how can pirsig claim to write as a legitimate philosopher when he fails to review or consider martin heidegger's 'being and time'? and how can pirsig claim to philosophize in an original and creative way, considering heidegger accomplished what merely pirsig tried to, only earlier, more comprehensively, and downright better? MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
- Re: MD Some sparse (trivial?) ideas elephant
- Re: MD Some sparse (trivial?) ideas Andrea Sosio
- Re: MD Some sparse (trivial?) ideas elephant
- Re: MD Some sparse (trivial?) ideas Andrea Sosio
- Re: MD Some sparse (trivial?) ideas Marco
- MD Language and reality Andrea Sosio
- Re: MD Language and reality elephant
- Re: MD Language and reality Marco
- RE: MD Language and reality Chris Lofting
- Re: MD Language and reality Andrea Sosio
- Re: MD Heidegger Kevin Sanchez
- Re: MD Heidegger elephant
- Re: MD Heidegger Kevin Sanchez
- Re: MD Heidegger 3dwavedave
- Re: MD Heidegger Kevin Sanchez
- RE: MD Heidegger Richard Ridge
- RE: MD Heidegger Richard Ridge
- Re: MD Some sparse (trivial?) ideas elephant