Re: memetic engineering

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Thu Jul 13 2000 - 20:06:23 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Memes and sexuality"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA08067 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 13 Jul 2000 19:50:00 +0100
    Message-ID: <001601bfecfe$ed3e61c0$8b06bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D310174590F@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    Subject: Re: memetic engineering
    Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:06:23 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    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: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 12:38 PM
    Subject: RE: Cons and Facades/memetic engineering

    >Vincent wrote,

    > I'm not sure that the inclusive fitness argument is necessarily
    watertight.
    > After all some behaviours may be tolerated if the people doing it offer
    some
    > other attributes which benefit the group, e.g. being a good hunter.

    << That is a kind of ' sick ' argument ! Sex-offenders and paedophiles have
    also attributes which benefit the group; they can be great teachers !
    I think the behaviour is tolerated not because people doing ' perversities '
    offer some benefit to the group, maybe way back in the ' old days ', but
    because they act NOT against the weak in our society.
    Clinton was OK, after all how old was the lady !? I suppose the im-
    peachment would have take place if the lady was a child of 8 !?

    The behaviour of paedophiles is not tolerated because the sex act involves
    children. The same principle is applied towards sex-offenders who rape
    and murder out of a ' power ' situation. The principle goes, that you don
    't
    touch the weak even you have so mush to offer.

    I remerber, what was the mans name, he was prime-minister in Indonisia,
    I think,...
    Anyway, he is/was convicted to imprisonment for having sex with animals,
    I think !! Sex is a weapon !!

    Oh, yeah, the state of Louisiana do punish oral and anal sex acts with 5
    years imprisonment.
    The law is now 200 years old and the Supreme Court has confirmed the
    law once a again.
    The supporters argued that sex acts between agreeing adults can 't be
    a case of public right.
    The Pope called homosexuality this weekend ' an objective disorder ' .
    I do understand the reasons why he said that, but that people are belie-
    ving that stuff, well Elmo Recio said it, I don 't get it !!

    > After all, these behaviours have survived, so they can't have been so
    non-adaptive to have been wiped out. But the basic point you make seems
    fine to me.

    Regards,

    Kenneth

    (I am, because we are)

    ===============================================================
    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 13 2000 - 19:51:47 BST