Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA05860 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 11 Jun 2000 20:43:18 +0100 Message-ID: <000701bfd3e0$f28c9de0$510ebed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0006110929380.25226-100000@marple.umd.edu> Subject: Re: Imitation or transmission? Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:08:30 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence H. de Bivort <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2000 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: Imitation or transmission?
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Kenneth Van Oost wrote:
>
> >merits. Which is why I like this list, fragmentation and all. The area
> >missing from this list,
> >and properly so, IMO, is that of engineering.
> >
> >Lawrence, to which field of engeering are you prefering to !?
> >Technological, biological, mechanical, genetical,...
>
> "Memetic" engineering. I'm not sure who coined this term, but the idea is
> that it might be possible to design and release a meme with a specified
> goal. I'm not sure this constitutes a 'field' of engineering <grin>.
>
> Kenneth, you and I have taken the first steps toward a very interesting
> discussion some time in the past: that of self-building via memes. (This
> is a key interest to me, but difficult for me personally to explore, and I
> appreciate your patience.) If this were do-able, or useful, it could, I
> think, be viewed as an element of memetic engineering...
>
> In an earlier message, I indicated my belief that this listserv is not a
> good place to discuss memetic engineering, but such self-application might
> be appropriate... I have to think a bit about this.
>
> >(I am, because we are)
>
> Can you say more about what your sign-off line means? Do you mean this
> metaphysically (would it be equally appropriate to say "We are, because I
> am"?) ?
<< To answer your last question first.
On your own it seems not to be possible neither to determine nor to put
to the test the meaning and reality-value of your opinions and your goal(s)
in life. (With our first steps we are trying to prove it wrong.)
For that I need other interlocuters, but each of us needs at the same time
the same network of interlocutors to formulate and interpretate his or hers
ambitions and his or hers ideal attitudes of/ towards life.
But in doing so, we point the independence of the others_I am, because
we are all " identified " (from the word identity) by the others.
I am, because everybody else is an " I " (I hope they are, will be and
become one.) I don' t think the other way round the sign-off gets the same
meaning, in my opinion it gets a more " grouped " expression and that is
just what I don' t like. >>
Now to the memetic engeering. Why putting it between quotation marks,
its a very good term and I thought we were long over due to put any meme
between markers. But that aside, " it might be possible to design and re-
lease (a) meme(s) with a specified goal " and self-building via memes can
be viewed as an element of memetic engeering..."
Did you get my post about autism, may be you can look at it as a form
of memetic engeering, but I think I got a better one for you.
Do you know what "Aphasia " is !?
Well if you don' t let me in short explain, aphasia is inflicted upon
someone
by braindamage by which speaking, understanding things, reading and
writing are disturbed. Aphasia makes communication quit difficult and in
many cases impossible. Even writing a lettre is very difficult, even peoples
handwriting is changed. In many cases the character was also changed.
What now makes aphasia so special for yours (and mine) exploration of
the self-building throught memes concept !?
Well, to heal the patients they heve to re-learn speech, writing, the ABC,
.....the language is still there but no longer accessible. People forget for
what a tooth-brush is used for,...throught upon them inflicted memes they
have to re-learn why; what is the importance of tooth-pasta in order to
control dental decay etc.
That is one side of the coin.
The other side are two major objections from the patients themselves
according to how other people (re)act in their presence and how people
(re)act according to the illness itself.
First, most of the time we have the urge to speak in the patient his or
her place...that means in some sense:- we are memetical engeering the
environment of the patient, if not the patient him- or herself.
That have to change, but I think it is a normal human reaction to help
a patient out, but that is not a very good way.
Secondly, we must approach them as adults, if we speak to them we
use a " childs "-language (jabbering). In memetical engeering sense:-
we are inflicting memes upon them which are not appropriate,...the
language is still there but not accessible. In therapy they are trying
to make the entrance to the language better. In a sense, making
pathways where engeering memes can travel upon...I think.
Enjoy !
Regards,
Kenneth
(I am (more then ever), because we are.)
===============================================================
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 Jun 11 2000 - 20:44:00 BST