Re: solipsistic view on memetics

From: Douglas Brooker (dbrooker@clara.co.uk)
Date: Wed Sep 13 2000 - 21:12:14 BST

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

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA15810 (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 21:21:52 +0100
    Message-ID: <39BFDF9E.A5A2C363@clara.co.uk>
    Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 21:12:14 +0100
    From: Douglas Brooker <dbrooker@clara.co.uk>
    Organization: University of London
    X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
    X-Accept-Language: en
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: solipsistic view on memetics
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745A06@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    A few comments stimulated by your observations

    Vincent Campbell wrote:

    > Do you put the term intellectual in quote marks only in relation to the
    > western tradition, and if so why?

    Well, no it wasn't intended to suggest that, only that what might in some
    theoretical consensus be classified as 'intellectual' is a little tip of an ice
    berg founded on really embedded (and very emotion-based) cultural assumptions.
    My interest is how the relationship of self to collective varies from society to
    society and determines the kinds of questions we permit ourselves to ask in
    certain (intellectual) situations. The derogatory use of the term 'mystical'
    in 'intellectual' circles just serves to establish a them-us relationship
    between two equally imprecise categories of ideas. What is compelling about
    some aspects of memetics is that it appears to formulate a theoretical structure
    for the dynamic of collective thought which is lacking in societies whose
    language structure reflects a strong bias towards individual-specific
    discourse. (Waiting for the Freud of the collective mind to appear). The cross
    fertilisation between 'mystic' ideas (not 'mystic charlatans') seems similar to
    physics-'mystic' cross fertilisation that has occurred in recent years.

    > I assume you're implying

    Am trying not to have too much personal baggage, or at least to be able to
    identify it and consider the ways in which its invisible hand creates
    conclusions about ideas or situations that do not require conclusions. This is
    an interesting thought process, -'assuming someone is implying' but I don't know
    what to say about it.

    > What I find very interesting is the way that so many westerners who reject
    > the intellectual traditions of the west in favour of the east- even when
    > they have been to the east (often glowing about its virtues beyond anything
    > the west can offer)- tend to ignore the major holes in eastern practices
    > that they can't quite get their heads round.

    This is a universal urge of collective identity whether one is embracing
    (defending) or rejecting one's birth group or groups.

    > Now let me see if I can think of an example.... oh yes how about the caste
    > system? What a wonderful way to treat people (over 100 million are
    > untouchables in India today was the last figure I saw) and entirely
    > substantiated and justified by eastern religious traditions.

    There is not much conceptual difference between the Hindu caste system and
    Western social hierarchies or even other non-Hindi hierarchies in India,
    Bangladesh or Pakistan.

    > The reasons 'mystic' has such poor connotations are very good ones

    My interest is more anthropological - the emotional connotations collective
    thought imputes to alien ideas to confer this evil virus status upon them.

    > - mystics gain their status and power from taking advantage of, and
    > maintaining, human
    > ignorance and humans' psychological and emotional weaknesses. They make a
    > mockery of cause and effect, bleed money by the sackload from people all
    > over the world, and in many regards can be very simply demonstrated to be
    > either completely wrong or deliberately faking it.

    This could equally be applied to commodity mysticism (a la Guy Debord), a kind
    of 'cargo cult' well on the way to becoming the universal religion.

    ===============================================================
    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 - 21:22:57 BST