Message-Id: <v03102804b1bc45390ae0@[194.109.13.153]>
In-Reply-To: <35968040.6ED72775@metz.une.edu.au>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 21:29:49 +0200
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: Ton Maas <tonmaas@xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: To have a mnemon
Bruce wrote:
>>let's face it, if academics don't buy your theory then it's never going to be
>intellectually respectible.
>
>I have a problem with this statement in relation to the intention of
>progressing any scientific theory or concept. Who are we trying to sell this
>to? Is "respectability" the objective? I would suggest that the established
>academic community are neither the target nor the body from which approval
>should be sought. In the realms of culture, the only satisfactory criteria is
>"does it work?" I would hate to think that all this cognitive effort is about
>"approval". When this Science of Memetics is progressed to a point where it
>is obvious to all that there is a benefit to Social Science (in particular)
>and the human race (in general), then the establishment academics will say
>"what a good idea". All good ideas appear logical in hindsight (de Bono).
Exactly! "Approval" seems to be the _least_ important prerequisite for an
idea to catch on. And as De Bono so eloquently demonstrates, "logic" has
more to do with appearances than with "solidity or argument". In his book
"Against Method", Paul Feyerabend argues that in science "anything goes" -
meaning that there are no inherent scientific grounds for the failure or
success of theories. In fact, the most decisive reasons are external:
social, political, economical etc.
Ton
===============================================================
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