Re: Purported mystical "knowledge"

From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Sun Sep 17 2000 - 04:24:35 BST

  • Next message: Joe E. Dees: "First Appearances"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA27799 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 17 Sep 2000 04:22:31 +0100
    Message-Id: <200009170320.XAA03195@mail0.lig.bellsouth.net>
    From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 22:24:35 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Purported mystical "knowledge"
    In-reply-to: <39C436D2.2606B8B5@fcol.com>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Date sent: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 23:13:23 -0400
    From: "Robert (Bob) Grimes" <grimes@fcol.com>
    Organization: Grimes & Grimes Consulting
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Purported mystical "knowledge"
    Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    > Lloyd,
    >
    > I have no problem with what I think you mean as I do believe that our
    > concepts of "reality" are abstractions as are all of our senses. Thus,
    > we do not "know" reality and cannot "know" reality as long as our
    > perceptions are determined by our sensory systems. We can augment our
    > perceptions through enlargement (magnification) and other things but we
    > are still "filtering" everything we receive and if our sensory organs do
    > not respond or respond incorrectly as to the total stimulus we do not
    > perceive "reality" even though it is certainly "reality" as far as we
    > are concerned.
    >
    We perceive part of reality through our senses, and reality must be
    so that when it interfaces with our perceptual systems, our
    perceptions result. In other words, the whole cannot contradict the
    part.
    >
    > Our memetic responses are governed by the same limitations although they
    > certainly may have a great influence on our perceptions. If we cannot
    > hear subsonic or hypersonic sounds we can make equipment that indicates
    > that there is such activity but we cannot be "sure" that what we are
    > perceiving through our equipment "sounds" like what is "really" going
    > on. Nor can we be sure that we are controlling our responses which may
    > be determined by autonomic responses at a lower level that determine one
    > or both of what we are perceiving and our responses to such "filtered"
    > responses.
    >
    Memetics, the realm of meaning rathr than being, is constituted not
    within matter/energy simpliciter, but within the patterns into which
    matter/energy are configured, and the information that these
    configurations symbolize and communicate by means of mutually
    agreed meanings encoded in common symbol systems
    (hermeneutic rather than existential).
    >
    > Is that what you where asking me?
    >
    > Cordially,
    >
    > Bob
    >
    > --
    > Bob Grimes
    >
    > Jacksonville, Florida
    >
    > http://members.aol.com/bob5266/
    > http://pages.hotbot.com/edu/bobinjax/
    > http://www.phonefree.com/Scripts/cgiParse.exe?sID=28788
    >
    > Bob5266@aol.com robert.grimes@excite.com
    > bobinjax@hotbot.com Bobgrimes@zdnetmail.com
    >
    > Man is not in control, but the man who knows he is not in control is
    > more in control...
    >
    > Quoth the Raven, "Nevermore....."
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    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 : Sun Sep 17 2000 - 04:23:39 BST