Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA08209 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 14 May 2000 23:02:52 +0100 Message-ID: <391EDCEB.452F4850@mediaone.net> Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 18:05:47 +0100 From: Chuck Palson <cpalson@mediaone.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: New subject: I need help on memes, morality, and abortion. References: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJIEOOEMAA.richard@brodietech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Richard Brodie wrote:
> Your theory that morals of different societies are a certain way because
> that is what is required in order to make the societies function is
> attractive until I start to look at what mechanism could cause the change.
> Do you suggest there are people actively examining current morals, assessing
> the need for change, and implementing it? I think that happens sometimes
> (Vatican II?) but rarely and perhaps does not produce the expected results.
>
Richard -
No - I absolutely do not suggest that changing morality is some conscious,
rational activity. Some of it may be, but most of it is not. The change is
sparked by the fact that the current laws of morality aren't working very well.
All people know for sure is that something is wrong and they are disoriented.
Their discussions on what and how to change the rules can be full of confusion,
and don't forget that we know that a lot of conscious decisions that people make
about _anything_ is really accomplished in the lower brain, not in the cortex.
All we know with absolute certainty from a close study of history is that laws
of morality do in fact change to fit new situations.
>
> Memetics predicts that a change in the memetic environment---the way in
> which people communicate and relate, as a part of it---will catalyze a shift
> in the meme pool simply because in the new environment some memes will
> become more fit.
I think you could certainly chart the changes in terms of the frequency of
"memes." People do this in the form of content analysis of recorded behavior -
such as documents and film and radio programs. But that is an abstraction that
doesn't really get at the underlying dynamics of why the memes change. As I keep
repeating, I don't see any theoretical advantage to discussing memes as things
in themselves.
> The least changeable part of the meme's environment is
> human nature. I think it likely that some moral tendencies are part of human
> nature and those would therefore be the most stable moral memes. Others, as
> you say, would shift when technology and society changes, but NOT in order
> to make a more perfect society,
I hope you don't think I am talking about perfection here. I would never use
that word. I am only saying that people have to adapt to new environments. If
they don't, they die. Perfection as it is currently defined has nothing to do
with this concept.
> rather to facilitate their own spread. The
> result is certainly not guaranteed to product a wonderful place for all to
> live and prosper.
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 14 2000 - 23:03:13 BST