Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA27696 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:50:28 +0100 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> Organization: Reborn Technology To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: RE: Cons and Facades Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 18:20:10 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <20000626182138.AAA4489@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]> Message-Id: <00062718212900.00865@faichney> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Wade T.Smith wrote:
>On 06/26/00 11:45, Chris Lofting said this-
>
>>BOTH astrology and NLP use dichotomisations in their determination of
>>meaning and this process ENSURES the emergence of meaning.
>
>I _am_ missing the point, them, because I am asking for the empirical,
>experimental proof of the above assertion, and I'm not interested in the
>meaning _within_ the respective cultures of NLP, or astrology, (or
>phrenology or tea-leaf-reading, et al.), I'm asking for the proof across
>cultures, within the universal reach of science.
>
>Take me into the tent.
Meaning is essentially subjective, so experimental proof isn't possible. That
also means such stuff isn't scientific, of course. Did anyone say it was?
-- Robin Faichney===============================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 : Tue Jun 27 2000 - 19:51:15 BST