From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sun Jul 17 2005 - 02:50:16 BST
On 16 Jul 2005 at 12:46, Erin wrote:
MARK: My question to Erin was sort of tongue-in-cheek, as one who
knows my writing style and tone might expect. It's pretty clear to
me that she is referring to things I've said, not to stuff from the
distant past. That's why I asked for quotes. I doubt she'll provide
them, but if she does I'll have some fun cleaning her clock.
ERIN: the post was NOT referring to you Mark why that is so clear to
you I will leave that to you and your ego to assume
msh 7-16-05:
Ok, I stand corrected. The post was not referring to me. Here's
your original post, and my response....
On 14 Jul 2005 at 11:22, Erin wrote:
A related issue hasbeen bothering me lately. There have been a few
times where members who are clearly interested in Quality asked to
leave the forum just because their ideas are not identical to Pirsigs
on it. Ironically some of these same people will complain about the
dogmatic, appeal to authority attitudes of religous people while
promoting that very attitude here.
msh 7-14-05:
Well, this is intriguing. Which members have been asked to leave
because they don't agree with Pirsig? Or for any other reason for
that matter?
In which way has an appeal to authority been promoted "here," by
which I guess you mean the recent "Nihilism" thread?
Can you post some attributed quotes in support of your allegations?
msh 7-16-05:
Now, your post was obviously referring to someone, so please provide
attributed quotes supporting your claims that members have been asked
to leave the forum because they disagree with Pirsig, and that
"people will complain about the dogmatic, appeal to authority
attitudes of religous people while promoting that very attitude
here."
msh 7-15-05:
I recently said to Ham and Platt that I expect them to provide
evidence and argument for their political and religious opinions,
when challenged. And I've suggested that if they are unwilling or
unable to do so, they should post THOSE opinions to a non-
philosophical website. I don't see this as asking anyone to leave;
it's just a request that all contributors respect the nature of the
list.
erin 7-16-05:
I ignore a lot of your political bickering/ usually just skim through
it quickly (pretty easy because it is the same stuff over and over
again) so didn't even see that. My post was not directed to that
comment at all.
msh 7-16-05:
I suggest that, if you read carefully rather than skim say the last
15 or so posts in the Moral Society thread, you'll see that I have
been trying to push the discussion beyond bickering, and have met
with nothing but evasion. I've answered all questions asked of me
with no substantive response to questions I've asked in return. The
evidence is there, if you choose to review it.
msh 7-15-05:
For me, the ideas expressed by ignorant reactionaries like Vogel,
and right-wingers in general, are so easy to expose as foolish, it's
a pleasure to keep them (the right-wingers) around. Truth comes out,
and Quality is served.
erin 7-16-05:
see I don't get this...it is talked about how it is more helpful to
stick to issues than to this right-leftpartykind of crap....yet you
continue to do it.
msh 7-16-05:
In the paragraph above, I use the expression "right-wingers" as
shorthand for an easily identifiable political agenda. If you read
my detailed posts in political discussions, you'll see that I deal
exclusively with ideas and don't talk right-left at all. In fact,
I''ve often said that the left-right, lib-con false dichotomy is a
red-herring to distract us from meaningful discussion. But, to see
this, you need to read, not skim, my posts.
erin 7-16-05:
AlsoI know you want to lump me into the conservative 3 group and
thus not get to know me as an individual but insteadjust generically
applystupid little political stereotypes .....but last presidential
election i voted democratic and the one before that I voted for
Nader. You don't know anything about me so please stop trying to
make assumptions about me because your horrible at it.
msh 7-16-05:
I've drawn no conclusions about your political beliefs. As far as
I've seen, your posts contain no argument or evidence for a position
of any kind. Mostly, you ask questions, get careful thoughtful
responses from people who clearly understand your question, then
write back saying "That's not what I mean," then ask the same
question, again.
erin 7-16-05:
When I first joined this site I used to go off on Platt (e.g. talking
about the stupidity of Bush) and my political opinions are closer to
you thanPlatt. Since then Platt and others have influenced my
thinking about politicsbutnot in a way thatI actually agree with
him about politics:-) (maybe a little more moderate)It is more
that I have grownrespect for how he handles himself with such
arrogant people as yourself. Also his viewpoint is so different from
I like to hear the other side of things.
msh 7-16-05:
I'd be interested to know what you find respectful in the way he has
handled my arrogance in the last 10 or so posts.
Anyway, if you find his political viewpoint valuable, then you can
rest happy in knowing that he is an institution at MD and is not
likely to be going away. It would be like seeing the Statue of
Liberty walk out of New York Harbor.
Best,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder 'why,
why, why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell
himself he understand." - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 Jul 17 2005 - 03:44:10 BST