RE: the tent

From: Chris Lofting (ddiamond@ozemail.com.au)
Date: Thu Jul 06 2000 - 20:47:18 BST

  • Next message: Chris Lofting: "RE: Cons and Facades - Welcome to My Nightmare Part 2.Bb"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA21278 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 6 Jul 2000 20:32:40 +0100
    From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: the tent
    Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 05:47:18 +1000
    Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIAECNCHAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Importance: Normal
    In-Reply-To: <20000705191842.AAA1991@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Wade,

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
    > Of Wade T.Smith
    > Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2000 5:19
    > To: memetics list
    > Subject: the tent
    >
    >
    > On 07/05/00 14:34, Chris Lofting said this-
    >
    > >The intent was to help Wade understand how people find 'meaning' in
    > >Astrology etc, it was all done as a response to his 'take me
    > into the tent'
    > >request :-) It was a bit 'intense' so may need a few reads (if one is
    > >interested :-))
    >
    > Ah, but you see, I never had any problem with _how_ (or even 'why')
    > people find 'meaning' in astrology (or NLP, or acupuncture, or even the
    > Red Sox....) What I _still_ have a problem with (yes, believe it or not,
    > regardless of your volume of explanations) is in taking that meaning and
    > making it work outside the 'tent' (the culture of astrology, of NLP, of
    > acupuncture, of the Red Sox-) because, a real scientific fact is, like
    > the indomitable Washburn would say, meaningful in the entire universe.
    >

    I think I touched on that with the comments re mathematics etc. Did you read
    that? did you understand it? what did it mean to you? Did you see the
    pattern of the method of analysis emerging from the neurological data? I
    would like to know as this would help as feedback to help in getting my
    point across.

    What I am saying IS testible and so refutable and was developed outside of
    the tent, the approach was more how meaning was found in the seemingly
    meaningless.

    The template model reduces all disciplines to being metaphors for describing
    objects and relationships, samenesses and differences. It allows us to
    refine these disciplines but also forces us to recognise that all meaning
    comes from 'in here'.

    The resonences we get with 'out there' when we use our metaphors is due to
    the underlying even unconscious responses to objects/relationships and the
    suggestion is that we have adapted to the environment by internalising
    fundamental distinctions -- at the base level that of fermion-like
    characteristics from boson-like characteristics and this has 'filtered' up
    the development 'tree'.

    Thus at a general level we do 'contain' out there (in the 'in here' sense as
    well as contain in that our methods puts boundaries around things).

    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 archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 06 2000 - 20:34:23 BST