Re: electric meme bombs

From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 23:18:46 GMT

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: I know one when I see one"

    >From: joedees@bellsouth.net
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk, fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    >Subject: Re: electric meme bombs
    >Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:09:43 -0600
    >
    > > Joe,
    > > > Different people can indeed have similar thoughts, but this does not
    > > > mean that several similar actions taken by the same person do not
    > > > share a common mental basis. Individual neurons fire, or do not
    > > > fire, depending upon their input from other neuurons, and dynamic
    > > > gestalt- patterns are indeed formed, which refer to and represent
    > > > certain specific informational types and not others; some of these
    > > > information types may be accessed to guide specific action tokens.
    > > > Which patterns have been internalized depends upon an individual's
    > > > genetic predispositions, personal choices and environmental history.
    > >
    > > I don 't deny that either, but that ain 't the thing I was after ! I
    > > am fighting the assumption that the bias HAS to be a common one. IMO,
    > > maybe it is too hard to comprehend, what commonly is seen as
    > > collective is the way by which the evolution of a singularity went up.
    > > Everything in nature tends to be (the) getting better/ best. Our
    > > course to take this, that this is done along lines of consensus,
    > > deliberation and consultation for granted has led us away of what
    > > really matters in nature_ the singularity of whatever kind from
    > > whereout the evolution of the object/ subject can begin.
    > >
    > > The idea is to get from the Big bang as singularity to the Universe,
    > > from one cell to multiple celluar organisms, from one single idea to
    > > the complex state of a memeplex, from one seed of one tree to the
    > > whole of the forest which eventually will grow, from the one single
    > > hut to the houses in the town.... from singular to plural that is the
    > > way evolution follows.
    > >
    >No, evolution tends to favor progressively more complex and elaborated
    >systems, which permit a wider range of possible alternatives to the
    >organism, and thus increase the likelihood that it will survive to
    >reproduce. Not from singular to multiplicity, but from less complex to
    >more complex system.
    >
    Yet bacteria rule the planet.

    If you draw an imaginary line from monad to man and generalize from this unidimensional and linearized view of evolution up a ladder across the whole, you might tend to (mis)perceive a progressive tendency toward complexity in evolution, especially if you fail to define "complex" and
    "elaborate".

    Some of us avoid such cheezy generalizations.

    _________________________________________________________________ Unlimited Internet access for only $21.95/month.  Try MSN! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp

    =============================================================== 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 2.1.5 : Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 23:22:46 GMT