Re: the conscious universe: subjectivity/objectivity of beliefs

From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Tue Oct 10 2000 - 02:19:57 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "RE: mysticism etc"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA00623 (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 13:20:44 +0100
    Message-Id: <200010100115.VAA07930@mail4.lig.bellsouth.net>
    From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 20:19:57 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: the conscious universe: subjectivity/objectivity of beliefs
    In-reply-to: <008401c03206$1b23d6a0$9863b8d0@default>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    From: "Lawrence de Bivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: Re: the conscious universe: subjectivity/objectivity of beliefs
    Date sent: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:32:12 -0400
    Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    > 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." We can reduce the degree of falsifying subjectivity
    > by listening and observing with greater skill and a wider range of
    > distinctions, and we can make better sense of it all -- get a better sense
    > of the structure of another person's subjective reality -- with better
    > models of what goes on when another person thinks, makes judgements, and
    > makes decisions.
    >
    The difference I draw between subjective (objective to one subject)
    and intersubjective (objective to more than one subject) is the
    same one I draw between L-memes and G-memes; the first is
    within, the second between.
    >
    > - Lawrence
    >
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 Oct 10 2000 - 13:30:12 BST