Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA00361 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:18:33 +0100 From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: the conscious universe: subjectivity/objectivity of beliefs Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:54:15 +1000 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIAELBCJAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> 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 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <008401c03206$1b23d6a0$9863b8d0@default> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Lawrence de Bivort
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 October 2000 1:32
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: the conscious universe: subjectivity/objectivity of beliefs
>
>
> From: Joe E. Dees <joedees@bellsouth.net>
>
> Lawrence:
> > > The neural basis of ideas, I would suggest, is no more significant for
> memes
> > > than it is for non-memetic ideas, and so I find the neural elements of
> memes
> > > not particularly or intrinsically interesting when it comes
> to studying
> > > memes and their workings.
>
> Joe:
> > The difference is one of perspective - first-person vs. third-person -
> > upon the same phenomenon. My ideas are objective to me, as
> > they are objects of my mental attention/intention. That which is
> > called subjective is objective to the subject. There is no absolute
> > objectivity; only intersubjective agreement.
>
> Yes, agreed. In my classes, I use the term "subjective reality"
> to refer to
> the internal processes of perceiving, pattern-recognition, thinking and
> decision-making. This is as 'real' to the individual as anything,
> yet is so
> intensely idiosyncratic to that individual that it appears 'subjective' to
> observers of that individual. One of my interests is how, then,
> the observer
> can himself perceive and understand what is going on in another person's
> "subjective reality." We see each other through the lenses of our own
> "subjective realities."
Not totally. there is underneath the species filter and that is
objects/relationships and so the mechanism to eventually understand each
other -- discover the metaphors used to particularise the
object/relationships patterns and you get communication that all members of
the species should be able to deal with regardless of local nuances.
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
===============================================================
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 Oct 10 2000 - 13:22:05 BST