Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA00775 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:18:15 +0100 From: "Richard Brodie" <richard@brodietech.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: mysticism etc Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 08:15:21 -0700 Message-ID: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJAEONFGAA.richard@brodietech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745A45@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Importance: Normal Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Vincent,
You have put your finger on exactly the assumption that distinguishes the
rational empiricist from people with other mindsets. You take it on faith
that the only ideas worth harboring are those that can be tested
successfully against reality. It's not that that's wrong, but for a large
number of people that is simply not a distinction they are interested in. I
do not believe your assertion that some day people will need to walk without
a crutch holds up under scrutiny. People lead very successful lives without
knowing much at all about science. In fact I bet most people would say that
religion is more important than science to the individual interested in
living a successful and fulfilling life.
Many ideas have nothing to do with analyzing the existing world but rather
with creating a future that pleases us. "Goodwill" is an attitude. In a
place where very little goodwill exists, injecting the delusion of it can
bring about positive change. Likewise for a simple person the idea of a
reward for good behavior in the afterlife may be just the metaphor that
launches him or her on a fulfilling life versus a depressive nihilistic one.
Remember, higher animals live their entire lives without knowing one thing
about science. It's clearly not necessary to survive. Some people like
learning about it and some don't. It's rather presumptuous to put forth that
scientific ideas are inherently better than religious, artistic, or literary
ones. Who is to say that the nuclear physics that produced atomic weapons is
an inherently better set of ideas than the "unalienable rights" that spawned
democracy?
Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com www.liontales.com
-----Original Message-----
From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf Of
Vincent Campbell
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 7:02 AM
To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
Subject: RE: mysticism etc
I realise Robin is bowing out on this, there's one point here I just wanted
to respond to, and I'm not expecting a response from Robin, I just wanted to
put this out there. It contains a few rhetorical questions.
>The question is: what's it a metaphor for? All ideas are "just"
ideas,
>and that includes rationality, objectivity, reality, etc. But some
>ideas are more important than others because of what they stand
for.
(...)
> Psychology is
>what it's ALL about. It's just a pity neither the fundamentalists
nor
>the atheists can appreciate that. Both take it all too literally.
Of course all ideas are "just" ideas, but how we differentiate in terms of
the value of what ideas stand for? With a subjective stance, you end up
with relativism- if it works for you, then its legitimate, but as has been
argued here and elsewhere, relativism is a wholly unsatisfactory position to
end up in. What gives ideas value in my book is not so much what they stand
for but whether their utility, and thus their value can be empirically
demonstrated. After all, if two people have conflicting beliefs that
impinge on each other, how does one resolve that potential conflict in a
fair manner?
Psychology is vitally important in understanding people's beliefs and
behaviours, but anti-rational beliefs and practices I truly feel encourage
people to be delusional: They encourage people to avoid the material
reality around them in a whole host of different ways, such as denying the
existence of that material reality or describing it as merely a stage in
existence to be followed by something a lot better etc. etc., and I
definitely feel that's wrong. A crutch is still a crutch, even if it does
make people feel better, some day people are going to have to walk unaided,
or something/someone will come along to kick that crutch away.
Anyway, this hasn't got very much to do with memetics, so I promise to
reserve my next post for something meme-oriented!
Vincent
===============================================================
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 : Mon Sep 25 2000 - 16:19:37 BST