Re: memetics and knowledge

From: Robin Faichney (robin@reborntechnology.co.uk)
Date: Mon Sep 18 2000 - 11:59:12 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: solipsistic view on memetics"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA02213 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 18 Sep 2000 12:04:20 +0100
    Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 11:59:12 +0100
    From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: memetics and knowledge
    Message-ID: <20000918115912.A1617@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <200009162002.QAA18143@mail3.lig.bellsouth.net>; <20000917140026.A2429@reborntechnology.co.uk> <200009172009.QAA03567@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i
    In-Reply-To: <200009172009.QAA03567@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 03:10:51PM -0500
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 03:10:51PM -0500, Joe E. Dees wrote:
    > >
    > One can completely communicate the multiplication tables, but it
    > would still take practice to commit it to memory, just like riding a
    > bicycle.

    In your "How to Ride A Bike", you didn't explain the most important,
    and most difficult aspect: how to maintain one's balance. Noone ever
    told me that, either, and I doubt very much whether many bike riders ever
    had it explained to them. Even if they did, they'd need practice before
    they could do it effectively, but that's NOT because it needs committing
    to memory -- it is basically very simple: just steer in the direction
    towards which you find yourself leaning -- unlike the multiplication
    tables, so simple that it can easily be memorised on first being heard.
    What's actually required here is the motor skill of doing that, to
    the correct degree, automatically. If it's not automatic, it's not
    fast enough -- like juggling, the conscious mind just isn't up to
    it, and until the unconscious mind "gets" it, it can't be done.

    I'd suggest that people who "teach" bike riding usually don't bother
    to communicate that just because the automation of it is so important,
    that conscious knowledge of it is little or no help. In fact, it wasn't
    until I'd been happily riding to and from school every day for years that
    I realised what I was doing to maintain my balance. And I think I only
    realised it then, because someone told me, or I read it somewhere.

    The key word here is "skill". Now, we can argue about whether skills and
    knowledge are overlapping or disjoint sets, but that's just semantics,
    isn't it? And I'm not wedded to "mystical knowledge", anyway -- "mystical
    skill" works just as well for me. But the point is, what's central to
    both bike riding and mysticism can't be communicated directly, for the
    same reason -- and in neither case -- despite mysticism's reputation
    among those ignorant of it -- is it some special secret.

    Maybe I should say, I do understand that the common "mysticism" meme
    has thoroughly innoculated people against the concepts associated
    with the technical meaning of the word, and I sympathise. It's like
    "intentionality" -- the common usage tends to obscure the technical
    meaning even among those whom you'd think really should know better --
    but that's the power of the meme!

    -- 
    Robin Faichney
    

    =============================================================== 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 : Mon Sep 18 2000 - 12:05:37 BST