Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA16812 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:59:23 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31017459B5@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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:56:59 +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
Well, of course, the founders of America were all puritans, a particular
kind of Christian who weren't that popular in England, and more or less got
sent away. That puritan zeal runs deep through American society, but as
others have said, I'm not sure one could classify Americans in general as
Lamarkian.
There is no doubt, also that the particular European mindset that
encountered the very different environment of North America (many of the
early settlements struggled to survive because of major differences in
climate, available food, disease etc. etc.), affected belief systems, which
rapidly diversified. A good example would be the snake-handler christian
sects- not exactly likely to gain much ground in Britain where there is only
one poisonous snake (the adder) and it's bite isn't very dangerous. There
are lots of dangerous snakes in the US, and combined with the literality
that puritans gave to the bible, those last couple of verses in Mark's
gospel (which incidentally are highly suspect as the two earliest known
versions of Mark's gospel don't contain those verses) have been taken
literally. I don't know how many people die each year handling snakes in
this way, but people do die- an anti-utlilitarian meme if ever I saw one.
Anyway, a combination of environmental change, and existing specific beliefs
undoubtedly influenced the American mindset, but the problem is that America
as yet to stabilise in terms of immigration, with many waves of diverse
groups continuing to enter the US since the 17th century efforts of the
puritan colonists. As a result, I don't really think it's possible to
ascribe to the entire USA a particular mindset, after all if they were all
Lamarkian, or creationist, there would have been no desire for the Scopes
trial (I have a large photo, from a newspaper, of Clarence Darrow taken at
the trial on my wall).
Anyway, enough for now.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Kenneth Van Oost
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 8:37 pm
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Changing threads/ American Nationalism !?
>
>
> Vincent you wrote,
>
>
> > 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?
>
> << Yes, in a sense a society has to be ready for a theory, for the
> implications
> of Darwinism or like now in Rusland, for tragic news. People, institutions
> and structures are bound to what I call ' emotional bounderies '. Memes,
> any kind,
> won 't/ can 't cross those, because other memeplexes are stronger_are hol-
> ding back new info f.e. People like in Rusland, after the disaster with
> the
> Koersk, were ' prepared ' for the sad news that all the seaman were dead.
> The believe in a miracle (a emotional bounderie) had to be crossed/
> replaced
> by another. The bounderie was broken by the Norwegian divers...
>
> But, in the case of the USA I will not say that they are not ready, the
> better
> term would be ' not evolved in to it '.
> Remerber earlier posts where I put forward my stand on Lamarckism in the
> USA. Remerber that I had a few doubts if Darwinism will be excepted in
> the USA or not.
> Well, I thought this issue further through and did came up with this.
>
> I think we have to make a division between what the religion in the USA is
> and that of Europe. IMHO, the USA is more Christian- like. Europe more
> Catholic, what in fact is a sub- division of Christianity.
> So, in the USA with their more Christian- like faith are more bound to
> moral
> convictions, devine revelation and creation, what is shown troughout
> society.
> Europe with the Catholic approach is more in agreement with antquity and
> with the consensus of distinguiched theological opinions in former
> generations.
>
> The USA uses Christianity more precise, more inclusive_faith, hope, love
> (towards men) and charity_they trust in the way of God. Men is as the
> crown
> of God 's creation, men can 't be an decendent of the apes. That is Anti-
> Darwinism.
> In Europe we loosing that notion. Only the ' true believers' are still
> like
> that!
> The USA places Christianity above it all, they use it as a goal.
> In Europe it is more a principle, we are working with it. We bring
> Christian
> principles to the particular environments of which people are part.
> In Europe we use Christianity as in the formula_ " what all men have at
> all
> times and everywhere believed must be regarded as true ". That is more a
> sense of orthodox.
> We use it in the development of a wholesome and beneficent social action.
> In the USA it is more a doctrine.
> That is why I think the USA is more Lamarck orientated and Europe more
> Darwinian.
>
> But how in the first place is that possible !?
> Americans, are and were European immigrants, and IMHO there lies the key
> for this puzzle.
> If we take the issue in the context as written as above, a strange effects
> comes
> forward_somehow the first immigrants had to change from Catholics into
> USA-Christians (exuse me for that term). How and why, it is still the same
> believe, though !? As seen as above, no, there is a difference and just
> that
> difference is the explanation.
>
> I suppose when the first immigrants set foot on the American shore, that
> the
> land was wild, inhospitable, strange and full with strange creatures which
> we
> call now Indians. In order to overcome those problems, to set up a new
> society the application of rules was necessary, but then and only in the
> strict way. And with the notion that most of the immigrants were poor
> people,
> the prospect of a new country gave them hope. And just that is one of
> the cornerstones of Christianity, HOPE !!
> And those people, already believing the Christian doctrine, were open to
> the
> reasons given to them by the priests_work hard, believe, give love, never
> give up hope and salvation will come.
>
> In a sense Darwinism had never really a chance in the USA that due to the
> fact that the land was already ' evolved ' into its own seperate doctrine
> which
> we see now back in political thought_that is the moral convictions.
> Look what happened to Clinton, it was not the fact that he and Monica had
> something going on, but the fact that the deed was immoral played the
> major
> part in the issue. See what Joseph Lieberman had to say about that...
> I don 't think such an issue is possible in Europe. Blair, Kohl or
> Mitterand
> for that manner may have affairs, but to expose them on TV with the fact,
> well...
>
> The term ' not evolved in to it ' is a result of the absence of an archaic
> period
> in the history of the USA, there were no (neo) feudal or patriarchal forms
> wherein Catholism could ' evolve ' into some form of Christianity, that
> is
> the Church of England, Lutheranism, Reformism and/ or Free Churches.
> Darwinism was rapidly dismissed because it was not sound with the
> adoration
> of the glory of GOD which was felt by the new Americans, that as a result
> of their struggle to stay alive.
>
> Another possibility, but a very strange one, could be that the first
> immigrants,
> by some daft luck or a special selective thread of nature were all '
> special ',
> that is, they apostated Christianity due to the fact that the position
> they
> were
> in, in Europe was ' hopeless '...some memetic lineage pulled them over...
>
> 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 : Wed Aug 23 2000 - 13:00:25 BST