From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Tue Mar 25 2003 - 15:07:24 GMT
All,
Since Squonk's supposedly leaving, I will make one last call out to all who
read the forum:
If there is anybody out there who feels as though Squonk was on to
something in his "criticisms" of my philosophical projects, I would
strongly urge those people to take up the cause for him. My hope in doing
so is that if somebody else can possibly see what Squonk is after, maybe
they can explain it to me.
The deal is, I really do want it explained to me. Squonk so clearly sees
me as a degenerate piece of scum to be eradicated from the coaxial cables
that it makes me wonder what this utter blind spot of mine could
be. Squonk has hinted around that I've made amazingly stupid philosophical
blunders, but whenever he becomes specific they turn into little
quibbles. But people don't get worked up over quibbles, so I still wonder
if there still are blunders out there.
So, to everyone out there, be ye old or young, a regular poster or a first
timer, if you think I've made a mistake (following Squonk or not following
Squonk) and you've never said anything before (yes, Platt and DMB, I've
heard what you guys think already ;-), I would ask that you speak your
mind. I'm not a bully. I try to respond thoughtfully and kindly to all
those who respond thoughtfully and kindly to me. I have recieved many
thoughtful criticisms over the years privately and I've always enjoyed
them. So, if you are new and feel the climate isn't quite right on the
public forum (which I wouldn't blame you) and would rather e-mail me
privately, go ahead.
I just want to figure out what the hell Squonk has been talking about for
the last 6 months.
Matt
p.s. I'm aware that Squonk's entire point could be that I haven't made the
mysterious shift to a "new understanding," as he alluded to in his parting
post. The funny thing that Squonk seems to never have realized is that my
very first post in my new guise as pragmatist was on the subject of
argumentation and how making the shift to a new understanding is almost
never an act of argumentation. So, I've never expected great perceptual
shifts by arguing. Most of the time I try not to argue. But, if this is
Squonk's entire point, then there is only one response: it does very little
to help my shifting of perceptions to call me names. The "new
understanding," if and when it ever comes, will happen
inexplicably. Something will simply cause me to have a wonderful, new
lease on life. The only thing I can do is remain an ironist, somebody who
knows that her current understanding isn't the True One, that no
understanding is the True One. An ironist is somebody who wishes to
experience as many alternate vocabularies and understandings as she can, in
the hopes of improving her own vocabulary and understanding. I have been
promoting the ironist perspective and I think I have taken the ironic
turn. Outside of that, I don't think there is anything else I can
do. Belittling me or anybody else certainly doesn't help.
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 : Tue Mar 25 2003 - 15:10:16 GMT