Date: Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 17:53:09 GMT
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <email@example.com>
> > > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 03:19 , Van oost Kenneth
> > > > > wrote:
> > > This is becoming a question of ideology IMO !
> > > Wade is in a sense emphazin' individuality and Joe lingers onto a
> > > more collective state of things. In Wade's proposal a Bildung-
> > > ideal is set/ implied, Joe uses the gene- ralisation to drive
> > > cultural transmission. Wade's proposal is something that implies
> > > humanism/ romantism, Joe's claim is dependent of something higher,
> > > more divine, collectiviness is seen here as a ' natural autority '
> > > ! I reject that...
> > Do you reject DNA, a common molecular basis for instances of similar
> > creatures, as blithely and facilely as you reject a common
> > thought-basis for instances of similar actions?
> No, I reject the fact that everything must be seen as a result/
> outcome of a collective enterprise. In my book, the strings which
> eventually made up DNA were singularities in their own beginning. The
> only next step in their seperate evolution was working together. I
> reject the fact that many often forget there was that first step to be
> taken, two cells working together was the second step of evolution.
> Working together is NOT a natural trait, it is evolutionary
> For cases where a common thought- bases for instances of similar
> actions is required the same line of thought can bear fruits. There is
> no doubt in my mind that would ignore the possibility that seamingly
> similar actions have a common thought- bias, but that is not to say
> those sprung out of some fellowship between two people. In their own
> mind they could have come up with the exact same idea millions of
> miles apart.
> If you now conclude that would be a result of how their mind works you
> are wrong, neurons and cognitive processes all work on an "
> individualistic " level. Different environmental stresses around the
> globe can result into a similar behavior, but you may not see this as
> a step of the whole of worlds -community. If you do you deny the
> individual his/ hers identity and contribution.
Different people can indeed have similar thoughts, but this does not mean that several similar actions taken by the same person do not share a common mental basis. Individual neurons fire, or do not fire, depending upon their input from other neuurons, and dynamic gestalt- patterns are indeed formed, which refer to and represent certain specific informational types and not others; some of these information types may be accessed to guide specific action tokens. Which patterns have been internalized depends upon an individual's genetic predispositions, personal choices and environmental history.
> 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
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 : Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 17:57:10 GMT