Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA03563 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 29 Mar 2001 19:41:24 +0100 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20010329123619.0083d200@mailhost.rongenet.sk.ca> X-Sender: hawkeye@mailhost.rongenet.sk.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 12:36:19 -0600 To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk, memetics@mmu.ac.uk From: Lloyd Robertson <hawkeye@rongenet.sk.ca> Subject: Re: The Demise of a Meme In-Reply-To: <c9.e753c47.27f4574d@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
At 04:15 AM 29/03/01 EST, LJayson@aol.com wrote:
>At 06:13 PM 28/03/01 EST, LJayson@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>robin@reborntechnology.co.uk writes:
>>
>>
>>By my understanding and experience, enlightenment can be achieved while
>>under the influence of psych*a*delics, but the state wears off pretty
>>quickly, like the drug, whereas if attained by the more traditional,
>>long-term means, it's more likely to stay.
>>
>>
>>
>>In this context, what is meant by enlightenement?
>>
>>Len Jayson
>
>>Lloyd Robertson wrote:
>>Whatever Buddhists like Watts and Faichney mean by it. To the rest its just
>>koan.
>
>
>Could we therefore say that one man's enlightenment is another man's
>endarkenment?
I agree with Len's statement but would broaden it. Each memeplex has it's
own term for "endarkment". For Christianity it is sin. For Buddhists it is
delusion. Each memeplex defines its endarkment term in a way that
essentially means: not accepting the faith. This means revising definitions
to fit dogma. Thus "enlightment" to a Buddhist means something different
from what the term meant during Europe's "Age of Enlightenment". "Delusion"
to a Buddhist means something different from what it means in mainstream
psychology.
I am not sure how your term, "endarkment", might apply to non-religious
memeplexi. I suppose, at a personal level, it might have to to do with
anything that creates cognitive dissonance in the self. At the level of
science it might have something to do with not knowing or deliberately non
knowing. Feminist researchers in my country, for example, exposed male
domestic violence while witholding those results of their research that
showed that women, in domestic situations, were just as violent as the men
studied. Possibly this was seen as "enlightened" in feminist circles but in
scientific circles it would be seen as unethical.
I apologize for rambling. Interesting question.
Lloyd
===============================================================
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 Mar 29 2001 - 19:47:18 BST