From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: Structured Dichotomies
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 02:40:34 +1000
In connection with my previous post on NLP etc my own research has come up
with a pattern that is consistant in all disciplines in creating a sense of
meaning. Three dichotomies are used and put in a particular order. The
particular words used in the dichotomy are many but they will all favour an
emphasis on something being interpreted with a 'facts' bias or a 'values'
bias.
This dichotomy is the primary dichotomy in that it serves as the general
context for all that follows and reflects the way our brains initiate
analysis. (facts bias is something I could point at, there is an object
emphasis even with abstract concepts like 'truth'. values bias is more
context sensitive and deals more with relationships)
The second dichotomy covers the concepts of:
(a) What WAS, what IS, what WILL BE
compared with
(b) What COULD HAVE BEEN, what IS NOT, what COULD BE
a preference is made to one of these (a or b) in the context set by the
first dichotomy. The first and second dichotomy create the context for the
third dichotomy.
The third dichotomy covers the concepts of reactiveness and proactiveness.
Note that these are all general enough such that a lot of words can be used
that fit within the overall context with the things under consideration
being in the form of objects or relationships. Thus an object is interpreted
with words linked to a 'facts' bias, a 'what could have been' emphasis, and
a proactive categorisation.
In a general sense the resulting 'meaning' will have something to do with
boundaries, organisational emphasis, pushing outwards. The lexicon for any
dichotomy-derived discipline will contain words that 'point' to this
pattern. The words are 'free will' whereas the pattern is determined in that
it exists as part of the method of dichotomisation.
Thus ANY dichotomy-based discipline will be found to be 'meaningful'
regardless of the words used and the 'facts' brought against it e.g.
Astrology etc (which is based on the context-setting use of the Earth/Air.
Water/Fire dichotomies)
best,
Chris.
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
===============================================================
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