In a message dated 7/30/02 2:28:15 PM GMT Daylight Time,
beasley@austarnet.com.au writes:
> Matt: "The main topic I wanted to cover in this little introduction to the
> new
> movement of my thought is the issue of argumentation, something we know all
> too well here. A lot of arguing goes on here, some of it edifying, much of
> it belligerent and uninteresting (so goes my opinion)."
>
> Mine too. I made a good resolution a few weeks ago to stay away from
> argument for a while and try to find something of value to say, but
> inevitably I got sucked back in. But I agree with you. The seeming futility
> of the argument in this and other forums is a real issue to me.
>
Hello Matt and John,
Argumentation is an art that derives its value from the same quality that
generates a sunset.
Looking at the argument or sunset is to see an argument or a sunset. Pirsig
invites us to look at quality behind the argument and sunset.
To suggest the quality that produces an argument is not the same as that
which produces a sunset is to miss the point. Static filtering produces
disagreement - static filtering accrued over ones life.
Matt has been working most diligently on his static patterning and has now
discovered he is unhappy. And i fear his unhappiness will increase the more
he reads, for he is mistaking what he reads for that which produced it.
Coping with reality instead of experiencing it is a rather defeatist?
All the best,
Squonk.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:29 BST