Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA03187 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:31:49 +0100 Message-ID: <000901c00831$df924a20$2b00bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF230040EF3@DELTA> Subject: Re: Changing threads/ American Nationalism !? Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 11:59:03 +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
> Derek:
> Are you saying that most scientists in the USA are creationists? I don't
> think that is the case.
Kenneth,
<< No no, I don 't say that !! And I agree on the fact that most are
Darwinians,but I wish to point out that with the Lamarckian stance against
Darwinian belief in the USA that scientist have to be, in some way '
Lamarc-
kian ' in order to get there funds...that is to be political correct they
have to be
' Lamarckian '. If is that not the case, I am simply wrong ! No harm done !!
> Kenneth:
> IMHO, the practical benefit is made in those aereas where
> Darwinists call the shots. But be aware, if the strong lobby of creation-
> be-
> lievers gets it way, that will be gone.
Derek,
> There is no chance whatsoever that a religious lobby
> could somehow stop the teaching of Darwinian thought. It's just too
crucial
> to capitalism nowadays.
<< True, but you gonna have in some extent a division in the society due to
the fact, like in Tennessee a religious lobby gets its way. I don 't think
that a
kid raised in those conditions can or would work, for that manner, into the
bio- industry or is willing to make cars. That due to the fact that his/
hers mind is than full of memes which are in the ' outside world ' not
approiate.
In the other way round, noone in the bio or car industry will/ can accept a
kid
who not familiar with capitalism and its perversities. And migrate to Canada
seems to be a solid solution but again, like in tennessee, a kid of fourteen
is
not allowed to migrate to Canada in order to escape religious contaigon, I
suppose. That would be just the argument that those groups need to show
the rest of the country that there is something wrong with the youth of
today.
> So, although I share to some extent your fears about the future of the
> teching of evolution in the USA, I don't think there is any serious threat
> globally.
<< What about the election coming up in November !? Bush and his party are
employing great efforts to make the family the cornerstone of society once
again, just the item which religion groups use to convince local politicians
to condemn Darwinian insights. It comes down to morality and that is I think
not
one of the major backbones of Darwinism, is it not !? The fittist, the
better and
the best, the most beautiful, we got the money, capitalism...!? >>
> Derek:
> I don't understand, how can Lamarckism be 'closer to the truth'?
<< I mean by that, that the political thought in America is more Lamarckian
orientated. That is a political subject will always be set closer to
Lamarckian
thought then to Darwinian. >>
>
> Kenneth:
> I now exactly where the benefits of Darwinism are, but how will you ever
> convince American scientist of the same fact, if Lamarckism is one of the
> cornerstones of their scientific thought !?
>
> Derek:
> But is it? I mean can you name a modern neo-Lamarckian working in the
USA?
> I can't. The only neo-Lamarckian I can think of is Robert Steele, and
he's
> an Aussie. (I could mention Brian Goodwin, or Mae-Wan Ho, but they might
> not thank me for the label neo-Lamarckian, and in any case they're both
> based in the UK, and Goodwin is English).
<< So, if I do understand you correctly, in America there are a few streams
working side by side. Lamarckian and Darwinian, but on the other hand you
get a few streams in the society where Lamarckian and Darwinan thought are
seperated, like in politics. So, my conclusion is that scientist are working
against
the political thought of their governement, and on the other hand the
American
governement allows that due to economical benefits of the research done by
those scientist !? >>
Derek, I go away for a few days, we will continue this next week, if you
please.
In the meantime, send in your post, I will pick it up !!
Thanks,
Many 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 Aug 17 2000 - 10:32:45 BST