Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA10852 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:12:39 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745B7D@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: virus: Psychological Profile of Hall Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:10:18 -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
<Teaching a knowledge-acquisition tool is exactly as memetic as
teaching
> dates in history, religious rituals, or sexual techniques.>
>
Well, I'm not sure here. It's not that I wouldn't say that methods
of knowledge-acquisition aren't memetic, but I'm sure they are the same as
the claim about beliefs being memes.
<There are only three possibilities for how people come to believe
things:
> 1. The belief is innate, like a Jungian archetype.
> 2. The belief is a Dennett "Good Trick" and is something people tend to
> come
> up with on their own given a certain set of preconditions.
> 3. The belief is transmitted from others sharing the belief.>
>
1. I don't accept beliefs as innate- belief capacity is innate, but
not particular beliefs, at least not complex specific beliefs. (There's a
more complicated debate here of course, but I'm trying not to blather on too
much).
2. Quite possibly.
3. This is where we disagree. Doctrines and rituals are transmitted
which may inculcate belief, but the belief itself doesn't transmit.
I would add a-
4. People come to believe things because we're perceptually
imperfect, as when they:
a. have experiences they cannot explain (e.g. temporal lobe
epileptic fits can produce intense feelings of religiosity, sometimes giving
people god complexes- before we knew it was epilepsy, people thought it was
things like possession or visitation etc., I've said before I think this is
what happened to Mohammed in the cave),
b.make causality errors that they fail to correct due to probability
misjudgement (e.g. and by far the best example, astrology)
<Most often two or three methods are combined. Memes encompass more
than
> simple beliefs... you must include attitudes, strategies, names, models,
> and
> so on: all the software of the mind.>
>
Well yes, I think I'd agree with that... apart from the beliefs.
Astrology is a good test of this. Large proportions of the UK
public read their stars (I think it's about 60% something like that), but
many of them would disavow that they believe in astrology, especially if you
asked them to compare it with their belief in God (self-reporting is a
limited research tool I know). The point here is surely that many thousands
of people participate in the astrology rituals whilst having very different
levels of belief in it- from mere casual interest, to people planning their
lives based on the stars. So, take two people who both read their stars,
but one genuinely believes the stars are accurate predictions of the future,
and another who reads them for a laugh. The only thing that those people
share is the practice of reading their stars, and thus an awareness of at
least some if its rules (e.g. they'll know what sign they are). So, they'll
be aware of the doctrine, and of the rituals, but the
emotional/psychological investment in it may be very different. How then
can one talk about_a_belief having been transmitted to these two people? Or
perhaps, more methodologically speaking, how do we identify and measure the
astrology-belief meme in those individuals?
To give a more mainstream example, what about people who only go to
church for weddings, christenings etc. compared to someone who sets a place
for Jesus at the dining table (I have a friend here is Scotland whose
relatives do that) and pray to god every night? Do they share the same
belief meme?
<I dropped out of Harvard to accept a prestigious and lucrative job
at
> Microsoft, not to get away from any perceived wrong.>
>
Smart move, which I think most people on the list (whether they
admit it or not) are really rather jealous of. Well, I am anyway... for
some reason most of my best friends work in computers and they all earn more
money than me (lecturers in the UK get paid crap wages). I know money
doesn't buy happiness, but it does help getting that widescreen TV and
Playstation 2! (or should I wait and buy an x-box :-))?
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 Dec 08 2000 - 13:14:07 GMT