RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and Palestine.

From: Chris Lofting (ddiamond@ozemail.com.au)
Date: Thu Jul 20 2000 - 20:04:07 BST

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

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA28140 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 20 Jul 2000 19:48:30 +0100
    From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and Palestine.
    Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 05:04:07 +1000
    Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIKEHICHAA.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
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745943@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: Friday, 21 July 2000 12:49
    > To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
    > Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and
    > Palestine.
    >
    >
    > These are not fundamental categorisations, these are your idiolectic
    > categorisations, and merely supports the main point of my last post.
    >

    the distinctions of what/where, and the entanglement of these elements into
    more complex forms, is built-in to the neurology and that dictates the
    structure of all meaning that is possible 'in here'. Read the references I
    gave.

    The distinctions of what/where (as used in neuroscience texts) are
    synonymous with those of object/relationship and when these are flesh-out,
    by using recursion, into wholes, parts, static relationships and dynamic
    relationships you can map these distinctions to a set of basic feelings
    Blend (whole), Bound (parts), Bond (Static relationships) and Bind
    (dynamics).

    All of that comes straight out of analysis of the neurology and these
    FUNDAMENTAL, NEUROLOGICALLY determined, categorisations were there well
    before I was.

    You dont like it do you. :-) What is it? the sense of containment implied,
    the restraint? wouldnt worry about it, there is so much to experience that
    you could do without it, ignore it. Get on with what ever you are trying to
    do, let it pass. :-)

    Just note that I do use the method in analysis and it does seem to aid in my
    fleshing-out of ideas, concepts etc so if you find it difficult to read my
    emails then just ignore them, set up your browser to filter them out.

    Best,

    Chris.
    ------------------
    Chris Lofting
    websites:
    http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
    http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond

    ===============================================================
    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 20 2000 - 19:49:20 BST