Re: memetics and knowledge

From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Tue Sep 19 2000 - 04:33:47 BST

  • Next message: Joe E. Dees: "Re: memetics and knowledge"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA04506 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 19 Sep 2000 04:32:35 +0100
    Message-Id: <200009190330.XAA21599@mail0.lig.bellsouth.net>
    From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 22:33:47 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: memetics and knowledge
    In-reply-to: <20000918115912.A1617@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <200009172009.QAA03567@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 03:10:51PM -0500
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Date sent: 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
    Send 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!
    >
    Actually, when people first hear the multiplication tables, they have
    trouble with them; it takes a bit of practice and attention to 'get
    them down', just as riding a bike takes a while before one masters
    balance. However, in both cases, once it is routinized, the skill
    becomes automatic, requiring practically no conscious attention to
    exercise.

    The sequence by which new information becomes routinized to the
    point of being second nature (how one gains expertize and
    becomes an expert) is outlined in MIND OVER MACHINE: THE
    POWER OF HUMAN INTUITION AND EXPERTIZE IN THE ERA
    OF THE COMPUTER by Dreyfus & Dreyfus. The stages are the
    same regardless of the skill being mastered, be it mathematical,
    verbal or somatic.
    > --
    > 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 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 : Tue Sep 19 2000 - 04:33:48 BST