Re: MD Is the MoQ still in the Kantosphere?

From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sun Jan 02 2005 - 21:36:54 GMT

  • Next message: hampday@earthlink.net: "Re: MD Universal Moral Standards"

    DMB
    You added "degenerate rock and roll" to Platt's list of "new age"
    degeneracies.
    You added to his list. What more can I say on the first point.

    In eary 1970 when Pirsig was writing ZMM and later in Lila, he was clearly
    warning people of taking hippiedom into irresponsible anarchism, and
    providing an antidote, supporting the technology many were reacting against.
    He also had an established publishing company to keep onside. I could also
    point out that Pirsig is only an imperfect human too.

    Now as Marsha points out the forces of conservatism have a new pejorative
    word to dimsiss whacky non-scientific thinking in "new age". The balance has
    gone too far since the 80's and anyone even giving house-room to anything
    non-scientific is branded politically incorrect. Prof Brian Josephson
    (Physics Nobel Laureate) has a very good collection of materials about valid
    scientific subjects that cannot even get airtime because they get branded
    new-age or mystical. Conservatism should only be permitted to prevent
    undermining of the static latches, but not judge what ideas are too whacky
    or new-age to be given credibility. A lot of new age stuff is very whacky,
    but it's whacky because it's whacky, not because it is new age.

    As predicted, when I asked you about your soul you gave me an answer based
    on classical anatomy and logical argument.
    About the physical reality of a soul - I'm actually not so sure - but I do
    find it a useful metaphor for recognising a good groove.
    About the intent of my point - which you typically avoided - you really do
    prove my point that you have no metaphorical soul.

    The thing I cannot get my head around is that there are still people on the
    planet who are so un-hip / square - we don't even have any words for it
    anymore - it's such an anchronism, it's so 18th century. Fortunately I do
    believe you must have a sense of humour.

    BTW on what authority / evidence / basis do you brand "rock and roll" as
    degenerate.

    Ian.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "David Buchanan" <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 7:48 PM
    Subject: RE: MD Is the MoQ still in the Kantosphere?

    > Ian and all:
    >
    > Ian Glendinning said:
    > Platt reinforces DMB.
    > I almost predicted that in my response to Marsha, but I ran out of
    courage.
    > DMB, Platt, you two do have souls, don't you ?
    > I really do not get you, and it bugs me (my problem not yours)
    > It's either monumental conservatism, or an amazingly well disuised sense
    of
    > humour. I'm still praying (oops sorry, hoping) for the latter.
    >
    > dmb says:
    > Huh? I honestly don't know what you're saying. I don't see how Platt
    > reinforces anything I said. In fact, I was complaining about various kinds
    > of reactionaries. While Platt is certainly no hippie, he is most
    definately
    > a reactionary of the worst kind. Entering hippiedom would be an
    improvement
    > in his case.
    >
    > But more importantly, what is it you don't get? Don't you think Pirsig's
    > attempt to unite art and technology, to convince his bohemian friends of
    its
    > value, is a clear sign that returning to nature is not the answer? We want
    > to beautify our most advanced evolutionary achievements, not turn our
    backs
    > and return to the beauty of the past, right?
    >
    > And no, I do not have a soul. As I understand it, neither do you or anyone
    > else because there is no such thing.
    >
    > I guess being against degeneracy makes me a conservative in some sense of
    > the word, but my stance toward the political ideology that calls itself
    > conservative in America could be fairly well described as contempt. They
    are
    > a different sort of degenerate, not a nature-loving kind, but a intellect
    > hating kind, which I see as much more dangerous because they already have
    so
    > much power and want even more.
    >
    > As for my sense of humor, that's best judged by others but I can tell you
    > that I crack myself up and generally have a jolly good time putting little
    > surprizes in my posts. Remember the one about the inflatable Buddha love
    > doll? I laughed so hard I cried. So even if no one else is amused, I very
    > much enjoy it. I know. Its pathetic. But there it is.
    >
    > Anyway, as is often the case, I'm not following you.
    >
    >
    > 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
    >

    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 : Mon Jan 03 2005 - 04:03:55 GMT