Re: ality

From: Dace (
Date: Mon Feb 18 2002 - 07:50:31 GMT

  • Next message: Dace: "Re: ality"

    Received: by id HAA04417 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 07:54:54 GMT
    Message-ID: <001f01c1b850$f2051b80$6086b2d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: ality
    Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 23:50:31 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk

    From: Joe Dees

    > > If time is intrinsically real, then it doesn't need matter to exist. In
    > >other words, the past still exists.
    > >
    > The past does not 'still' exist; if it did, it would not be the past, but
    the present.

    Memory is when something is *mentally* present without being materially

    > Ted, you are not practicing memetics, but are instead a circus barker
    hawking your own personal variant of a vedantist religiously grounded
    memeplex. No one here is sipping such snake oil, no matter how
    indefatiticably you ignore unanswerable logical and empirical refutations
    and blithely continue to preach same. What you are advocating is not within
    the Popperian realm of science, but within the dogmatic realm of

    You continue repeating the same accusations long after I've dismissed them.
    We went over this last summer. Sheldrake's memory-based "hypothesis of
    formative causation" has been experimentally verified among numerous
    different species, including our own. Though subject to falsification, all
    attempts to do so have failed.

    > it does not good to futilily masquerade it otherwise; there is not enough
    camoflage in all the universe to disguise its nature as a meme which has you
    tightly coiled in its thrall and with which you vainly hope to infect

    As I've said, you're not attempting to engage in a rational discussion. You
    see a point of of view you don't like, and you try to stamp it out before
    anyone takes notice. Your methodology is to intimidate into silence anyone
    else who might carry on a legitimate discourse with me. Science needs new
    points of view to keep from ossifying into dogma. You are an enemy of


    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 - 08:04:32 GMT