From: Van oost Kenneth (email@example.com)
Date: Sat 02 Nov 2002 - 20:57:12 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Chase" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> If we are so great and 'evolution tends to favor' us, which your argument
> boils down to, then why do bacteria persist? Why haven't we replaced them
> sent them into the pit of extinction as a group?
That was an initial gut feeling I got too Joe !
In the discussion we have with Wade, Wade argued I missed your point, that
you weren 't even close to defend collectiviness, I reconsidered my view and
came to the conclusion that beneath, the notion of collectiviness was giving
the bias of similarity which you defend. And I kept quiet.
But now I see you go much further than that, you bring in a " religious "
one that Darwin himself was obliged to built in, that despite the fact
was random and blind, man was its favour subject.
I thought Joe you were a rationalist, one of the harder line, but now you
save the appearence even to be one. You drag morality and ethics into a dis-
cussion where even the need for those can be missed.
You deny the fact that man can create along his own image, without any
divine intervention and that is why you " attack " Wade because in his
scheme as each beme exists only for the time it is in performance, the
question of life and death is part of the system, not in the hands of some-
thing that must be at its base.
That is what I see,
can be wrong, for what than I ask your forgiveness,
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 : Sat 02 Nov 2002 - 20:44:35 GMT