RE: Cons and Facades/memetic engineering

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Jul 05 2000 - 12:27:32 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Genome is not a map to the human self"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA16983 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 5 Jul 2000 12:29:35 +0100
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31017458F9@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/memetic engineering
    Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 12:27:32 +0100 
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    This is a central question I think, because of the notion of intent.
    There's no doubt that different social systems (political, religious etc.)
    have proscribed behaviours in different ways at different times, and have
    deliberately done so, but the question emerges of where (and why) those
    proscriptions occured in the first place (and how and why those
    proscriptions spread).

    I think it depends on the nature of the behaviour. With sexual behaviours
    it is more than likely, IMHO, that the behaviours predate any efforts to
    proscribe them. Other kinds of taboos undoubtedly emerged within a cultural
    context. I suppose good recent examples would be cloning, and IVF
    technology that allows same sex couples to have babies (or will do in the
    near future).

    Cannibalism strikes me, as I write, to be an interesting example. Again,
    this is presumably a very ancient behaviour, predating civilisation. I'm no
    anthropologist, but I believe today it's only practised amongst remote
    tribes in places like Borneo. Nonetheless it is a human practice, but one
    that is today a major taboo broken only in the most extreme of
    circumstances, such as by serial killers, or in that case of the Argentinian
    rugby team trapped in the Andes for months after a plane crash a few years
    ago. How did it become a taboo? If it was engineered in some kind of way,
    why? (and more importantly how?).

    I know there was the case of that tribe in South/Central America (?) that
    suffered a very high level of encephalopathetic diseases, that was related
    to their ritual practice of eating dead relatives (which they no longer do).

    Vincent

    > ----------
    > From: Kenneth Van Oost
    > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Sent: Monday, July 3, 2000 7:01 pm
    > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Subject: Re: Cons and Facades/memetic engineering
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    > To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    > Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 2:40 PM
    > Subject: RE: Cons and Facades/memetic engineering
    >
    >
    > > One of the interesting things is how (or why) things become taboos,
    > despite
    > > their prevalence in human behaviour.
    > >
    > > Homosexuality has gone, for example, from one extreme to the other in
    > terms
    > > of social acceptance (e.g. Ancient Spartan society), to taboo, to our
    > > current era of greater tolerance and acceptance. Incest was the
    > preferred
    > > reproductive method of Egyptian pharohs, but is now a major taboo etc.
    > etc.
    > >
    > > Now, it seems to me, that the tolerance or condemnation of such
    > behaviours
    > > at various times is probably memetic in nature.
    > >
    > << Vincent, do you mean with " such behaviours at various times is
    > probably
    > memetic in nature " that such behaviours vary along the changing tread of
    > human culture !? In that case, what is influencing what:- culture ><
    > behaviour !?
    > What kind of " effective memes " are infecting the human mind to tolerate
    > or to condemn such behaviours, not in the least to take part into
    > incest...!?
    > Or is it possible that tolerance or condemnation are memetical engineered
    > !?
    > That is, in our society the equality-principle is held high, is it then
    > not
    > possible
    > that media/ propagande etc are generating the judgment which behaviour is
    > tolerated or condemned !? >>
    >
    > regards,
    >
    > Kenneth
    >
    > (I am, because we are) once more
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 Jul 05 2000 - 12:30:19 BST