From: Grant Callaghan (grantc4@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu 05 Dec 2002 - 18:44:07 GMT
I pretty much agree with you. Argument is the problem here. Arguments are
structured in terms of attack and defense by the participants. If someone
attacks, the natural response is to defend. But the media advertisers
change our minds quite often by persuading rather than attacking. And
images are stronger, to my mind, than words for this effort. The idea is
not to attack the other guy's point of view, but to slip around it by
offering a new point of view that seems more suited to his needs than the
old one. A new vision, so to speak.
Cheers,
Grant
>
>Grant Callaghan
> > > >
> > > > In numerous posts many of us have pointed out the fact that you
>can't
> > > > argue with memes of faith.
>
>I believe that I can create competitors to cultural replicators
>incorporating a faith meme. When I read the statement above, I focus on
>the
>word "argue" which, in my mind, has connotations of debate, formal logic,
>competitive strategy, and strict construction of rules. I interpret the
>above statement to mean that such strategies are not very effective in
>transmitting competing replicators into a mind that already hosts a
>replicator containing the faith meme.
>
>My interpretation doesn't imply that there aren't effective ways to have
>influence using language. It's more a question of adapting the memes of
>the
>competing replicator to the hosts present ideosphere.
>
>One difficulty in transmitting cultural replicators is that we tend to be
>in
>love with our own mental images. Like Narcissus, it is only satisfying to
>see a faithful reflection or reproduction of our replicator in the other.
>Anything less seems to compromise the "truth" of the idea. If I'm not
>careful, I often engage in the process with the implicit assumption that I
>can erase and overwrite memes on the surface of another brain like sectors
>on a hard drive.
>
>An effective competing replicator, however, needs to be specifically
>targeted. As the adage goes, success is 10% inspiration (breathing in the
>new replicator) and 90% perspiration (figuring out the thought process of
>the other person). It's very hard to keep that balance in mind.
>
>A corollary is that, given limited time and energy, one must distill down
>the replicator to the fewest memes possible. Every bit of excess baggage
>will require 9 times as much effort to transmit (or reduce the probability
>of transmission by some related factor).
>
>Best,
>Reed
>
>
>===============================================================
>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
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
===============================================================
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 : Thu 05 Dec 2002 - 18:46:07 GMT