Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA11384 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 13 Jan 2001 13:27:17 GMT From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: DNA Culture .... Trivia? Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 00:34:37 +1100 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIOEJDCMAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745BC7@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-RBL-Warning: (orbs.dorkslayers.com) 203.2.192.82 is listed by dorkslayers.com Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Vincent Campbell
> Sent: Saturday, 13 January 2001 3:30
> To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> Subject: RE: DNA Culture .... Trivia?
>
>
> So why is religion so widespread? And, more particulary, why are
> some religions significantly more widespread than others? Why do people
> follow one religion over another? Why do people persistently engage in
> practices which they can often be consciously aware of as being
> irrational,
> e.g. reading one's horoscope? Why do people engage in practices that seem
> antithetical to adaptive behaviour e.g. giving up your child or
> yourself for
> sacrifice, or celibacy?
>
sense of value (but then ask 'why' and that is all you will get --
'because'...)
> Tell me what disciplines have unequivocally answered such questions,
> and what the answers are, and we can all go home and put our feet up.
>
I can give you hows, will that help? :-) ..but then you will have to read
things slowly, 'in depth', many many times and perhaps that is too much for
lists?
BTW I sent in a link to a paper in response to one of Joes recent emails re
quantu mechanics etc did you read the paper? did you understand it if you
did read it? what did you understand?
In the context of your above questions, go and read it and THINK about what
it says re 'ideal forms', resonances etc., etc.. see
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting/stegan.html
Note that the root is cellular automata -- discrete emphasis, VERY either/or
at the local level and gets into complexity but retains the either/or-ness.
The oscillations process reflects our mind at work and out of that comes all
sorts of things :-)
This CA sort of behaviour is reflected in us in our object-biased (i.e.
discrete) modes of analysis; IOW the act of applying anything to itself can
bring out what can be interpreted as archetypal forms and if you do not know
the sources of those forms then they can easly lead to religious concepts
based on ignorance.
In your questions change the 'why' to 'how' and from that you may start to
get answers, otherwise all you get is 'because'. The task of information
gathering does not include 'why' since what you seek is BEHIND the
expression not the expression itself, you dont want the value judgement but
more the processes that led to it.
best,
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
List Owner: http://www.egroups.com/group/semiosis
===============================================================
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 : Sat Jan 13 2001 - 13:28:49 GMT