Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA27574 (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 16:18:05 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745AFE@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: addendum to mysticism etc. Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:15:44 -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
>Sounds like it would make you feel good to help the impoverished,
so I would
>recommend you go do it.
I don't individual philanthropy makes much difference, I think society needs
to address these issues collectively by recognising the impoverished as
victims of the social system, whihc is all our responsibility, not of
personal failings.
>It's a common myth that negative emotions are symptoms of a
situation that
>needs to be addressed. In reality many people have unpleasant
emotions
>constantly but those emotions do not lead to solutions to problems
or to any
>kind of progress. What leads to progress is clear thinking, a clear
sense of
>purpose, and action in line with those two. Knee-jerk reaction to
painful
>emotions, as Albert Ellis taught, is what gets us in trouble.
I'd agree that people often think bad feelings = something's wrong. But
what I'm saying is that often we are encouraged to have good feelings about
bad situations. Clear thinking is precisely what's needed for people to
recognise this, but recognition may be all that some are in a position to
possess (as in the untouchables who know they're treated like dirt but can
see no way out of their position).
>It is not necessary to be unhappy to move up in the world.
I didn't say it was. But feeling happy is not enough on its own.
>There are plenty
>of dissatisfied poor people in America who never move up the status
>hierarchy significantly no matter how many times they are bombarded
with
>memes telling them they can't be happy until they have the right
job, the
>right car, the right mate. This is the land of opportunity.
Millions of
>people raise themselves from poor families to financial
independence. It
>takes a pragmatic attitude, hard work, and luck. It does not take
feeling
>miserable.
The USA is an excellent example where the individualist meme continues to
work despite the evident barriers to personal development for people who
aren't white, male and straight. This is the central element of my point.
There are plenty of people who would argue that success and well being are
not in (at least not exclusively) in our own hands. The notion that anyone
can be President, for example (not that the job amounts to a zenith of well
being), in the USA is so patently false, it's embarassing. Many other
facets of US (and I should add, of course, other developed Western nations,
before I sound too much like an Anti-American and have Menwith Hill taping
my phone calls) show evident inequities that no amount of high spirits will
dissipate.
Middle-class well-being may come from a change in one's outlook on life, and
a different attitude towards oneself and others, but that's within an
inherently secure socio-economic position. The options for self-development
in other socio-economic groups is much more restricted, and this situation
alone, for me, leaves claims to well being rather hollow.
Incidentally, I raise these concerns at this point since I've been reading
Barry Glassner's 1999 book 'The Culture of Fear', about the
misrepresentation of trends in US society. Very good it is too, berating
mass media and vested-interest institutions for misrepresentating risks in
society, and brought out my lefty political leanings.
Interestingly the sheer extent of misrepresentation (demonstrable by wanton
mis-use of statistics- Glassner is well tooled up with all sorts of data and
references in his analysis), raises the question so central to my interest
in memetics of why so much of the media, both factual and fictional, are
full of wildly inaccurate material. Why do we buy into images of issues
that we often know are rubbish?
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 - 16:20:18 GMT