Re: Why memeoids?

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Mon Feb 11 2002 - 20:17:26 GMT

  • Next message: Keith Henson: "RE: Words and memes: criteria for acceptance of new belief or meme"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA10857 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 11 Feb 2002 20:16:06 GMT
    Message-ID: <000901c1b339$3f3796c0$20a6eb3e@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <kennethvanoost@myrealbox.com>
    References: <LAW2-F20Cjmpp1qyXNM000042dc@hotmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Why memeoids?
    Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:17:26 +0100
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Grant Callaghan <grantc4@hotmail.com>
    > The New World Order is designed to keep the people of every country in
    their
    > place and make them solve their own problems rather than letting them run
    to
    > other countries and take those problems with them. You won't see that
    > written anywhere, but if you examine how NATO and other countries react to
    > problems that spill over onto their turf, you will notice the trend. The
    > lines on the map are drawn and etched in stone. The world governments
    don't
    > like the idea of anyone trying to change them.

    Hi Grant,

    You are so, unfortunate right here !
    But according to Charles Taylor ( Multiculturalism ) that perspective is
    completely wrong. He notes that indeed we keep our borders shut, with
    no reason he argues because our laws/ rules and constitutions don 't allow
    such moves, but where we see the incoming of refugees as a terrible treat,
    between 1800 and 1960 with a 80% equal share, we Europeans took
    part in intercontinental immigration movements.
    So where lies the difference !?

    Ronald Dworkin expresses this in the following way.
    ( Translated from Dutch),
    Begin quote,
    " The community can 't express no substantial point of view about the
    matter of immigration and integration and can 't as in an example make
    the people believe in being virtious in whatever term, to attempt to make
    the constitution in such a way that the normative proceedings can 't be
    hustled with.
    Just because of the fact that different communities/ socities exist, the
    fact can 't be beaten that some people won't bind themselves to the
    commmitments of the society where they live in, or to the facts of
    being virtious for that matter. " End quote.

    And IMO, that is the whole nature of memetics, and the centre- piece
    of my personal conviction, you can 't change people where ever they
    are, who they are, rich, poor, long, small, fat of humpty dumpties.
    Traditional, historical, cultural, religious,.... dispositions blind us all
    in eveything we do, where we do it and with whom.

    And in that respect we must ' respect' the thoughts people have over
    others, even if that means discriminating them_ we can 't escape the
    facts which are running around in our heads.
    But does that means that in cases of crime passionel the criminal can
    walk freely !?
    Yes and no !
    Yes, if the crime can be explained as the result of the interconnections
    of neurons and no, because still than we would have the gut feeling that
    ' someone ' is inside our head pulling the strings.
    And that fact is debateble....

    We, the West keep our borders shut because in some sense our memes
    tells us that we must, and the immigrants leave their homeland just be-
    cause for the same odd reason. We don 't like them and they want to
    come in... what is the compromise if we are, both, intellectually blocked !?

    Just a notion in regard, in Holland Pim Fortuyn, first candidate on the list
    for his party ( A Livible Holland) called out to disregard the in the
    consti-
    stution laid down rule that you won 't discriminate. His own party sacked
    him ! Where is the moral ground of governments to substain such IMO
    discriminating ruling !?

    Cheers,

    Kenneth

    ===============================================================
    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 11 2002 - 20:25:37 GMT