Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA01213 (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 20:08:12 +0100 Message-ID: <002901bff34a$df416e80$e60fbed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIIEHMCHAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Subject: Re: point of memetic saturation Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:11:19 +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
<< Thanks Chris !!
> Kenneth, FYI:
>
> At the time of answerinng these questions it points to a security seeking
> bias. Moralist perspective. Zoom-in and the emphasis includes
> preservationist/conservationist (providing the necessities of life) as
well
> as monitor-types (admin, management). You would need to answer a third
> question to resolve this i.e. do you react to things more or do you
actively
> get involved? (REACTIVE vs PROACTIVE).
<< Reactive, I don 't see the point in getting involved in something over
the long term, that is_I solve the problem now and here. What the con-
sequences are is a problem for later. But that does not mean that I am
not aware of those problems. They do bother me ! >>
> Overall the emphasis is seeing SAMENESS within DIFFERENCE and so, as I
said,
> an ASPECTUAL bias (where DIFFERENCE is the context); more social.
>
> In the bind-bound-bond-blend development pattern you are 'in' the first
two
> (answer the above question to zoom-in on that). We can expand on this a
lot,
> just answer the above question and I can give you more particular details.
>
> BTW in the recent discussion re genes, gender, and speech there is a
> fundamental difference in that for some the act of talking acts to
> socialise, to get a high off the conversation even if in detail the
> conversation is about 'nothing'. Thus you can go to meetings for hours and
> achieve nothing of 'fact' but lots of 'value'. There is not push for
> closure, issues are passed on to the next meeting!
>
> In the neocortex, the corpus callosum (CC - information highway between
the
> hemispheres) varies in size and there is a difference in size when we
> compare male to female but also heterosexual to homosexual. The emphasis
is
> on a sensitivity to feedback where the RIGHT side is more feedback
> sensitive, harmonics oriented, into exageration of boundaries. The better
> you are at this sort of expression the more likely you have a more
developed
> CC. This does NOT necessarily mean that you are female or homosexual, the
> results just show how these GROUPS do favour a sensitivity to pattern
> matching, context sensitivities and overall value. (Most of these types
are
> better in management positions since they 'live' in-between the dots, in
> social space.)
<< In that respect I would answer, I work with 20 woman !
Female enough !?
All the jokes aside, I do wish in my professional environment to show my
' feminin side ', over the years that gave me the best result in
accomplishing
things. Homosexual !? No, by all means !! >>
> I would suggest that a study of all teachers etc would come-up with the
same
> differences in CC size compared to others since they too are required to
be
> feedback sensitive to their students. The bias to females is, I would
> suggest, due to the emphasis on better pattern matching skills and context
> sensitivity (note that most primary/secondary teachers are females. Males
> only come to the fore when you get into 'fact' precision). The
entanglement
> of male/female leads to these skills breaking away from gender but still
> noticable in gender studies.
<< I don 't know if you are aware, but if you walk down the street or in
a supermarket and you overhear a conversation, can you pick out the
persons who are probably teachers !? With all your previous posts in
mind that would not give any problem. That is, in the way they act, they
act as teachers, not only in their professional lives but also in their
private
lives. But that is what you said, is it not !? >>
> The left side is concerned with EXPRESSION but the right side
> encodes/decodes rich expression in the form of metaphors etc where there
is
> a strong bias to context linkage. The more context-sensitive you are ( or
> more context-AWARE you are) I would suggest the more refined CC
development
> as well as emotional intelligence and refined use of language in that you
> have to use MANY words to identify all of the aspects of something; all of
> the nuances. Your average male is often more limited in the use of words;
> they prefer people to get to the point! :-) The male emphasis is 'point'
> oriented, the female more 'field' oriented; more group biased.
>
> AS I said, ENTANGLE these distinctions and you get closer to what we see
in
> reality (in our culture I.e. WESTERN).
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 : Fri Jul 21 2000 - 20:09:04 BST