Re: Abstractism

From: Steve Drew (srdrew_1@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Feb 04 2002 - 21:15:03 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Re: Words and memes"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA14497 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 4 Feb 2002 21:20:45 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.84]
    From: "Steve Drew" <srdrew_1@hotmail.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Abstractism
    Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 21:15:03 +0000
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <F110aii08N8yxdZjfNL0000220b@hotmail.com>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Feb 2002 21:15:03.0905 (UTC) FILETIME=[03517D10:01C1ADC1]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    >Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 13:55:30 -0800
    From: "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Abstractism

    >
    >>Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2002 16:19:12 -0800
    >From: "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com>
    >Subject: Re: Abstractism
    >
    >The way I understand it, Mr. Rorschach just spilled some ink on a piece
    >of
    >paper and folder it over with no intention of transmitting a message.
    >He
    >was creating a convenient equivalent of clouds for his patients.  I
    >think
    >intention has a great deal to do with transmitting messages.  Anything
    >transmitted without intent is not a message.
    >
    >Grant<
    >
    >It may not be a message, but it is information. If you go back to my
    >’novice
    >at a dinner party’ example from earlier, the other diners are not
    >instructing the novice intentionally. The novice is learning by
    copying,
    >while the other guests are behaving (by their own criteria) normally.
    >Therefore they are transmitting an unintentional message - "this is the
    >behaviour you adopt at dinner parties" and which the novice endevours
    to
    >adopt. Irving Goffman wrote quite a bit about this sort of
    *subliminal*
    >messaging (and many other social psychologists). This is also part of
    where
    >i see the problem of who is doing the choosing - us or the meme.
    >
    >regards
    >
    >Steve
    >
    I also discussed receiving information in that message or the one before
    and
    someone compared it to seeing pictures in the clouds.  We receive a
    great
    deal of information from others that is not meant as messages.
    Everything
    about a person provides us with information.  Some of it is meant to be
    a
    signal and some is not.Most of it is deduced from the abundant clues
    provided by speech patterns, decisions made about clothing, gestures,
    head
    and facial hair, etc., etc.  Some of these things are meant as messages
    and
    some are not.  But they provide us with information regardless.
    Information
    not meant to be a message can, nevertheless, be a meme.  That's because
    the
    information can be transferred merely by its presence.

    A person who wears a particular costume indicating status (a business
    suit
    for example) is sending a message.  The person from another culture
    sends
    messages with his clothing and speech patterns to other members of his
    culture but not to people of another culture.  People of the other
    culture
    get information from this data  even though it is not necessarily the
    information being transmitted.  If they use what they learned to change
    their own behavior, I think you can call that a meme.

    Grant<

    I agree with a lot that you have said, but the information given by the
    practiced diners does constitute a message. If the novice did not bother to
    adopt their practices the others would very quikly recognise this and
    respond accordingly. This is why i say that a lot of the messaging is not
    intentional in that they have thought about what they want to say, but it is
    intentional in that it is what we do all the time - conform to the norms of
    the culture we live in and broadcast those norms in the things that we do.
    It is only when some one acts contrary to those norms that we actually start
    to think about what we our selves are doing. And people usually respond
    negatively to major infractions of norms that have been committed. i agree
    with you that messages, information etc, intentional or otherwise tend to be
    culture specific, but i assumed that was as read. Inter-cultural
    communication is a whole different ball game as many of us are aware and you
    yourself have mentioned.

    regards

    Steve

    _________________________________________________________________
    Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
    http://www.hotmail.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 : Mon Feb 04 2002 - 21:29:44 GMT