From: Van oost Kenneth (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 20:19:01 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wade T.Smith" <email@example.com>
> On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 06:28 , Richard Brodie wrote:
> > I don't see how [the behavior-only stance] either explains or predicts
> > anything.
> And I don't see how it can fail not to. Once a pattern of behavioral
> similarity is established, predictions about the nature of the next
> behavior can be made. It would all seem pretty matter-of-fact to me.
> Trying to find motivational similarities (like profiling serial killers)
> would seem pointless, if not overtly errant, as they have proved to be.
> But, like in all weather-prediction models, the actual behaviors are
> somewhat, if limitedly, predictable if enough data is observed.
Wade, that brings back the contradiction of collectiviness and indi-
vidualism. Generalizin' behavior and than predicting what the next
individualistic behavior will be is in my book arrogant and shows
how much people don 't understand of what is it to be a human
individual_ moreover it shows how much people are willing to set
themselves aside for a proper/ better good... Aaarrhhh !!
The predictable data is just due because people show no other
behavior, we are contioned in what we do/ say/ act and react upon
by our memes and by our genetic built up, but that is not to say
you can 't escape their dull processes of stimulus and response.
Fightin ' our memes / the memes of culture and society will prove
to be a better stance than just takin' in what our culture/ society
prescribes and dictates.
Making predictions would than not be so easy !
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 2.1.5 : Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 20:06:27 GMT