is always on anyone who makes any claim.
This is an un-moderated forum. I don't get the sense that Horse wants or
expects any special consideration as host of the moq website, nor do I think
that he would get it even if he did. Perhaps your perception of him has
been colored by such a misunderstanding.
> 5) My contribution to the debate about Pirsig
> belittling science is that bad scientists (or poorly
> informed non-scientists), simply by indulging bad
> science, belittle science. Pirsig claims that the MOQ
> is scientific and, in doing so, belittles science,
> because that claim is false (spurious, therefore
> deserving of contempt by your values and unworthy of
> being disproved!).
Steve:
Does he really say that the moq is scientific? I wince as I ask, but could
you point me to where he says this?
>
> I take my leave and apologise to others for my
> contribution to the low value Horse creates.
>
> John
Steve:
I hope you decide not to unsubscribe. Or that if you do, it won't be because
of your perception of Horse's bullying. I don't think anyone can bully
another on this list. Someone could try, but ideas must stand on their own
or not.
Steve
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 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 19:29:14 GMT