Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA07805 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:20:28 GMT X-vSMTP: intekom.com Message-ID: <01ec01c199e9$aa2ba020$509cef9b@intekom.co.za> From: "Pieter Bouwer" <pbouwer@intekom.co.za> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <200201101408.g0AE8XB27201@terri.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 17:12:03 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Hi Wade
> On 01/10/02 08:39, Pieter Bouwer said this-
>
> >I am referring to a
> >hypothetical case where somebody allegedly receives knowledge
> >'intuitively'.
>
> This sounds like a priori or mystical knowledge, and, as such,
has been,
> within most rational circles, discounted.
>
> - Wade
I agree, but the subject's response to this a priory or mystical
knowledge is real. How would you interpret such behaviour? If
someone alleges to have received such 'knowledge' even though
rationally it has been discounted, I am not so much concerned
about the scientific validity of mystical knowledge. For
him/her it is real and he/she acts accordingly. The point I
want to make is that the subject behaved as if he/she had
received a communication. There was no communicator, but the
behaviour looks like a meme. Is this possible?
Pieter
===============================================================
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 10 2002 - 16:27:39 GMT