From: Van oost Kenneth (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 21:19:37 GMT
> 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.
I don 't deny that either, but that ain 't the thing I was after !
I am fighting the assumption that the bias HAS to be a common one.
IMO, maybe it is too hard to comprehend, what commonly is seen
as collective is the way by which the evolution of a singularity went
up. Everything in nature tends to be (the) getting better/ best.
Our course to take this, that this is done along lines of consensus,
deliberation and consultation for granted has led us away of what
really matters in nature_ the singularity of whatever kind from
whereout the evolution of the object/ subject can begin.
The idea is to get from the Big bang as singularity to the Universe,
from one cell to multiple celluar organisms, from one single idea
to the complex state of a memeplex, from one seed of one tree
to the whole of the forest which eventually will grow, from the
one single hut to the houses in the town....
from singular to plural that is the way evolution follows.
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 - 21:06:59 GMT