RE: addendum to mysticism etc.

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 13 2000 - 11:45:54 GMT

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: addendum to mysticism etc."

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA04444 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:48:04 GMT
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745B01@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: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:45:54 -0000
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

            I see there's been a rash of postings over the weekend. I'll give
    my response to this before checking the other posts, so apologies if this
    overlaps with what others say.

    >You think other people need to do something about the problem, not
    you. Huh.
    >Maybe everyone else feels the same way.

    No, I think collective action from entire nations is required e.g. how about
    the USA honouring its requirements to reduce pollution levels, or pay up its
    share to the UN? That's not something an individual can do, save through
    the ballot box perhaps.

    >I don't get your point here. I was expecting you to argue that
    feeling good
    >is harmful but you didn't.

    Feeling good isn't inherently bad, what matters is the reasons for feeling
    good, some of which can have bad consequences (e.g. racism can make people
    feel good about themselves but has negative consequences for others).

    >They are not evident to me. In all my time at Microsoft we would
    kill for
    >minority and female applicants but there was always a shortage.
    Homosexuals
    >have a much higher average income than heterosexuals in the US
    (172% was the
    >last figure I saw). Blacks dominate the extremely high-paying
    positions in
    >professional sports. We have had race- and sex-blind admissions to
    colleges
    >for decades. You must realize that there is not universal agreement
    about
    >your "barriers" and you cannot conclude causality from statistical
    >correlations.

    I can't believe you're genuinely making this argument. Women in the US, and
    UK, and probably many other developed nations earn on average 3/4 the wages
    that men do for the same work. Do your figures for homosexual wages
    distinguish between gay men and lesbians? Professional sports are a
    notoriously bad example of so-called 'equality' for ethnic minorities, not
    least in relation to the ethnic devides in sport e.g. how come the majority
    of ice hockey players are white and the majority of basketball players are
    black? High wages doesn't stop black sports stars suffering from racist
    abuse- as recent examples in football in the UK, Italy and elsewhere would
    attest. How many african american, or hispanic american politicians are
    there in Congress? Explain why the highest rates of premature death occur
    amongst ethnic minorities. Explain US prison populations disproportionately
    consisting of ethnic minorities. We could broaden this out- what about the
    way that major US companies use sweatshop labour to produce goods (including
    Nike, Gap and Disney)?

    The USA, like many other societies is profoundly inequitable in all sorts of
    areas of life. I'm afraid Richard this was exactly my point- happiness
    often comes through the denial of social reality.

    >There are plenty of people who would argue that you can beat the
    house at
    >roulette by following betting systems. People who are personally
    accountable
    >for the results in their own lives are more successful than people
    who look
    >at themselves as victims, regardless of the reality of the
    situation.

    That's exactly my point- the results of one's own life is not solely
    accountable to oneself. There is no choice is being born into a group that
    society mis-treats, whether that's in terms of gender, ethnicity, religion,
    sexuality, or whatever. Being any, or all of these things, means society
    shapes what you can or can't achieve. That doesn't one can't struggle
    against the system and achieve things that help to change it, but it does
    make it far more difficult.

    >As Jesus said, there will always be poor. Help them if you want to,
    but the
    >fact of their existence does not lessen the importance of the lives
    of the
    >rest.

    It does if the rest makes themselves happy by ignoring the plight of the
    poor, or blaming their status on the inadequacies of the poor, rather than
    recognising their role in the maintenance of the poor. The idea that there
    will always be poor people is a product of liberal capitalist ideology, and
    helps to make us feel less bad about it.

    >Memes spread for many reasons. We tend to pay attention to "crisis"
    memes.
    >We believe ideas that fit easily into our existing mindset. We
    trust our
    >authorities. We believe memes that get repeated several times,
    especially
    >from multiple sources. "Truth" is not a strong selector for memes.

    That may be true for audiences, but what about the producers of media
    content? Why are they so persistent in misrepresenting risk to the public?

    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 : Mon Nov 13 2000 - 11:49:32 GMT