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

From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Fri Jul 21 2000 - 20:09:04 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: point of memetic saturation"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA01193 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:06:37 +0100
    Message-Id: <200007211904.PAA12862@mail3.lig.bellsouth.net>
    From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:09:04 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and Palesti	ne.
    In-reply-to: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D310174594A@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and Palesti
            ne.
    Date sent: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:50:39 +0100
    Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    > Just one more comment, and then I'll let it lie.
    >
    > I'm not a neuro-scientist, so I can't really comment on that aspect of your
    > claims, but I'd be incredibly surprised to find that neuroscience in any way
    > supports the notion that if we switch one I-ching symbol for another we can
    > explain or solve problems in the Middle-East.
    >
    > If it were that simple, then why not offer your services to the Camp David
    > negotiations? They certainly seem to need some help, and I'm sure they'd
    > appreciate it.
    >
    > If you feel that this system explains life the universe and everything for
    > you, then fine, I wish you well.
    >
    > Vincent
    >
    > (By the way, just a small bit of advice regarding your presentation of
    > arguments- putting words in capital letters doesn't make them more
    > persuasive).
    >
    I vote that we make Chris the object of a memetic study; he is
    obviously tightly esconced in the iron grip of a self-created
    memeplex, and we may discover how to personally avoid the same
    sad fate. I suggest analyzing his system to find the psychological
    hooks and how and where they embedded themselves in his self-
    concept so we may understand how he was persuaded to make
    such a strong emotional investment in them.
    >
    > > ----------
    > > From: Chris Lofting
    > > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 8:04 pm
    > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and
    > > Palestine.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > > -----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 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 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 21 2000 - 20:07:28 BST