Re: solipsistic view on memetics

From: Chris Lees (chrislees@easynet.co.uk)
Date: Wed Sep 13 2000 - 05:01:36 BST

  • Next message: Joe E. Dees: "Re: solipsistic view on memetics"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id FAA13190 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 13 Sep 2000 05:04:17 +0100
    Message-Id: <f04310100b5e4a0574651@[194.154.110.185]>
    In-Reply-To: <200009122140.RAA24133@mail5.lig.bellsouth.net>
    References: <200009120010.UAA25232@mail6.lig.bellsouth.net> <200009122140.RAA24133@mail5.lig.bellsouth.net>
    Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 05:01:36 +0100
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    From: Chris Lees <chrislees@easynet.co.uk>
    Subject: Re: solipsistic view on memetics
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Joe wrote :

    >No, it was "Wu!",

    I don't think it matters very much, but I think it was/is Mu in Japanese,
    Wu in Chinese, yes ?...meaning, I believe, literally 'nothing', but with
    a more technical or special meaning in this particular context. (As in
    Joshu's 'Has a dog a buddhanature ?' )

    > which is more than a negative answer, it is a
    >rejection of the question. That's like invoking God or different
    >dimensions to foreclose further questioning; a mystical and anti-
    >intellectual response, indeed.

    Hmm. This is a bit tricky. I agree on "more than a negative answer",
    but not that it is "a rejection of the question". It's more like saying
    'neither positive or negative', in the sense that to progress insight
    it is nescessary to move from that simple binary opposed pair.
    I see Mu! is an injunction, a clue, a pointer to look elsewhere.

    I see what you mean (I hope) by saying it is "like invoking God or
    different dimensions" or a some other non-empirical principle.
    That's true, but only at the level of this verbal intellectual debate. I wrote
    because stimulated by your "if selves didn't exist, what could possibly
    be there to be deluded ?" which is a magnificent, powerful and
    fundamental question. In my view, Mu! or similar koans are not
    nescessarily 'anti-intellectual' (in the sense of being against rational
    thought or scholarship ) rather that there is recognition by a questing
    intellect that when we hit such tough questions on the ultimate nature of
    our reality or being, the intellect, as a tool, can go no further, whilst
    direct experience in meditation can go further, and it is from such
    a position, a position outside or beyond conventional verbal speculation
    or rational analysis that the Mu! answer can be found, as a practical
    project. I don't think this is at all 'anti-intellectual', nescessarily.
    It's just an approach which has been found to provide an answer to
    those who are insistent upon pursuit of that question, ' what is there
    to be deluded ? ' Or what is there to be Enlightened ? for that matter.

    C.L.

    ===============================================================
    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 Sep 13 2000 - 05:05:21 BST