Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA05781 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:07:51 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31017459AB@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Changing threads/ American Nationalism !? Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:05:23 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
In a way are you saying that, perhaps a society has to be "ready" for a
theory, and (parts of) the USA simply aren't quite ready for the
implications of Darwinism?
On your last point, the caste system has worked because of one of the great
truth-tricks of religions- that your life after this one will be better.
For those in the lowest caste, in a perverse sense, they have the most to
look forward to- in future lives that is- but only if they play the role
intended for them by the caste system. Howard Bloom talks about the caste
system in this kind of way in his 'The Lucifer Principle' (as he does about
most religions, which for me is part his book's appeal).
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Kenneth Van Oost
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 8:11 pm
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Changing threads/ American Nationalism !?
>
>
>
> Vincent wrote what I said,
> > You said-
> >
> > > > If we all suppose Darwin was right, and we gave him all the regards
> that
> > > > goes with it_and on the other hand half of the worlds population
> thinks
> > he
> > > > got it all wrong,...where is the benefit of Darwinism then !?
> > > > There is some contradiction somewhere, no !?
> >
> > Adding to Derek's point, Darwinism is also useful in retrodiction-
> offering
> > the most satisfactory theory so far as to the origin of species. No
> theory
> > before Darwin's could plausibly explain dinosaurs, for example, (bit of
> a
> > guess here, as I've no idea if Lamarck had anything to say about
> dinosaurs),
> > and certainly the judeo-christian-muslim creation stories could not, and
> > cannot account for them (oh, wait a minute, don't they claim they now
> claim
> > they were all killed in the great flood? yeah well...).
>
> Adding to both your posts,
>
> << That is just the point I wish to make, you can 't explain dinosaurs to
> the half
> of the worlds population because they don 't buy Darwins story !!
> And like I see it, in America it is worse than where ever, due to the fact
> that
> their political belief (and that is one of the major players in exepting
> or
> not
> of a theory) is impressed on the one hand by the Creatonist believe and on
> the other hand by Reform Lamarckism !!
> I don 't see how in that environment Darwinism can get to any practical
> bene-
> fit...!!
> See below, you mention the reasons why.
> In addition to that, the reason why Creatonists will have a go, once again
> at
> Darwinism, now that is called Reform Lamarckism, is that a religion uprise
> will cause a decline in moral abuse. A religion uprise would be better for
> the
> society, because it would mean lesser poverty, lesser crime etc...
> The struggle in America would be IMHO of great importance for the further
> acceptance of Darwinism throughout the rest of the world.
> If Darwinian scientist would fail, I think of the worst scenario
> possible...
>
> > Half the world may reject it as a theory because it undermines their
> > existing belief-systems- or at least it does if they are fundamentalist
> > believers in their religious texts. Much the same thing happened with
> the
> > Copernican world system, which many people worked out was more accurate
> than
> > the Ptolemaic system, but so much was at stake in this that lives were
> > literally on the line over accepting/refuting this view (most obviously
> in
> > Galileo's case where the Vatican priests refused to see what was evident
> > through the telescope- or many indeed have simply been unable to see
> because
> > their world-view wouldn't allow it), and it took many, many years to
> become
> > accepted.
>
> > As to your point about key people/moments in nation's sense of identity,
> > well yes I think that's a factor. The problem with the A-bombs in
> Japan,
> > however, is that the survivors (I believe they're called hibakusha)
> although
> > able to get on with their lives have always been regarded rather as
> pariahs
> > in Japan (a bit like Vietnam vets in the USA)- perhaps because they are
> > living reminders of defeat. with any defining moment, there will be
> groups
> > of people excluded,
>
> Just in addition, again a program on BBC world this week, Life
> Untouchable,
> about the lower caste in Indian society...I can understand the philosophy
> behind why parents/ people are reduced to nothing, but the children born
> in
> their mids...that is something what escapes me, though !!
> Talking about pariahs, brrr...
>
> 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 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 Aug 18 2000 - 12:09:18 BST