Fw: Article, A Solipsistic View on Memetics - Part 1

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Mon Sep 11 2000 - 19:01:40 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Article, A Solipsistic View On memetics - Part 3"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id SAA08489 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:33:34 +0100
    Message-ID: <001e01c01c1a$6df257a0$1a09bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: Fw: Article, A Solipsistic View on Memetics - Part 1
    Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:01:40 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
    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
    

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Kenneth Van Oost <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <LJayson@aol.com>
    Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 6:25 PM
    Subject: Re: Article, A Solipsistic View on Memetics - Part 1

    >
    > Len, thanks for the remarks. I will take them into account. Your
    suggestions
    > will certainly be helpful. But I have a few remarks of my own, if you don
    't
    > mind_ this is a discussion list after all !!
    >
    > > Hi Kenneth,
    > > I am new to the listgroup. I've been studying memetics for
    > > only a few months. The extent of my reading is Blackmore,
    > > Dawkins, Dennett, Brodie and some of the archives.
    >
    > Part 1
    > >
    > > We all do understand memes to represent units of information passed on
    > in
    > > some form of communication between two or more organisms/ brains.
    > > We comprehend memes as intentions, fears, emotions, beliefs,
    > suppositions,
    > > aspirations,...as they are found in language, ideologies, theories and
    > > religions.
    > > We do also understand that a Self, that I reflects those memes.
    > >
    > > Len:
    > > Perhaps the last sentence could be expressed more clearly.
    >
    > << No problem, I will work on that.>>
    > Is that is the case then ' my
    > > '
    > > memes will strive and succeed where others fail, and that Self(plex)
    of
    > > mine
    > > will grow. ( Idit Susan Blackmore/ Memes, Myself and I)
    > >
    > > Len:
    > > It may be better to say "my memes may strive and succeed", etc
    > > There is really no way of being certain.
    >
    > << Will, is here unvoluntary used ( now I see it) in the solipsistic way.
    > I am the only mind existing remerber !
    > But ok, it is confusing and in the sense for the article " may " is
    better.
    > I still doubt if I will ever use " will " or " may "...>>
    >
    > > Len comments:
    > > crystal not cristal
    >
    > << You will see that a lot, my native language is Dutch, my English is be-
    > coming better, but faults are inevitable...>>
    > >
    > >
    > > If memes, as we established are selfish (they show no mercy) and they
    > > created the world in the way as we know it today ( including the first
    > memes
    > > for the very first genes) haven ' t they then not created the world
    in
    > a
    > > solip-
    > > sistic way !?
    > > After all, are they then not egoistic, in some sense moral self-
    > interested
    > > primary in their doing and being !?
    > > Memes act in such a way, so what is the point !?
    >
    > >
    > > Do memes really replace any genes? Don't memes and genes coexist?
    >
    > << Memes and genes coexist now ! Back in the early years there were only
    > memes, like I side they could originate from something like morphogenetic
    > fields. The argument that memes existed before genes is not mine, a member
    > have put that idea on the list, can 't remerber who it was. But I do
    recall
    > that
    > there was no discussion about that. Maybe now ?
    > Memes replacing genes ? Hm, don 't think so, did I write this, where and
    > how ? Memes influencing genes, yes and moreover I think more than we
    > realise. Memes are in my opinion in some extend " reactions " on changes
    > in the environment where we live in. Genes are to slow...>>
    >
    > > By the way, what does solipsistic mean? I could not find it in the
    > > M-W dictionary.
    >
    > << Solipsistic, it would be better to put it between question marks, I
    sup-
    > pose. It means being part of the world of solipsism. If I understand you
    > correctly there is no adjective for solipsism ?>>
    >
    > The reality out there is (partly) an optional extra. What counts is
    > what
    > > is happening inside the brain and what happens there in complety
    > personal.
    > > In a sense the brain secretes its own private ' reality ' wherein '
    > me
    > > ', who
    > > experiences this ' reality ' is somewhat a convergepoint/ a host
    > whereby
    > > info/ memes are/ is perceived, gets transformed and is/ are send '
    back
    > > out ' again.
    > >
    > > I would not downplay the reality out there as no more than an optional
    > extra.
    >
    > << Reality as an optional extra is in the context of this article well put
    I
    > think.
    > In the case of one " solipsistic " mind the outside world is primary -
    info.
    > It is there to help the mind in order to re-construct my innerworld.
    >
    > > It is certainly as essential to the human mind as any genetic
    > underpinnings.
    >
    > << Certainly it does for " normal " minds, not in the case of a "
    > solipsistic-
    > one ", its uses the outside world as a storage- tank.
    > > In terms of memetic science, how would you define 'imagination?'
    >
    > << Hm, imagination...yes indeed, in our used definitions it seems unclear
    to
    > use it. Well put ! I have to refine the matter further but I think
    > imagination in
    > memetic terms would be " ' making' up new neural connections between al-
    > ready existing ( memorised) info " >>
    > > Instead of 'imagination' could you say, 'extraneous memes'?
    >
    > << In a sense you could say that. Imagination would be like lining up meme
    > (plexes) in a particular order conjucted with a new set of memes. The
    result
    > would be not only a new memeplex (that too) but more important a ( new)
    > idea. Ideas would be somewhat the result of relining our thoughts_proces-
    > sing new neural connections between already existing info.
    > But I am working on an article regarding the difference between an idea
    > and a meme...but that is not what you asked for, I think...
    > > >
    > > Kenneth, I like your article a great deal because it says so much
    > > about the unique qualities of each human brain which then combine
    > > with memetic intake in countless ways.
    >
    > << Thanks, I am trying to make sense...
    >
    > > Hope my comments have helped.
    > << Certainly ! Don 't wait with the rest...
    >
    > 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 : Mon Sep 11 2000 - 18:34:39 BST