Re: Sin

From: Robin Faichney (robin@reborntechnology.co.uk)
Date: Wed Oct 11 2000 - 09:46:38 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Social psychology"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id JAA03898 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:51:51 +0100
    Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:46:38 +0100
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Sin
    Message-ID: <20001011094638.A495@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <20001011062904.AAA17253@camailp.harvard.edu@[204.96.32.117]>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Disposition: inline
    User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
    In-Reply-To: <20001011062904.AAA17253@camailp.harvard.edu@[204.96.32.117]>; from wade_smith@harvard.edu on Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 02:29:10AM -0400
    From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 02:29:10AM -0400, Wade T.Smith wrote:
    > Hi Diana Stevenson --
    >
    > >Tracing the evolution of an idea or symbol can be
    > >fascinating in its own right, and seems a valid subsection of memetic
    > >research to me. Are there reasons why it shouldn't be?
    >
    > Nope.
    >
    > Tracing the paths of sin is a good place to start. So often, myths (and
    > other memetic narratives) are used proscriptively.

    If we're looking at it historically, rather than conceptually, I think
    the "original sin" must be disobedience. And I thought of putting it
    that way *before* I thought: ah, that's what it is in Genesis, too!

    The one major facet of religion I really don't like -- and I think
    it's the only facet many anti-religionists see -- is authoritarianism.
    But it is quite endemic. The only religious leader who said people
    had to check everything out for themselves was the Buddha, as far as
    I know. In Christianity, obedience to God is very, very prominent, and
    there can be no doubt that has extended to obedience to the priests,
    his representatives, and to the secular authorities where state and
    church are in cahoots, which is probably most of the time.

    And to go back to the beginning, you must admit it must be tempting for an
    alpha male whose powers are waning, to promote *any* reason for doing as
    he says, besides "I'll beat you up if you don't!" "Don't question me --
    it's, it's.. it's a sin, that what it is!"

    Of course, Freud had all this taped, saying precisely that scenario
    is at the basis of all religion and civilisation. Old men inventing
    reasons for young men to let the old ones remain in power. (Sorry,
    there wasn't much political correctness back then -- I believe women
    were generally left holding the baby, while the men played power games.
    You could even say it was only due to men's irresponsibility in the
    family that they could attain positions of authority in society!)

    And to bring science back in, *that* becomes a sin when the authorities
    decide it's a bad idea to let people discover things for themselves.
    Nietzsche was right in the sense that getting understanding is the
    most important thing people can do for themselves, so where it's
    proscribed, it could be considered the first significant sin, but I'm
    convinced that disobedience, of any kind, was the first historical sin.

    Before I'm shot down in flames, I'll admit that apart from the Freud
    bit this is all relatively uninformed speculation. But until and unless
    I'm corrected, it makes a lot of sense to me.

    -- 
    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 : Wed Oct 11 2000 - 09:53:18 BST