Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA01292 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Sun, 17 Feb 2002 22:41:43 GMT Message-ID: <email@example.com> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 05:36:38 -0800 (PST) From: terry creighton <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: religious viruses To: email@example.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-704123884-1013952998=:50027" Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Richard Dawkins (father of the 'meme'; would Susan Blackmore be the mother?...) has referred to religion as a 'virus'. With absolutley no axe of faith to grind I think this is too derisory a term to use and could actually be inaccurate. Granted there have been many mistakes made and downright atrocities committed by psychopaths sheltering under their respective churches to say nothing of the amount of bs propagated by them but I would like to propose the following.
Drawing from Richard Dawkins' reference to 'The Inorganic Molecule Hypothesis of the Origin of Life', proposed by Graham Cairns-Smith, wherein it is suggested that the original organic 'soup' templated itself onto a silicate substrate thus using it as a sort of 'scaffolding' then, after achieving a degree of independence 'took over'. Why could not 'religious thinking' be a 'scaffolding' around and about which a more rational mind can build itself and take over eventually..hopefully.
Any more thoughts on this?
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 18 2002 - 00:15:51 GMT