Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA26621 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 24 Mar 2001 21:43:03 GMT From: <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 15:45:49 -0600 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: The Demise of a Meme Message-ID: <3ABCC12D.24455.DE913@localhost> In-reply-to: <20010324150025.C1030@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <3ABB4CD5.14022.8C6349@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:17:09PM -0600 X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 24 Mar 2001, at 15:00, Robin Faichney wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:17:09PM -0600, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
> > On 23 Mar 2001, at 10:52, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > So what do you
> think they're hooking in to, Joe? > > > There are a couple of ideas;
> #1 the idea of expanded or > transcended awareness (which assumes that
> a) our everyday > waking consciousness is inadequate for the pursuit
> of self- and > reality-understanding and b) there are ways in which we
> can > augment or extend it, one of which is focused concentration, a >
> second is repetitive ritual and a third is the disruption of normal >
> consciousness), and #2 the idea of seeing beneath the apparent to >
> the real (which assumes the unreality of the apparent).
>
> <snip>
>
> That was a highly interesting little dissertation, Joe. Thanks.
> Your approach is that of the professional philosopher, while I'm more
> occupied by what goes on on the ground.
>
> I'm totally with you regarding the necessity of genuine agnosticism in
> the "phenomenological epoche" -- as you'd expect, given my regular
> endorsements of Buddhism Without Beliefs.
>
> Bringing it all back home, I'd like to make the following suggestion:
> there are just two major factors (as well as many minor ones) that
> explain the success of religious memeplexes in general: social
> control/conformism (that's one), and the induction of altered states
> of consciousness.
>
> Personally, I think of the former as bad and the latter as good
>
We are in agreement here; it is the difference that the Pagan
author Starhawk delineated in her book TRUTH OR DARE between
power-over and power-from-within.
>
>
>, so I
> say the "real" business of religion is to encourage and support the
> attainment of beneficial altered states, but YMMV. (For me, the best
> method of inducing the most beneficial altered states is meditation.)
>
Everyone to the method that works best for them.
>
> Of course, memes aren't necessarily successful because they benefit
> their hosts. A much more reliable strategy is to induce enjoyment. I
> don't have the details to hand, but a book came out a few years ago
> suggesting that humankind has, in effect at least, an innate tendency
> to attempt to achieve altered states, whether through alcohol,
> marijuana, mushrooms, meditation, chanting, pentecostal type stuff,
> etc, etc. As a generalisation, we tend to enjoy them. This is where
> the major western religions have generally fallen down, leaning too
> heavily on the social control/conformism side, without offering enough
> in the way of fun times to retain the adherence of the populace. (I
> speak, of course, of the west generally, in which traditional church
> attendance has been in fairly steep decline for decades. The US is
> exceptional in this regard.) It is no coincidence that Buddhism has
> been found highly attractive by relatively large numbers of "druggy"
> counter cultural types since the fifties, at least (vide Kerouac,
> Ginsberg, etc).
>
> "I wanna get high..."
>
The drugless high is attractive because it does not require the
expense, physiological damage and supply problems of it's
competitor, but it does require mental discipline, which is more
difficult than simple ingestion. They will both remain popular, in my
opinion.
> --
> Robin Faichney
> Get your Meta-Information from http://www.ii01.org
> (CAUTION: contains philosophy, may cause heads to spin)
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Sat Mar 24 2001 - 21:45:41 GMT