From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Wed Jul 09 2003 - 02:39:54 BST
Squonk,
You are not responding to my argument that questions your view of things (in this case, your view that Bo's -- and my -- position denigrates non-Western culture). Since you are not responding to it I assume you have no response, and since you repeat your view below ("And as a direct result, Eastern thought is devalued") in spite of the fact that I have explained why this is NOT a direct (or indirect) result, I look on this response as intellectual dishonesty. An attempt to change the subject.
You have clearly latched on to this thought (that our position devalues other cultures) as a way to denigrate Bo's position, and so don't want to give it up. I have shown that this thought is bogus. Whether Pirsig is more culturally aware is beside the point. Whether Bo is right in his position or not is beside the point.
By the way, I was a math major in college, and have frequently pointed out what you say. However, I also have said that mathematics, while itself not S/O thinking, comes after S/O thinking. One doesn't have the detachment, or mental space, beforehand to do mathematics (by which I mean proving theorems and suchlike, not just measuring and counting).
- Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 5:00 AM
Subject: Re: MD Racism in the forum.
Scott:
So when we say that "S/O thinking arose in Greek culture about 500 BC", we are referring to its advent in Western culture, not saying that it only arose in the West. Of course, it is a matter of dispute whether or not S/O thinking is the mark of the intellectual level, but you seem to prefer to use demagogy rather than argument over this question.
- Scott
Hi Scott,
Skutvik's position is clear. For him, the intellectual level is the divide itself.
For me, any intellectual differentiation is an aesthetic - an art. The aesthetic comes first, and assertions about differentiation come later. Therefore, rational thought is an art, as any mathematician will tell you. In Mathematics and geometry, there are no subjects and objects.
Skutvik turns this around - his doctrine asserts that subjects and objects are required for intellect. And as a direct result, Eastern thought is devalued, and intellect is denied to the Dakotas and every other tribe.
The MoQ takes a broad view. If you wish to tell me those who value Wetsern thought do so because they have that as their common sense, then fine. But you must understand that Mr. Pirsig's cultural view is so far broader than Skutvik's as to make your statement irrelevant.
All the best,
squonk.
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 Jul 09 2003 - 02:41:46 BST