Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA13431 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 25 Jun 2000 20:18:08 +0100 Message-ID: <000e01bfdedd$c6b5b8c0$730fbed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: Darwinism/ Chris Lofting Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 21:43:39 +0200 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01BFDEEE.6CF15040" 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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Chris, thank you for the excellent paper ! A wonderful piece of deduction.
But, if I may I wish to confront my own ideas about Darwinism/ Lamarckism
with yours. I see some resemblances and I would like your opinion.
<< The fractal structure that results from Darwinian and Lamarckian interaction.>>
The idea is twofold.
_1. Darwinian structures, as you put it_ context, are to me what we should call
the collective/ the sense of community_in a sense what makes us a race of men.
It indicates DNA/ genes/ intelligence/ reason/ functionality (the Darwinian end).
Lamarckian structures are what I see as individuality/ opportunism/ memes/
action/ emotion/ sudden (what you should call sensitive/ aware).
_2. The interaction begins with a desire/ a (re)action/ a need which must be
satisfied.
A/ that is what I call To- become- Lamarckian.
Behavior results here from epigenetic/ semantic/ emotional (re)actions upon
situations which we encounter. These (re)actions are from some perspective
conscious or unconscious.
That is _ violence/ murder >< psychosis/neurosis.
Either way, the distiction is not very clear where the conscious aspects stop
and the unconscious begins_ see p.e. mental derangements and schizofrenia.
B/ The above mentioned interaction intersects with what I call To- become-
Darwinian, that is our rules of conduct/ culture/ our ethics/ our political agreements/ religion/ social order_ our sense that we're a part of something
greater.
Like I think, Lamarckian (re)actions will devide a social order because inborn
needs are to be satisfied (like survival is one) !
Of course, that 's no way to direct a society, so the sensitives/ the lusts/ the
stimulations will be comformed by Darwinian law into new definitions/ stipu-
lations/...until there originates a fractal structure.
How often we exerts the Darwinian pathways, how stronger growns the message
which the Darwinian laws are holding within_that is, we 'll not jeapardize de-
mocratic/ social institutions, we know we will be punished if we break the
rules.
The fractal structure is here encoded in the DNA sequence, it is build up out of Darwinian (collective/ historical/ genetical) cultural habits/ uses and/ or stresses/
desires and needs which make up our collective consciousness
The system is ordened, regulated, provided with definitions/ conditions and proper-
ties...which in their turn provoke, each in their own interest, a Lamarckian (re)-
active which once again wants to corrobate itself into the Darwinian idea of
selection and variation etc; untill there originates that fractal structure where I am
talking about. (See your paper of 22/ 06/ 2000 paragrapf ' If you treat evolutionary
development as a dimension then the Darwin 'end ' reflects...)
Do you mean the same !?
That is one of my two questions.
Now the second one.
You talk about Sameness and Difference.
I agree on the fact that Lamarck searched the Difference but overlooked the
Sameness but, and I would like once again your opinion, the approach I take
to explain those terms is as follows.
Difference is for the Individuality, Sameness the Collective.
If Difference is fundamental and Sameness comes out of the relationships can
we say that Individuality seen as the bias for our being is something what
happens over and above the Individual_the urge towards Individuality is a need
for each us independently but it happens in a Collective way (each of us is
doing it)_ results that in a Sameness !?
I think it does.
What do you think !?
Many regards,
Kenneth
(I am, 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 25 2000 - 20:18:50 BST