Re: memetics-digest V1 #1011

From: Wade T.Smith (
Date: Tue Apr 09 2002 - 23:45:04 BST

  • Next message: Richard Brodie: "Thoughts and Perceptions"

    Received: by id XAA04726 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 23:51:11 +0100
    Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 18:45:04 -0400
    Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1011
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <>
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Message-Id: <>
    X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481)
    Precedence: bulk

    On Tuesday, April 9, 2002, at 06:20 , Scott Chase wrote:

    > Is visual observation pure seeing?

    It certainly can be.

    > Is there any processing before something makes it...

    I'm pretty sure there is not. Nerves respond to stimulus, unless they
    are anesthetized.

    > the status of an observation as filtered through limited sensory
    > channels...

    The filtering is done _after_ the sensory channels are filled, not
    during, or before. (Admittedly, focusing upon a task will effectively
    and intentionally invalidate for further processing a great deal of
    one's sensory input, but, like that sudden shock, the sensory input is
    not halted, but waylaid and bypassed.)

    I am talking about states wherein this sensory input is unventuri'd.
    When the filters refuse to form. The creative act. When it all, all of
    what is before one, is let in. Bang, smash. This is so often a shock of
    the new, and so often, as explained by those describing the creative
    moment, a new and seminally integrating shock that produces an answer.

    No processing whatsoever. Processing, in many ways, is dogma.

    - Wade

    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 : Wed Apr 10 2002 - 00:02:11 BST