Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA11497 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 12 Sep 2000 15:09:11 +0100 Message-ID: <000b01c01cc7$0c0e3060$6603bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <LJayson@aol.com> Cc: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <8e.a64cd16.26ef1278@aol.com> Subject: Re: Article, A Solipsistic View On Memetics - Part 4 Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:37:16 +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
Good day to you too, Len.
Subject: Article, A Solipsistic View On Memetics - Part 4
> What IMHO have to be solved are mainly two things, A_ the problem of the
> other minds/ humanoid objects and B_ what is the knowledge in casu, what
are the memes originating from out those minds !?
Please tell me what does IHMO stand for?
<< In My Humble Opinion
I could not find "casu" in the M-W Dictionary?
<< it means, in the present case.
> Len:
> You don't know what specific memeplexes exist in other minds but you can,
> with reasonable certainty, believe that various and sundry memeplexes
> are present in all brains.
<< Just in addition here, one of the problems I have with f.e ideologies is
that they can inflict pain, terror and famine upon people, but on the other
hand
they have difficulties controlling people's mind for the 100%.
There is IMHO always, a blank spot left how to where and how people get
caught up in such beliefs. There is always, and there has to be, always a
part
of individuality left...conscient or unconscient.>>
> Len:
> The human brain has not internalized all of the materialistic things in
the
> environment; it contains no more than meme bits and pieces---at
> various levels of awareness and understanding. Our concept of others
> will depend on one's mental meme gestalt. A physician, a priest,
> a child, serial killer, a female, a male, and so on---each one will see
> others in terms of their own preconceived memeplexes.
<< Len, you have to think here solipsistictly. If you do that, the only
possible
conclusion is than that indeed all of the materialistic things are
internalized
by my brain_who 's brain would do the internalizing if the only mind
existing
is mine ?
> The logical way, somehow, is to pre- suppose the existence of a number
> infinite solipsistic memeplexes which each in their direction, form,
concept, relation,etc...are part of mine individual personal and unique
memory storage tank.
> Len:
> Do you think that my memeplex has the same direction, form, concept,
> relation as the memeplex of a Brazilian native living in a primitive tribe
> far removed from modern civilization?
<< No, I think you misinterpretated what I am saying here.
I mean by this that all memeplexes did came in existence (f.e ex- hypothesi)
and
that each of them in their own direction, form, concept, relation,...do have
their own memetic lineage which is than a part of mine individual personal
and unique memory storage tank whereout my brain gets the info acquired
in order to shape an accurate picture of my reality.
Your memeplex and that of your Brazilian native friend are no more than
such memetic lineages. You and him are part of my reality, that is you and
him are primary info.
In the case of your specific memeplex, no there is a great difference
between
you and your Brazilian friend, due to the fact f.e environmental
circumstances,
but for that matter we all are !
Your friend and me are becoming then no more than neural images in your
brain.>>
> Len:
> Whether or not it becomes part of our reality, do we have a choice?
<< No, we are to deep intangled with the others !!>>
> This is given the nature of memes not possible_ memes has no ' forsight
',
> they can 't work independly from a brain. ( Experiments show however that
> such conclusions should not be taken for granted )
>
> Len:
> I appreciate this comment immensely. One of my problems with Blackmore
> is that she somehow gives memes 'a life of their own' ---it is our human
> brains that power the memes based on our minds' receptivitiy.'
<< At first sight, indeed so. But, once again, see it from the
solipsistic-meme-
eye- view_memes have to have ' a life of their own ', they only use our
brain
to propagate themselves. No one will argue against the notion that memes
created brains to get around better and faster.
If, like Susan Greenfield ( Brain Story) shows, that the motor cortex in a
brain was 2000 miiliseconds active before a decision was made_what ever the
memes are/ were which were involved in such a process, you give them
' life '. How we ever will define this, that is open to discussion.>>
> Len:
> Do you think that we need others to create our own sense of reality?
> Won't a young boy growing up in the jungle, without other humans,
> create his own special reality?
<< No,we do not need others to create our own reality? that is one of my
major interests. Memetic engineering, self- building via memes concepts,
individuality etc...
And yes, we can create our own special reality, see at autism and aphasia,
but
also in cases like Tarzan, Narcism and depressed children.
See about that previous posts from me to Lawrence de Bivort.>>
===============================================================
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 : Tue Sep 12 2000 - 15:10:17 BST