From: Van oost Kenneth (kennethvanoost@belgacom.net)
Date: Sat 08 May 2004 - 14:08:48 GMT
Can we study memes round upon their own place on the latter of
meaning !? Can we speak up for what is called ' relationism ' !?
Are ideas constraint / determinated by their location within the social / cul-
tural system which gives birth to them !?
Such an enquiry into the social / cultural basis of thought need not run
counter to the goal of objectivity _ for though ideas are internally shaped by
their social / cultural origins, their truth value isn 't reducible to them.
" Utopia " for instance denotes ideas ahead of their time , they are however
discrepent with the social / cultural reality , but capable nonetheless of
shattering structures of the present. " Utopian " ideas may be premature
and unreal but should be counted for as terms for those conceptual pre-
figurations which really do succeed in realizing new social / cultural orders.
In a sense, then, utopian ideas emerge in the light of a present
contextual framework _ unable yet to enter upon any material existence _
and are constraint by it. The inevitable one- sidedness of thus this particular
standpoint frozen in time can / will however be corrected by synthesizing/
comparing it with its direct, present and ' future ' rivals.
The aim of a ' science of memetics ' should thus be to spurn all transcen-
dental truths and examine the social / cultural determinants of any idea /
concept / belief / trait / habit /...while guarding at the same time against
the disabling relativism which would level these points mention above to one,
Darwinism ( genes ).
So the entrenched authority of the Darwinian view is thus accordingly
undermined by its very own nature.
Moreover, such a view breeds miscontentment and frustration as surely as it
generates social/ cultural order(s); beliefs and genetic influenced habits and
traits ; pitching them all together in a meleé of selection , history , time and
mutation.
No single way of thinking can claim it is more valid than any other.
The Darwinian creed sets the stage for the growth of scepticism and rela-
tivism and threatens to cut its authoritative ground from under its own feet.
It is hard to remain convinced that your own way of thinking about things
is the only possible selected when you are busy hard trying to subjugate
others who has radical/ rational choises and do live effective by them !
It is not so, that even an injust / unjust reasoning is a mistake / fault
that it hasn 't any reason to exist as any exact one is _ a wrong judgement
is after all as much a fact as a precise one !
This approach pushes the question of relativism within Darwinism back
a stage; for we can now always set standpoints from which the deter-
mination within can be contradicted.
We are simply too much blinded to what Darwinism demands that we
ain 't consider that the world consists out of more numious meanings
than meet the eye. But since society/ culture is composed out of more
or less free, apparently autonomous individuals, each pursuing their
own private genetic / memetic induced interests, any generalisation/
universalisation of this notion, becomes hard to sustain.
Each of us has become his or her own seat, not only of
self- determination [ what implies free will ; individuality ; identity ;
freedom ], but also of self- government _ each pursuits his or her
own interests in their own way and bear them around as principles
to live by and take responsibility when things turn bad.
Where there were no choises at all if life was confined to its Dar-
winian bounderies, now we have a kind of subjective speculation
about the outcome of our actions.
Now we bind ourselves to what our very own private ideas / con-
cepts / illusions / complexes / ...want ; now we struggle / fight /
acquire and act out and for our own interests _ now we can escape
every single Darwinian concept of the world , not merely the social
and the cultural ones, but also the implicit genetical.
Our ideas are thus true in so far as they serve to promote our very
own relationship with the environment / era we live in.
In how we stand related, not so much to what is said, but to who
say it and for what purposes, we find meaning for ourselves.
In how we connect ourselves; in how we stand connected [ and
in what akinda of ways ] with social/ cultural dispositions, we
find a / the meaning of the kind of relationship which others are
trying to promote.
This view is thus a version whereby choise ; possibility to choose;
intention; self- responsibility is the style of action / thought at
which people should arrive were they to grasp the real sense of
individuality.
Being free to choose whatever kind of freedom you want is in
contrast with the within the Darwinian tied perspective of being
doomed to be free.
In more than one sense this involves Heideggers conception
of Das Sein ; it is all together much more than a simple exis-
tentalistic commitment _ it brings out Nietzsche's practical
understanding that people should give shape; reason ; form
to their lives.
And it is in this sense that Darwinism and [ genetic/ meme-
tic ] determinism are not, after all , the only natural alterna-
tives.
Kenneth Van Oost
March / April 2004
===============================================================
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 : Sat 08 May 2004 - 14:06:14 GMT