Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id HAA04417 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 18 Feb 2002 07:54:54 GMT Message-ID: <001f01c1b850$f2051b80$6086b2d1@teddace> From: "Dace" <edace@earthlink.net> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <200202180005.g1I05Pg04866@mail9.bigmailbox.com> Subject: Re: ality Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 23:50:31 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: Joe Dees
> > If time is intrinsically real, then it doesn't need matter to exist. In
> >other words, the past still exists.
> >
> The past does not 'still' exist; if it did, it would not be the past, but
the present.
Memory is when something is *mentally* present without being materially
present.
> Ted, you are not practicing memetics, but are instead a circus barker
hawking your own personal variant of a vedantist religiously grounded
memeplex. No one here is sipping such snake oil, no matter how
indefatiticably you ignore unanswerable logical and empirical refutations
and blithely continue to preach same. What you are advocating is not within
the Popperian realm of science, but within the dogmatic realm of
faith/belief;
>>>
You continue repeating the same accusations long after I've dismissed them.
We went over this last summer. Sheldrake's memory-based "hypothesis of
formative causation" has been experimentally verified among numerous
different species, including our own. Though subject to falsification, all
attempts to do so have failed.
> it does not good to futilily masquerade it otherwise; there is not enough
camoflage in all the universe to disguise its nature as a meme which has you
tightly coiled in its thrall and with which you vainly hope to infect
others.
>>>
As I've said, you're not attempting to engage in a rational discussion. You
see a point of of view you don't like, and you try to stamp it out before
anyone takes notice. Your methodology is to intimidate into silence anyone
else who might carry on a legitimate discourse with me. Science needs new
points of view to keep from ossifying into dogma. You are an enemy of
science.
Ted
===============================================================
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 : Mon Feb 18 2002 - 08:04:32 GMT