Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA17734 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:05:22 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31017458D7@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:03:35 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
I see what you're saying.
What I'm addressing here is two things: first, what is it about certain
information that it is regarded as 'the truth' by individuals- which you've
got a most reasonable answer for; but second what makes some truths spread
beyond individuals. Why, for example, does the truth of natural selection
spread, but not the 'truth' of my computer password? (or rather why do I
freely discuss the former but carefully protect the latter?).
This question may relate to an earlier discussion the list about what a
'belief' is. I was flicking through Dennett yesterday, and saw where that
dispute emerged, in that belief is used by Dennett (and others) to refer to
all sorts of behaviours (Wade used the example of catching a ball- or rather
he demonstrated how 'beliefs' are needed to catch the ball). I think
perhaps the same thing is going on here with the concept of truth. Perhaps
it's my humanities/social science environment affecting my position on these
things.
It's not that I'm against reductive or determinist approaches, but I am
against taking the meaning out of words. After all, I would argue that
facts and truths are not the same thing, so there is no way I would accept
that my computer password is the truth, except by taking all the meaning of
the term 'truth' away.
I apologise if this is being too personal, but what I'm interested in is
truths that are shared by people, passed on between people, deemed important
enough to deliberately attempt to persaude people to accept that truth, and
what, if anything, characterises such truths.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Chris Lofting
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 8:02 pm
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> > Of Vincent Campbell
> > Sent: Monday, 19 June 2000 8:57
> > To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> > Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth
> >
> >
> > WE're clearly not using truth in the same sense here. I don't agree
> that
> > the only factor in our perceiving certain information as the truth being
> > ownership.
>
> I think the SOURCE of the feeling is tracable to the method of determining
> ownership through territorial mapping using waypoints marked by us.
>
> For example, my password to get onto my e-mail package is mine
> > but it is not the truth.
>
> to you it is, to all others it isnt since *their* password is 'the truth'.
> Truth is directly tied to the feeling of 'correct' vs 'incorrect', 'right'
> vs 'wrong'.
>
> Natural selection, on the other hand is a truth,
> > but it doesn't belong to me.
> >
>
> yes it does, as a belief system which you demonstrate with the above
> statement that you feel that it is a fact and outside of you, the point is
> it is a cultural truth and you being part of that culture will share that
> truth; the feeling of 'correctness'.
>
> > Similarly territory and truth are not the same either.
>
> I emphasised that the sense originated with territorial mappings and as
> such
> this sense of 'mine vs not-mine' has been abstracted to
> 'correct/incorrect'
> and eventually into the syntax processes we use in both spoken language
> and
> written (includes logic, mathematics etc)
>
> Territories are
> > things to be protected by their owners, truths are things to be passed
> > outside personal territories.
> >
>
> ....and into cultural territories where these truths are protected by the
> owners etc you can scale truths into:
>
> personal
> cultural
> universal
>
> The latter span all cultures giving a universal sense of 'correctness'. I
> think you are being too local, too personal, in dealing with the concept
> of
> truth.
>
>
>
> > Also, in your final comment- survival for who or what? The meme, or the
> > person?
> >
>
> when it gets down to the nitty-gritty it is the meme that is sacrificed.
> In
> concentration camps and prison camps high ideals (memes) were the first
> things to go as the battle for survival takes over UNLESS you formed a
> group
> or else a rigid degree of self-discipline and so some memes acted to keep
> you alive whilst others killed you; context was the determining factor (as
> it always is in evolutionary or devolutionary processes).
>
> best,
>
> Chris.
>
> >
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 2b29 : Wed Jun 21 2000 - 13:06:10 BST