Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA20106 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:54:12 GMT Message-Id: <200101231256.HAA07328@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 06:57:23 -0600 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on... In-reply-to: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIMEBCCNAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> References: <B691C536.6C52%bbenzon@mindspring.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
Date sent: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:32:21 +1100
Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> > Of William Benzon
> > Sent: Tuesday, 23 January 2001 4:40
> > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > Subject: Re: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
> >
> >
> > on 1/22/01 9:27 AM, Wade T.Smith at wade_smith@harvard.edu wrote:
> >
> > > On 01/22/01 08:08, Joe E. Dees said this-
> > >
> > >> I was
> > >> correct when I branded you as an unthinking zombic memebot of
> > >> the lowest order, in cognitive thrall to pernicious error.
> > >
> > > Hell, nobody's perfect.
> > >
> > > IMHO, Chris is an (archetypal) astrologer, and everything he says will
> > > work in the proper context and setting, there being a very nice mix of
> > > generality and specificity to all of it.
> > >
> > > I'm willing to enjoy what I see probable about it all.
> > >
> > > But, in the wider cases of Theories of Everything, how many wrongs do
> > > make a right?
> > >
> >
> > Such theories come in two flavors: Those that achieve generality
> > by ignoring
> > details and those that achieve it by paying close attention to novel
> > patterns of detail. The former are worthless, the latter are valuable.
> >
>
> damn right. The problem is that once you have been through the detail it is
> hard to communicate to those who have not or dont want to.
>
> Imagine the 'problem' for Joe when he realises (if ever) how it is that
> Astrology is believed at a base level since it develops from fundamental
> metaphorcations of fundamental meanings. It is a metaphor and a good one in
> that it is founded on dichotomisation, as is maths, physics etc etc Problems
> arise when these disciplines are taken too literally; pure mathematics can
> relate to total illusion but it is 'respected'. Astrology can relate to REAL
> social processes but because the literal-minded cannot identify the metaphor
> so it is 'rubbished'.
>
Idiot. Astrology is embraced, as is racism, sexism, ageism or
homophobia, because it is a short-circuit way to respond to
situations, a heuristic, or rule-of-thumb, that allows one to react
without the annoying necessity of thought, much as Chris
embraces ultra-reductionistic binary simplisms as the exclusive be-
all and end-all of everything, and ignores logic and examples that
refute such a nonview. It doesn't work worth a flip, but it IS
efficient. All you have to do is pigeonhole people into categories
based upon complexion or birthdate or gender or gender orientation
or age, and you don't have to go through the difficulty of considering
and responding to them as individuals. The constellational
correlations of astrology were set down more than 3000 years ago;
we have advanced two constellational "houses" since then, but the
correlative modifications have not been made in the astrological
dogma. That would require thought, and the acknowledgement that
the earth perspective on the sky changes with time.
>
> It is the relational emphasis that Astrology, Tarot, etc etc capture in
> their symbolisms, the underlying generallty invarient patterns of emotions
> etc., something many 'scientists' seem to have a problem with. This realm is
> REAL, most of the planet's population live in it and so it warrents analysis
> in the context of understanding our species and since it can lack obvious
> logic when viewed from the outside so we have to use a cognitive analysis
> and that points to a species-wide analysis and that is where the template
> comes in.
>
> An intersting 'discovery' lately has been that the zebrafish has left/right
> hemisphere processing like we do i.e. KNOWN (left bias) vs UNKNOWN (right
> bias) IOW these patterns are possibly in fundamental neurology PRE
> amphibians/reptiles development.
>
> (oops almost forgot the ref: Liang, J.O. et al (2000) Asymmetric nodal
> signaling in the zebrafish diencephalon positions the pineal organ "
> Development 127, 5101-5112)
>
> 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 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 : Tue Jan 23 2001 - 12:55:55 GMT