From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Thu 29 May 2003 - 22:13:27 GMT
>
>
>
>
> >From: Keith Henson <hkhenson@rogers.com>
> >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >Subject: RE: Watches & Necklaces
> >Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 08:31:18 -0400
> >
> >At 12:58 AM 29/05/03 -0400, Scott wrote:
> >
> >>>From: Keith Henson <hkhenson@rogers.com>
> >>>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >>>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >>>Subject: RE: Watches & Necklaces
> >>>Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 22:47:27 -0400
> >>>
> >>>At 09:10 PM 28/05/03 -0400, scott wrote:
> >>>
> >>>snip
> >>>
> >>>>So would you agree with Richard that education is a parasite?
> >>>
> >>>No, because I don't think Richard said that.
> >>(clears throat)
> >>
> >>After I had elaborated on symbiont relations with the aid of
> >>Minkoff's text, Richard had responsed (probably snipped from the
> >>post you had read along with my rather pointed questions to him):
> >>
> >>(bq) "It would seem easy to extend this, then, to gene-meme
> >>symbiosis. Education, for example, is parasitic because it reduces
> >>genetic fitness. How about them apples?" (eq)
> >>
> >>You may have a greater command of the English language than I do.
> >>Looking over what Richard said, is he saying that education is
> >>parasitic or not? Maybe he was being facetious?
> >
> >Not at all. But there is a difference between what you said he said
> >and what Richard said. The way you restated it is simply not true
> >because it implies education being a parasite on the individual where
> >Richard's states a well known fact about higher education, the kind
> >that takes many years. Education and wealth in western culture has
> >mixed effects, statistically reducing the number of offspring while
> >improving their chances to survive.
> >
> >Humans have their own viewpoint which is not the same as either the
> >memes they have or their genes.
> >
> >>>Education and closely associated wealth tends to reduced the number
> >>>of children you have, but it does make the ones you have more
> >>>likely to survive, in bad times *much* more likely to survive.
> >>>This is just an extension of the K r spectrum.
> >>I happened to be the one who added the allusion to the K r spectrum
> >>to the mix, in response to Richard. So maybe we are in somewhat of
> >>an agreement here?
> >>>
> >>>Though as I noted, humans just happen to react to education and
> >>>wealth this way. Our evolution could have left us with the
> >>>tendency to turn wealth into more kids. To an unknown extent this
> >>>may be more cultural. Consider that bin Laden has 40 some odd
> >>>kids, not unusual by Saudi Prince standards.
> >>Good thing Abdul Aziz conquered Arabia and then oil was discovered
> >>so that those petrodollars could trickle down to bin Laden's dad and
> >>family via the construction business. Otherwise, so much for Saudi
> >>wealth. The fortuitiousness of the al-Saud conquest AND striking oil
> >>are an historical confluence that cannot be underemphasized in any
> >>analysis relating to Saudi Arabian affluence.
> >
> >Certainly true. I presume you have read some of Bernard Lewis on
> >this subject.
> >
> I've been listening to his _Crisis of Islam_ unabridged CD book in my
> car over the past couple weeks. It's pretty good, but too concise IMO
> on the early Wahhabi/Al Saud history and the advent of Adbul Aziz and
> his Ikhwan warriors. He was right on from what I've read elsewhere on
> the parts he does cover, but given his knowledge base and expertise
> I'd have loved for him to get much more in depth on these areas.
>
> I thought his discussion of suicide and how this subject is addressed
> in the Hadithic literature of Muhammed's life and sayings was very
> interesting in light of September 11 and the constant birrage of
> suicide bombings against Israel by Islamist groups. IIRC the
> anti-suicide injunction goes something like however someone commits
> suicide in life shall be replayed eternally for them in death. In
> other words, instead of paradise and however many virgins, those who
> took out the Trade Center shall forever repeat that deed. Is that the
> impression you got after reading Lewis's coverage of this topic? I
> also liked his history of the fedayeen from the Assassins through the
> present day.
>
> He was rather fair and unapolegetic in his treatment of Islam. Great
> book IMO, especially in pointing out how Muhammed was a warrior
> himself and the jihad a part of Islam from the get go, where the
> Reconquest and Crusades were more of a reaction to the European
> encroachment of Islam, though the Crusaders took things way too far
> themselves.
>
For a more in-depth study of Wahhabism, along with a prestty good
history of Islam generally, read THE TWO FACES OF ISLAM by
Stephen Schwartz.
>
> >If not you should. He states the problems with the
> Islamic world as well >as can be stated without evolutionary
> psychology and ecological views. The >situation there is no better
> than that leading up to the Hutu/Tutsi >conflict--with the difference
> that the USA is one of the participants. > >
>
> _________________________________________________________________ MSN
> 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Thu 29 May 2003 - 22:18:56 GMT