Re: Macguffin

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Thu Aug 02 2001 - 21:20:09 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Macguffin"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA25928 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:16:20 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:20:09 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Macguffin
    Message-ID: <3B696FA9.31266.13A5BE7@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <3B6985F4.9A808CC1@pacbell.net>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 2 Aug 2001, at 9:55, Bill Spight wrote:

    > Dear Joe and Vincent,
    >
    > > > Was there a "self" in the primordial soup? Isn't self a
    > > > macguffin
    > > > (Blackmore thinks it's a memetic macguffin, or more accurately
    > > > concurs with Dennett's notion of the self as a benign user
    > > > illusion).
    > > >
    > > > Vincent
    > > >
    > > Self is no macguffin; nether is it an illusion
    >
    > The sense of self arises from the formation of the Self-Other
    > distinction. If it is memetic, then chimpanzees have memes, since they
    > can recognize themselves in a mirror.
    >
    As would orangutans, gorillas and bonobos.
    >
    > But illusions of self do arise with thoughts such as "I might have
    > been a giraffe." The "I" in that sentence is just a pronoun, not a
    > self. ;-)
    >
    Neither is the word "giraffe" really a tall, long-necked, four-legged,
    leaf-eating african denizen, but the word stands for, that is,
    symbolically represents, its referent, as does the personal pronoun.
    To confuse a term and its referent would be a category error, but
    both exist, and one refers to the other. Self-conscious awareness,
    that is, the posession of the self-aware decision capable cognitive
    environment that has evolutionarily emerged in us, is not itself a
    meme, but that which, along with the intentionality, free choice and
    symbolicity that depend upon such self-awareness, makes willful
    memetic evolution possible, in that we may consciously engineer
    our memes, that is, think about and creatively tinker with them -
    consciously directed, rather than random, mutation, and those
    exposed to them may subsequently choose to, for well or ill-
    considered reasons, accept or reject, or to propagate or refuse to
    propagate, the memes they come into contact with, that is, they
    may intentionally, rather than naturally (or blindly) select them.
    When this activity is pursued logically, rationally and reasonably,
    with appeal to evidence repeatable under conditions controlled for
    variables, we call it science. This is not to say that accidental
    mutation or inadvertent selection do not happen, just that, with the
    advent of self-conscious awareness, such selection is far from the
    entire story.
    >
    > Best,
    >
    > Bill
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 : Thu Aug 02 2001 - 21:20:31 BST