Re: Laudable but Misguided (with a word added)

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sun 25 May 2003 - 21:00:00 GMT

  • Next message: William Benzon: "Re: reply to Benzon"

    > I can understand Wade's desire to achieve objectivity in memetic
    > study; however, absolute objectivity can never be attained, as
    > everything we perceive, do and know is filtered through our own
    > subjectivities. The best we can do is achieve intersubjective
    > agreement. But we must intersubjectively agree that we think and
    > communicate thoughts to and receive communicated thoughts from others,
    > via commonly understood performative action/perception encoding
    > schemas; otherwise, we could neither agree nor disagree on anything
    > whatsoever. The thoughts we have are indeed cognitive; on this Wade
    > has agreed. However, memes are the subset of thoughts that may be
    > transmitted to and received from others, that is, communicated between
    > minds, via commonly understood preformative action/perception encoding
    > schemas. It is logically inconsistent to on the one hand, acknowledge
    > that a set (thoughts) reside in the mind, and on the other hand, contend that
    > a subset of that set (communicable thoughts) do not reside there.
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 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 : Sun 25 May 2003 - 21:05:26 GMT