RE: Cons and Facades - Welcome to My Nightmare Part 2.Bb

From: Chris Lofting (ddiamond@ozemail.com.au)
Date: Fri Jul 07 2000 - 17:38:04 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Cons and Facades/memetic engineering"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA23542 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:23:12 +0100
    From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - Welcome to My Nightmare Part 2.Bb
    Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 02:38:04 +1000
    Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIIEDDCHAA.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)
    Importance: Normal
    In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745904@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
    > Of Vincent Campbell
    > Sent: Friday, 7 July 2000 8:48
    > To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
    > Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - Welcome to My Nightmare Part 2.Bb
    >
    >
    > Yes, but the point was in this view of language, meaning only exists in
    > negation, there's dichotomy there.

    Umm.. sort of. From a neurological/psychological perspective there are TWO
    sources of meaning. One is the 'waypoint' mapping one which seems to serve
    as the 'root' for our distinctions of correct/incorrect and this leads into
    syntax processing but we do not go PAST the assertion. To go past it leads
    us into harmonics analysis. Furthermore there is a state in object thinking
    that is excessively positive and so all YES but there is no conscious
    experience of NO -- recall that NO elicits a scanning of contexts, a process
    of abduction to find a 'fit' to a required particular (as in I want 'YES').

    Go past this and you get into context and in that is negation as well as the
    forming of symbols to be expressed.

    Mathematics/logic is rooted in syntax and the fundamental correct/incorrect
    dichotomy. This 'explains' how some find a problem with mathematics in that
    they want to understand it by going BEHIND it but there is no perceived
    BEHIND. The method of teaching does this such that many drop out of
    mathematics, they dont 'understand' no sense of 'meaning'.

    In the spoken/written word we initially parse literally:

    Green numbers ate hearts.

    This seems to be 'nonsense' and most would throw it away as 'meaningless'
    but when I tell you that it is metaphor then your mind changes to harmonics
    analysis where you try to look BEHIND the words 'who is/are Green numbers?'
    etc.

    Now imagine people who see metaphors 'naturally'. When faced with
    mathematics they can have problems with some of the literal interpretations
    used in the teaching.

    >
    > Didn't you mention Heidegger in one of your posts? Isn't his notion of
    > humans as "beings unto death" an absolute? Where's the dichotomy in this
    > notion?
    >

    There are many dichotomies in Heidegger but the most fundamental is his use
    of the dasein/mitsein (being/being_with_others)

    This maps to object/relationships (1:many) dichotomisations. Take being to
    its extreme and, other than gene driven responses, there is no 'not' (!).
    Heidegger was after this and is I think the reason for his rejecting of
    Science in favour of Art, the Artist is 'into' purity, unique expression,
    the one. Science is more into repeating, regular expression, algorithms and
    formulas and so what is BEHIND the one. (these are gross distinctions, there
    is a degree of mixing that reduces these absolutes).

    There is an emphasis in 'purity' on eternity, the eternal being, the eternal
    one. There is no 'death' in this and these days we are still attracted to
    immortality. :-)

    For Heidegger the idea of the Thousand Year Reich was intuitively attractive
    as was the archetypal art forms etc of Nazi Germany at that time. This sort
    of material could/did? blind him to the more 'dark' side of things.
    (delusion is a property of fundamentalist thinking).

    > Just to be flippant, this left brain/right brain stuff reminds me of that
    > old joke that goes 'Since the left side of the brain controls the
    > right side
    > of the body, then only people who are left handed are in their
    > right mind!'
    > :-) (I unfortunately am right handed).

    I am 'pure' left. :-)

    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 : Fri Jul 07 2000 - 17:23:56 BST