Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA21432 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:44:09 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745A1A@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: The problem with the belief that one is enlightened Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:41:38 +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
To give a good example of what Joe's talking about here-
Michael Shermer's book 'Why People Believe Weird Things' (very good book,
awful title), has a chapter on the Ayn Rand cult, which looks at this
problem of scientism.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Joe E. Dees
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 11:24 pm
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: The problem with the belief that one is enlightened
>
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Date sent: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 15:00:00 -0700
> From: "Scott Chase" <hemidactylus@my-Deja.com>
> Subject: Re: The problem with the belief that one is
> enlightened
> Organization: My Deja Email (http://www.my-deja.com:80)
> Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
> >
> > --
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 00:25:27 Joe E. Dees wrote:
> > > The problem with the belief that one is enlightened, i.e. that
> one
> > >understands all, or at least the basic underpinnings of all, at the
> > >fundamental level, is that such people tend to become
> > >impermeable to subsequent learning by virtue of their erroneous
> > >belief that they already know or understand it all. It is an excellent
>
> > >defensive memeplex device, as it acts to foreclose the possibility
> > >that the "enlightened one" will seriously consider facts or
> > >perspectives that might invalidate or obviate their present grok-level,
>
> > >or even indeed offer the possibility that it might benefit from
> > >evolutionary elaboration in the light of subsequently discovered
> > >facts or refined understandings. If you already think that you know
> > >or understand it all, the attempt to learn more becomes a useless
> > >exercise.
> > >
> > This could be a critique which cuts both ways, both against mysticism
> and against science. What happens when a healthy respect for a scientific
> perspective becomes elevated into the realm of scientism? Critical views
> yield to crystallization and the possibility of stagnation into dogma.
> What
> awakens one from their dogmatic slumber? Will they actively search for the
> elixir?
> >
> > Or what happens when followers of a certain scientific perspective
> apotheosize their favorite author(s) into an exalted and uncriticizable
> position as the all-knowing one(s)? Or on another possible vector what
> happens when schisms develop over how the sacred texts shall be
> interpreted?;-)
> >
> In such cases, people are betraying the principles of scientific
> inquiry (for instance, the verification principle and popperian
> falsifiability) by approaching such an inquiry's (forever provisional
> and subject to falsification, elaboration and/or modification)
> products in an absolutistically religious way, as Received Gospel
> or Holy Writ. Any topic or position can be attitudinally enshrined
> this way; it is the attitude that is at fault - the system to which it is
> applied may or may not be meaningless or erroneous or useful and
> veridical.
> >
> > Yes, this is partly in jest, but there's a kernel of truth in there
> somewhere. Darwiniana and Dawkins-mania do abound.
> >
> One should indeed maintain critical distance and avoid
> acolytehood. It is regrettably common for all kinds of people,
> religious or not, to be made into other peoples' gurus and placed
> upon pedestals by them, even when the candidate gurus would not
> wish same.
> >
> > >BTW, Dawkins coined the word 'meme'; does anyone know who
> > >coined the word 'memeplex'?
> > >
> > >
> > I'm still stuck back at the previous fin de siecle and on the mneme.
> I'll need to catch up with the times a little.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
> > Before you buy.
> >
> > ===============================================================
> > 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 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 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 11:45:17 BST