Re: MD The MOQ conference hoax

From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Wed Aug 24 2005 - 09:16:12 BST

  • Next message: ian glendinning: "Re: MD The MOQ conference hoax"

    Hi Andy,

    It's worth also linking to this (hat tip to Matt Kundert):
    http://www.drizzle.com/~jwalsh/sokal/articles/fish-oped.html which says most
    of what needs to be said.

    I said to Matt that "If the MoQ has any long term worth it will come out of
    this immeasurably strengthened (what doesn't kill you makes you stronger,
    especially if it's only the egoes which die). But if the MoQ is as facile as
    Glenn/Struan allege, then it deserves to go puff in a burst of ridicule."

    For what it's worth, this does strike me as confirmation of what I said in
    my 'Why Platt must stay' post:

    "Where I find this process most disturbing is that it is predicated
    precisely on the MD forum being a social pattern. It is one that would
    produce a hierarchy of understanding - a Prophet; a high priest; sacred
    texts; acceptable interpretations"

    or as Struan put it:
    "SOM stands for Subject Object Metaphysics, a pejorative term used to
    describe anyone who has not yet found salvation in the MOQ"

    For all the antagonism towards religion, it's remarkable how much like a
    'cult' the MoQ has become. To that extent, all credit to Struan and Glenn
    for exposing it, however mixed and dishonourable their motives.

    Sam

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Andrew Bahn" <apbahn@gmail.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 10:28 PM
    Subject: MD The MOQ conference hoax

    Greetings discussion members,
     It looks like Anthony and others are aware that they were the victims of a
    hoax at the MOQ conference. The acknowledgements for Richard Loggins paper
    have been changed to thank Struan Hellier and the picture of Glenn's posing
    as a Hunter S. Thompson look-a-like has been changed to someone else
    (Richard Loggins?). However, the paper stands as is. hmmm? We are all
    waiting for an explanation from Anthony and the rest of the psychedelic
    clique. For people who have been around moq_discuss, an acknowledgement for
    Struan by someone who has submitted a paper praising the MOQ and Pirsig
    should arouse suspicions. I am not condoning the hoax, but what is done is
    done. Now, It would be nice to hear an explanation. Pray tell Anthony...
    DMB...or anyone else. Is the back patting still going on? Was the conference
    still a success in light of this hoax.
     If you haven't seen it yet, it is worth taking a look.

    http://www.shellier.co.uk/moq.htm

     or

     http://home.comcast.net/~moq/moralGenius.html

    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 : Wed Aug 24 2005 - 10:12:58 BST