RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...

From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Jan 25 2001 - 08:01:32 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "Re: character assassination"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id IAA28285 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 25 Jan 2001 08:04:20 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: [209.240.220.231]
    From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:01:32 -0500
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <F53LAPDVXLuSbh29cM300004343@hotmail.com>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Jan 2001 08:01:32.0290 (UTC) FILETIME=[07AD5620:01C086A5]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    >From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    >Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    >Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 01:41:29 +1100
    >
    (snip)
    >
    >I suggest you slowly work you way through the recursive dichotomisation
    >process as well as the development process I have discussed in the past re
    >archetypal-to-typal and the TRANSFORMATIONS at the typal into more
    >archeypal
    >etc all says EXACTLY what the above quote is TRYING to see with obviously
    >no
    >knowledge on HOW 'in here' works. I can 'see' the template working on him.
    >
    >
    What do you mean by the term "archetypal"? Would your definition come close
    to that of someone I think hits it on the head when he (Charles Darwin from
    the glossary of _The Origin of Species_) defines archetypal as follows:
    "(o)f or belonging to the Archetype, or ideal primitive form upon which all
    the beings of a group seem to be organised." The concept of homology is
    allied to the archetype of Darwin's definition.

    If you are OTOH referring to the primordial aspect of motifs in myths,
    dreams, hallucinations and the like, this too may reflect common ancestry or
    homology shared across groups, though I'm not confident that this sense of
    "archetypal" has much going for it.

    I'm really interested in seeing how you might relate something archetypal to
    a developmental process [he hears groans from the peanut gallery]. And what
    of the form versus content issue?

    I've been fascinated by the conceptual relation between the archetype and
    whatever ectypes it may spin off. Are ectypes kinda like Xerox copies or
    imperfect representations of an archetype? Would this be like a die versus
    the coin produced?
    _________________________________________________________________
    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

    ===============================================================
    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 : Thu Jan 25 2001 - 08:06:06 GMT