Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA26347 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:59:34 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745AFA@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: addendum to mysticism etc. Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:57:12 -0000 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
I know Richard Brodie hasn't posted for a while, and I assume that's either
because he's off doing something, or he got bored with this thread, or I
offended him (not intended if the last is true).
Thinking on these points a bit more, I just wanted to make one more comment,
which I didn't get into the discussion, but to which I don't expect a
response- unless people want to of course.
Just a reminder: Essentially, Richard and I were debating issues stemming
from the mysticism discussion, and had got onto questions of appropriate
methods of achieving personal well being.
I made the following comment:
> <<who says psychological well being is something we
> should strive for in the first place? I'm serious here, should we believe
> things that give us psychological well being even though they (may) be
> demonstrably removed from social reality?>>
>
Richard replied:
>I've been doing it for years and I seem to have turned out OK.
I did reply to this with a resonse that basically said "who are you to
judge?" This may have come across as a personal attack. It wasn't meant
that way, but the more I thought about it the more I thought it could have
been taken that way.
It occured to me that what I was really arguing wasn't a question of
self-perception of well-being, but actually about the context in which
people are able to achieve it however they define it for themselves. In
essence, it's actually a political question. Sometimes ideas like those
Richard has presented in this thread focus essentially on
self-actualisation- people making their own choices about what to believe
in, how to view themselves and their lives, but different people aren't in
the same socio-economic positions to do this. Poverty undoubtedly has a
significant influence on the kinds of choices people can make in terms of
what gives them feelings of well-being, and undoubtedly impacts on others'
perceptions of them, which in turn impacts on well being. Look for example
at how in modern developed nations, amongst the largest pariah groups are
the homeless.
This kind of thing is precisely why I'm so eager to attack certain kinds of
belief-systems, because they are about ameliorating the emotions of
situations people find themselves in, not actually dealing with that
situation. Untouchables in India clean the shit out of higher castes' homes
in many villages, in exchange for being given food (the higher castes have
to be careful when handing the food over, if they touch them they have to
bathe straight-away). Their faith tells them not to do anything about this,
that they must fulfill their duties so that in the next life they will move
up one rung on the caste ladder. Yes, indeed, this may make many of them
feel better about their lot, but it doesn't change their being treated like
dirt, moreover it is precisely a means of perpetuating the system that holds
them in that position.
That's a point I should have made from the outset, but there you go.
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 archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 10 2000 - 12:01:47 GMT