Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id JAA24565 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:48:13 GMT Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 01:42:31 -0800 Message-Id: <200202070942.g179gVB09080@mail14.bigmailbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116) X-Originating-Ip: [65.80.161.203] From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Words and memes Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
>Memes belong in the human sciences, all of which involve subjectivity.
>Human beings are subjects, not objects. Very little is cut-and-dry. Things
>tend to be somewhat fluid, and a flexible approach is required. You're not
>going to get anywhere with a human science that strives for complete
>objectivity.
Actually, we are both. Subjectivity is irretrieveably embodied.
>Anticipating your response to that, let me add another point. Objectivity is
>in no way identical with knowledge. As we've learned over the last century,
>physical (nonliving) objects have no intrinsic reality. There's no ultimate
>physical substance, such as air or water or earth or even the atom, which
>can provide the absolute foundation for a given object. Since knowledge
>concerns reality, the pursuit of knowledge cannot be limited to the study of
>the objective.
>
Here you are, quite simply, wrong. Whatever reality is, it must include our primordial and apodictic experience. Our augmented perceptions have informed us concerning the structure of these material objects, and the fact that they are composed of molecules, which are themselves composed of atoms, that are composed on one level of protons, neutrons and electrons, and on a deeper level of quarks, leptons and gluons, with much empty space between, but that is not to deny the reality we existentially and phenomenologically experience, but to further define it. Our experiences are subjective, but our common experiences are intersubjective, and massive intersubjective agreement, such as occurs in the sciences, apodictically approaches objectivity, and its objects are not only real, but experimentally possess certain real attributes. What we may discover in the future concerning the constitution of physical objects will not overthrow atomic and nuclear views, but extend, deepen!
and elaborate upon them. Since much of our technology is designed and built upon the exploitation of these structural underpinnings and their various properties, if they were fallacious, we could not be doing with them what we are doing here/now, i.e. communication with each other by virtue of them.
>
>Ted
>
>
><< msg2.html >>
------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
===============================================================
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 Feb 07 2002 - 10:18:49 GMT