RE: Philosophy of Technology: scale and meaning; sameness and difference part 1

From: Chris Lofting (ddiamond@ozemail.com.au)
Date: Thu Jul 13 2000 - 20:48:33 BST

  • Next message: Chris Lofting: "RE: (part 2) Philosophy of Technology: scale and meaning; sameness and difference"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA08217 (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 20:33:30 +0100
    From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Philosophy of Technology: scale and meaning; sameness and difference part 1
    Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:48:33 +1000
    Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIAEFBCHAA.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: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D310174591D@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    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: Thursday, 13 July 2000 10:12
    > To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
    > Subject: RE: Philosophy of Technology: scale and meaning; sameness and
    > difference part 1
    >
    >
    > (6) I don't agree with this at all.
    >

    OK..In what way, specifically :-) Do you reject the implicit detection of
    body language? Do you reject the opposition-bias behaviours that can emerge
    after the CC is cut? Or perhaps you reject the unconscious? Or more so you
    reject the structuring of the unconscious?

    > > (6) My emphasis is that at all levels, when communicating with someone
    > > else,
    > > there is consensus-derived communications and so SAME to SAME.
    > This means
    > > that all communciations have within them particular formations that are
    > > encoded such that decoding is at a particular level and the data is not
    > > necessarily 'meaningful' beyond/outside that level. This means that the
    > > expressions of the individual, although DIFFERENT at the surface level,
    > > the
    > > level of expression, have encoded in them data that is only
    > interpretable
    > > at
    > > the other levels and the full set of interpretations determines the
    > > overall
    > > meaning. Thus sensitivity to body language helps to validate the spoken
    > > word
    > > etc., we are sensitive to incongruent communications even if we only
    > > 'feel'
    > > unsure, the expression etc seemed 'right' but there is something 'wrong'
    > > which we cannot consciously put our finger on. This demonstrates how at
    > > the
    > > same time these levels can operate almost independently of the others;
    > > they
    > > are to some degree at least self-contained; autonomous. (As we
    > find in the
    > > behaviours of the left and right hemispheres of the brain when
    > we cut the
    > > communications channel between them, the corpus callosum, or put one
    > > hemisphere to 'sleep').
    > >
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    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 - 20:35:18 BST